Talk:Lester B. Pearson/Archive 1

Nobel Link
The bottom of the existing page has a link to previous/successor PMs etc. Why not add a similar link re: Nobel Prize winners? [2004.12.29 - JPiper]

Now I know relatively little about the politics of Canada, but surely being leader of the Liberal party for 12 years and prime minister for 5 isn't enough for the Nobel Committee. Any hints for the casual reader about Mr. Pearson's merits? --MichaelTinkler

Moved from main page: "While at the University of Toronto Pearson lived in Gate House in Burwash hall in what is now room 3203." Vicki Rosenzweig

I'm not overmuch into baseball, but I would assume that the Pearson Cup is no longer being awarded with the departure of the Expos. Dhodges 15:24, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Rug Pissing
I would suggest that the story that Johnson yelled "you pissed on my rug" at Pearson should not be included. The encyclopedia should include facts, not interesting stories. To the best of my knowledge, this story emerged from a journalist (Lawrence Martin) many years after the event. No credible witness (i.e., a person who witnessed the event) has recounted this version of events. Charles Ritchie, who was there, tells the story of Pearson being berated, but does not use the language "you pissed on my rug." Let's stick to the established facts, boring though they might be. HistoryBA 00:38, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * The story has been around for many decades & it is and will always remain part of Canadian culture & it should be addressed -- even if article says according to some reports --- allegedly -- reputedly. It's unlikely anyone there would go on the record officially - so reputedly is fairly accurate. It's unlikely that it was made up from whole cloth AND never refuted by anyone. Lots of "facts" are unverifiable. "Reputedly", Johnson was that kind of guy.
 * Another source of piss on rug - http://216.239.63.104/search?q=cache:FQHtg_E_lH8J:www.cbc.ca/news/viewpoint/vp_zolf/20030403.html+%22charles+ritchie%22+pearson+johnson&hl=en&start=8
 * more refined accounts
 * http://www.irpp.org/po/archive/sep03/donaghy.pdf
 * http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/johnsonlb/xii/2288.htm
 * On April 2, 1965, Prime Minister Pearson, in an address at Temple University in Philadelphia, suggested changes in U.S. policy in the Vietnam conflict. President Johnson invited Pearson to meet with him the following day at Camp David, Maryland. According to the President's Daily Diary, the meeting was held between 12:30 and 2:45 p.m. (Johnson Library) No U.S. record of the discussions between the two men was found. At an April 22 press conference in Ottawa, Pearson confirmed reports that the meeting with the President centered on the question of Vietnam and had been acrimonious but insisted that they had parted on good terms. Pearson's account of the meeting is in Mike: Memoirs of the Right Honorable Lester B. Pearson, Volume 3, pages 138-142. Ambassador Charles Ritchie, who was also present at Camp David, commented on the meeting in Storm Signals, pages 80-83.
 * Other versions could be included & let reader decide. We could say acrimonious, we could say "as a result of his comments, LBJ summoned him to a meeting..." (if meeting not already planned)
 * To not mention "piss on rug" part at all is to sanitize the article & make it less relevant.--JimWae 01:38, 2005 Feb 1 (UTC)


 * Perhaps some personal narrative history would clarify my point of view. I first noticed the "pissed" story on this page some time ago.  I added a qualifier ("reportedly," if I'm not mistaken) because I did not think the story was properly established.  Only two people were within hearing range of the event -- Pearson and Johnson -- and neither reported that Johnson said "you pissed on my rug."  Charles Ritchie reported that he witnessed the event from a distance.  Johnson berated Pearson, but Ritchie did not report any specific words.  It was only years after the event that a journalist (Lawrence Martin) claimed that Johnson said, "you pissed on my rug."  No one has ever provided collaboration for this.
 * More recently, I read a review of Greg Donaghy's book written by an expert in the field. The expert praised Donaghy for not having repeated the "pissed" story as fact.  This made me go back to see exactly how the story was reported in Wikipedia.  I was surprised to discover that my qualifier had been removed and the story was now reported as fact.  This is what motivated me to remove it: (a) the doubt cast upon the story by experts in the field (Donaghy and the book reviewer), and (b) the way the story was presented as an established fact.


 * In response to JimWae's specific points:
 * (1) I agree that not all facts can be verified. My point, however, is that unverified facts should not be in an encyclopedia.
 * (2) The fact that a story is repeated many times does not make it true.
 * (3) Pearson's memoirs and Ritchie's memoirs support my position.
 * (4) Donaghy supports my position (he reports that Johnson used that sort of language, but does not say that he used it in this specific context).
 * (5) Yes, let's include it as part of Canadian folklore, and let's make it clear that we are including it as folklore.

HistoryBA 00:36, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Anyone know why the entire word "pissed" now gets erased in article (& not last week)? I have had to type "p*ss*d"--JimWae 05:44, 2005 Feb 12 (UTC)

Fixed the "Pissed" thing, just made it a link.Habsfannova 01:53, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

War criminal
Noam Chomsky is apparently fond of describing Pearson as a "war criminal", and claims to have a long rap sheet against Pearson. See, for instance, http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=11&ItemID=5694. (I feel dirty for citing znet.) I sure would like to know what his specific claims are. Somegeek 00:06, 2005 Feb 11 (UTC)


 * Maybe it has to do with Ottawa supplying Agent Orange to the Americans? --sg


 * I've learned the "war criminal airport" comment was made on CBC Radio, on a show called Morningside, with interviewer Peter Gzowski. Don't know the date.  I'm not sure, but it doesn't seem as though he really articulated his case against Pearson at the time -- boy it would be fun to hear that interview -- and I don't know if he ever has since.  He's referred to the incident a lot tho, all I can ever find are these references after the fact.  Bahh.  Somegeek 03:54, 2005 Feb 11 (UTC)

Pearson as World War II courier
Yes, according to his Nobel biography, "From 1935 to 1941 he served in the office of the High Commissioner for Canada in London; in May, 1941, he was appointed assistant undersecretary of state for External Affairs at Ottawa; in June, 1942, named minister-counselor at the Canadian Legation in Washington; in July, 1944, promoted to the rank of minister plenipotentiary and in January, 1945, to the rank of ambassador." This does not mean he could not also be a courier. According to William Stevenson, "A future prime minister of Canada and secretary-general of the United Nations, Lester B. Pearson, was a humble diplomat when [William] Stephenson asked him to become 'a King's messenger,' conveying secret documents. Orders had to be conveyed between London, [British Security Coordination] in New York, and Camp X [in Canada]. Pearson had spent the hard winter of 1940 in London. Then he was asked to carry top-secret material across the Atlantic." In fact, I believe Pearson writes at length on the subject in his own autobiography, Mike. I really should have mentioned all this earlier. - Calmypal (T) 17:48, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)


 * As I explained the second time I removed your edit, my objection was the text said that Pearson was a courier, without putting this in context. Pearson was not a courier.  He was a diplomat.  Your sources show that he transported some important documents one time.  This makes him a diplomat that transported some documents, not a courier.  I once helped my brother pick up some supplies for his business, but this didn't make me a delivery boy.  HistoryBA 03:05, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thought America insenuated he was communist
I saw a documentary on TVO and they said CIA had a file of 200+ pages on him. They also publicly insisted that he was a communist for some reason. And his death - I could be wrong though - was self induced (Suicide) by jumping from some building. Don't nail me on that though, but please check it out.


 * You've mixed up Lester Pearson and Herbert Norman. HistoryBA 00:32, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Mike vs. Michael
I know that he was nicknamed "Mike" in the air force, but is there evidence that anyone ever called him "Michael"? I am fairly sure the nickname was always Mike. Josh H. Brown 23:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


 * The nickname was "Mike" never "Michael." Que-Can 03:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Origin/heritage
Does anyone know where the name Pearson origins from? I first suspected it was a form of the Scandinavian surname Persson ("son of Per"). /Jebur 14:23, 5 August 2005 (UTC) The name Pearson is actually Gaelic. It does mean "Son of Peter". Over time it changed from the English version Peterson to the Gaelic version Pearson./[[Pearson Family Tree 1697–1987;circa 1987-Researched by Connie and Mae Pearson- Entry by Scott O. Pearson

Airport Name
We're going to go by the Greater Toronto Airports Authority on the official airport name: Toronto Pearson International Airport, even though some news accounts say Lester B. Pearson International Airport, which it was during Operation Yellow Ribbon. SNIyer12 13:18, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Paul Martin
Please DO NOT say that Paul Martin is no longer prime minister. Wait until Stephen Harper is sworn in on February 6, 2006 to say so. SNIyer12 17:42, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I have changed the phrasing to indicated that Paul Martin became prime minister without saying whether or not he is or is not in office, this will prevent confusion and also save us from having to change it later. - Jord 17:56, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


 * It's very confusing, especially after Stephen Harper won the election. Martin is still in office. We're not going to add the fact that Martin was prime minister from December 12, 2003 to February 6, 2006 until Harper is sworn in. - SNIyer12 22:25, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

OK, you can NOW say that Paul Martin served as prime minister, since Harper has been sworn in. SNIyer12 21:55, 6 February, 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism
Does this site need to be blocked from unauthorized edits from 209.226.48.226?? Although I giggled when I once saw (since censored) Squidward in place of LBP's portrait! Bacl-presby 00:49, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Date of Death
I was recently doing a report on Lester Pearson. I found conflicting evidence about the exact date of his death. I found the 27th on this article and on the Nobel Prize Bibliography website. However I found the 28th on a government of Canada Biography website. I thought that the Canadian Government would know best but I would like some confirmation please.

It's not the the first time the Canadian Government has put the wrong date down--what do you expect from "uncivil" servants! Bacl-presby 00:22, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Accomplishments
Maybe seperate a section for his accomplisments that made him most known and his failures? Just a suggestion. --

I would suggest adding a reference to Mr. Pearson's contribution in writing the Charter and Treaty for NATO, in 1949. This was a singular piece of international diplomacy, especially given the different points of view amongst the allies about how to create an organization that could effectively counter the threat of aggression by the Soviet Union.

Tony 18:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I feel like the fact that LBP helped establish peacekeeping should be more explicitly stated in the introduction. It gets referenced to but never explicitly, and I feel like this is a mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pmorrow136 (talk • contribs) 06:34, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

OM/CC placement
5. Notwithstanding paragraphs 1, 3 and 4, a person who, prior to June 1, 1972, was a member of a British order or the recipient of a British decoration or medal referred to in this section, may wear the insignia of the decoration or medal that the person is entitled to wear, the proper sequence being the following:

Victoria Cross (VC) George Cross (GC) Cross of Valour (CV) Order of Merit (OM) Order of the Companions of Honour (CH) Companion of the Order of Canada (CC)

From The Honours, Flags and Heritage Structure of the Canadian Forces

-- Ibagli ( Talk ) 03:32, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I removed the link to the literature, it now appears to be infected with virii. -- Ibagli ( Talk ) 02:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

In the interest of objectivity
Maybe somewhere near the part where he's referred to as the "father of modern peacekeeping" there should be mention of Canada's role in the destruction of Indochina, particularly Vietnam, under Pearson. Specifically, where Canada remained officially neutral in the ongoing atrocities yet was the largest arms dealer (per capita) in the world, supplying the aggressors. Pearson did his part in helping to defend the aggression, warning the House of Commons about Vietnam's aggression towards the French as part of a worldwide Communist aggression, while allies France and the USA attempted to conquer Indochina (re-conquer in France's case). Pearson went further in his rally for the cause, claiming Soviet authority in the region, which turned out to be completely false, despite massive efforts to discover otherwise. It is widely accepted today that the atrocities committed in Vietnam and the rest of Indochina by Western nations was at the very least a colossal mistake costing many human lives and at most, attempted genocide. (Bzzhuh 04:45, 24 May 2007 (UTC))


 * Hello Bzzhuh. Pearson was a Western leader during the Cold War, so yes he did talk about Communist agression.  After the Russian invasions in Hungary (1956) and later Czechoslovakia (1968), it was a big concern.  Pearson didn't however, agree with the American role in the Vietnam "conflict" (not actually a declared war, although many, many people died).  Many Canadians, at least initially, actually supported the American side and some even enlisted in the American armed forces to join the fight.  To say that Pearson "rallied" for the American side is something Lyndon Johnson (if he were still alive) would heartily disagree with.  (One story is that at a 1965 meeting, the President poked Mr. Pearson in the ribs while he was berating the Prime Minister.)  You are correct about companies in Canada - mostly American owned? - being arms suppliers for the Vietnam war effort.   This was common knowledge and it didn't seem to bother most Canadians at the time, although it's not a proud legacy if you really wanted peace instead of war.  On the other hand, Canadians suffered official American wrath for accepting American draft dodgers during 1965 through 1975. The Americans who didn't believe in fighting could flee to Canada. Pearson supported this policy, as did Mr. Trudeau after him.  So, I think there are better targets than Mr. Pearson to attack for "the destruction of Indochina."Que-Can 06:50, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Indeed you are right, and I can see that "rally" was perhaps a poor choice of words. "Support" would have been more fitting. I agree that the draft-dodging policy reflects positively for his peacekeeping reputation, and there are better targets to attack, but as a Canadian, I'm only interested in exploring one or two of them. Bzzhuh 21:43, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Alumni?
So....categories for alumni have been added to places he received honourary (or honorary) doctorates from...Doesn't Alumni signifiy that they STUDIED there?? Bacl-presby 00:03, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, listing all his honorary degrees is really quite silly. As is calling him Lieutenant Pearson. Its not as though he ever campaigned using his military title as some generals- or colonels-turned politicians do (or some suitors to the Royal Family do). And because he was not field rank, I do not believe he retains the title automatically, even in formal circumstances. 68.48.153.35 (talk) 19:54, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Flags in the Infobox
Why are there flags in this article's infobox when none of the other Prime Ministers' articles have featured a flag icon? I have asked this question before in other forums. Does anyone have a reason for or against the use of the flag symbols in an infobox. Are flag icons in inappropriate locations not considered as per WP:FLAGCRUFT? Quote from WP:Flagcruft:"Not intended for birth/date places" "It may be tempting to use flag icons in the birth/death information in a biographical article's introduction and/or infobox, but this is strongly deprecated." "Not intended" is pretty clear as policy. Comments? Bzuk 00:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC).


 * As the page upon which you are relying declares so plainly right atop itself:
 * Pretty clear, alright, but  not a policy. Not even a guideline.  Just an essay expressing the opinion of one or more editors.  It agrees with your opinion.  It is as worthy as any other editor's opinion.  But it is in no way authoritative.  Please take more care not to make such misrepresentations, whether by oversight or intent. -- Lonewolf BC 04:41, 12 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey, lighten up, I am asking for an opinion not an attack. The fact that this issue had actually been brought up by another editor and that it had appeared in other forums and had been addressed as inappropriate, is the basis of my inquiry. I had posted the same question in all the biography, politics and history forums for a lengthy time and no one had responded. Misrepresentations, indeed...Bzuk 12:14, 12 June 2007 (UTC).


 * That was not an attack. It was a request that you be more careful not to present material as authoritative which is not.  I'm not saying that you did it on purpose (nor that you didn't; that's between you and your Rabbi).  It was also meant to highlight the true status WP:FLAGCRUFT, so that no one would take it as being authoritative. As for my opinion, it is that flag-icons are generally harmless and a nice touch, but not worth fussing about, one way or the other. -- Lonewolf BC 01:37, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


 * (moved here from my talk-page) Your rude comments in the talk Lester B. Pearson pages are inappropriate; I asked for information and did not take a stand on the question of flags- the questions I posed were "Does anyone have a reason for or against the use of the flag symbols in an infobox? Are flag icons in inappropriate locations not considered as per WP:FLAGCRUFT?" The original article I referenced did not have the essay tag on it yet you insinuate that I have made misrepresentations and now claim my motives are "between you and your Rabbi."I asked for information not condescension and ridicule. One more remark in above vein will result in your conduct being brought to an admin. Bzuk 02:31, 13 June 2007 (UTC).


 * What I meant is "between you and your Rabbi" is whether your misrepresentation was deliberate or merely an oversight. In other words, I am not saying that you were (or that you were not) trying to mislead anyone, just that the way you presented WP:FANCRUFT would tend to mislead, so please be more careful in such matters.  Perhaps you disagree that your presentation was misleading.  If so, then (plainly) I think that you are wrong, but there's no purpose in our arguing about it.  For my part, I disagree that you've any reasonable cause for offence, and am accordingly unconcerned about your threat. -- Lonewolf BC 03:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Further, with regard to your statement that "The original article I referenced did not have the essay tag on it...", WP:FLAGCRUFT, the only page to which you referred, has had he tag affixed ever since it was first made, last November. -- Lonewolf BC 06:34, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Mike Pearson (football player) and Lester B Pearson
(Bacl-presby's comment copied to here from Amchow78's talk-page -- LW) When recent Argos signee Mike Pearson wins the Nobel Peace Prize, and becomes Prime Minister of Canada, and gets daily wiki vandalism, perhaps then you can disambiguate LBP for this guy.....maybe the other way around for now!! (or if the Argos win the Grey Cup this year!) Bacl-presby 17:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I think that as long as "Mike Pearson" redirects to the PM's article, then a disambiguation link to the footballer's article is needed, for the sake of anyone looking for the article on that latter Mike Pearson. Many readers, and especially those not much familiar with Wikipedia's usages, will not know to put "Mike Pearson (football player)" when plain "Mike Pearson" has yielded them this article instead. Alternatively, "Mike Pearson" could be turned into a disambiguation page, or a disambiguation link to the PM's article could go atop the footballer's article.  Which of those ways would be the most fitting hangs off of how common the two uses of "Mike Pearson" are, as against each other.  I believe that "Mike Pearson" is much better known as meaning the former Prime Minister, in which case the disambiguation link atop this article is the way to go.  On the other hand, I'm not a football fan and so Mike Pearson the football player might be better known than I realise. However, I am restoring the page-top link on this article for the time being, in the lack of information showing that another form of disambiguation would be more fitting. -- Lonewolf BC 20:34, 14 June 2007 (UTC).

Anti-Communism and Cold War Leadership
Every so often, I post on the Lester Pearson page, under "categories," that he was a "Canadian anti-communist" and "Cold War leader." While "Cold War leader" remains there, "Canadian anti-communist" is frequently deleted by other editors. Every single U.S. president since 1945 until 1993 (the beginning- to the end of the Cold War) (Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, and Bush) has, on their Wikipedia pages, the category of "American anti-communist" and "Cold War leader." Likewise, as Canada is a major player on the world stage, I think that it is wholly appropriate to list every single Canadian Prime Minister since 1945 until 1993 (Mackenzie King, St. Laurent, Diefenbaker, Pearson, Trudeau, Clark, Turner, Mulroney, and Campbell) as "Canadian anti-communists" and "Cold War leaders." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nopm (talk • contribs) 23:37, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * And I was not the first to delete your postings....give it a rest, or Lonewolf, BC, call for arbitration!! Bacl-presby 00:18, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I tend to think that "Canadian anti-communists" should be reserved for Canadians whose notability is largely for being anti-communist. I don't think that rightly includes Pearson, because he was no more anti-communist that goes without saying from his being a national leader of a "western democracy" during the Cold War.  (I'm not sure that all those presidents rightly belong to the corresponding American category, either.  Regardless, each man must be judged as a separate case.) -- Lonewolf BC 03:05, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with the anti-communist statement for Pearson, because I think it is a notable, especially during the Indochina wars. Agreed that U.S. leaders during the Cold War would be anti-communist but Pearson should be compared to Canadian leaders, if anything. To list all the Prime Ministers over a 50 year period proves little, especially when Trudeau appears in the list, when he was notably pro-communist (as the term was defined throughout those years i.e. Castro among others). Bzzhuh 21:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I thank Bzzhuh for his support on this issue. However, after reading what Bzzhuh wrote about Pierre Trudeau being “pro-communist” because of his friendly relations with Fidel Castro, I think a clarification is in order. When the term “anti-communist” is used to describe a U.S. President or a Canadian Prime Minister, during the Cold War, the term was meant to exclusively mean anti-SOVIET communism; not to a general opposition to communism. If Pierre Trudeau was “pro-communist” because of his friendly relations with Castro, then it could also be argued that Richard Nixon was “pro-communist” because of his famous trip to Communist China in the 1970s in order to strengthen relations with Communist Chinese leaders (FYI: When visiting Moscow, Trudeau threw a snowball at a statue of Lenin; you don't throw snowball's at people you admire). However, on Nixon's wikipedia page, under categories, it lists him, like all U.S. Presidents from 1945 to 1993, as an “American anti-communist.” The bottom line is: Just because Trudeau and Nixon had friendly relations with some communists does not mean that they were communists or communist sympathizers. Quite the opposite: None of our Prime Ministers and none of the U.S. Presidents have been anything but anti-communists. So, even though Trudeau had a friendly meeting with Castro does not mean that he was a communist or communist sympathizer; just like how Nixon was an anti-communist, like Trudeau, despite meeting with Communist Chinese leaders. The term, as used in these articles refers strictly to Soviet communism. I can list many more examples of anti-communist leaders having friendly meetings with communists, but this does not make them communists/communist sympathizers/pro-communist: Reagan's meetings with Gorbachev, George W. Bush's meetings with Hu Jintao and with the Communist President of Viet Nam, Stephen Harper meeting with Hu Jintao, Pierre Trudeau's and Jimmy Carter's meetings with Castro, Gerald Ford's and Richard Nixon's meetings with Mao, Bill Clinton meeting (and shaking hands with) Castro at the UN, Pope John Paul II meeting with Castro, etc... None of these people are communists/communist sympathizers/pro-communists, they're all anti-communists and anti-socialists; they just happened to meet with communists. The meeting of two people does not mean that they both share the same views. Something else I would like to add, this time directed to Bacl-presby. How is it "opposing LBP" and "vandalizing this site" to say that Lester Pearson is an anti-communist? To all Canadian (and American)leaders, the title of "anti-communist" is a badge of honour, not something that is shameful. Now that I have added this clarification, do my fellow Wikipedians oppose me typing in "Canadian anti-communists" and "Cold War leaders" for our 1945 – 1993 Prime Ministers? Please advise. Thanks. Nopm 22:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Just noting, that I'm grateful that someone else is monitoring this posting (Thanks, LonewolfBC!) Now that school's out, let's see how many students from schools that oppose LBP will be vandalizing the site! (Halton Schools--ie Burlington, ON seem to be be a leading source...) Bacl-presby 17:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Anti-Communist?? Joe McCarthy, and a couple of categories in his bio is the sort of lead perceived by that title during the 1950s, when LBP was at the UN, and as External Affairs Minister in Ottawa. (it was another Pearson who took a physical blow from Joe!) I think such a category puts too much "clutter" and tags onto people--BTW, whatever happened to the "Bow Tie Wearer" Category that once adorned LBP --he's still in the Wiki List of bow tie wearers. Bacl-presby 15:48, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Knighthood??
Someone has just labelled LBP as SIR LBP...I don't think so!!

Post-nominals
Mr. Pearson obviously has an inordinate amount of post-nominal letters, to the point where they look unwieldly in the infobox. Is it correct to list all the honorary degrees, or does one "LLD (hc)" cover them all? I'm unsure as to the protocol surrounding the use of post-nominals. --G2bambino 23:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

--Migration-- Didn't Diefenbaker eliminate restrictions of non-white immigration after being appalled by the South Africans at a Commonwealth Conference? Somebody should check the claim that Pearson removed restrictions on Jews and Chinese. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MacBiggles (talk • contribs) 20:29, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Pearson-Carleton.jpg
The image Image:Pearson-Carleton.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --06:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

President of UN General Assembly?
In the link here from Greatest Canadians, it says he was President of the UN Gen. Assembly. Not in the article. PonileExpress (talk) 22:57, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Pearson as Soviet Spy?
There is a 1951 FBI memo identifying Pearson as passing on information to an unauthorized person while in Washington. There are many references on the internet to his being recruited by the Soviets while in Cambridge. Why is nothing of this being mentioned? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.138.4.251 (talk) 23:07, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Order of Merit/OBE
I noticed neither of these awards are mentioned in the Honours section or in prose at all... surely they should be? If nobody objects, I'm going to add them. -- MichiganCharms (talk) 04:31, 1 February 2011 (UTC)