Talk:Maurice Strong

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please suggest changes in order to meet BLP standards[edit]

The Oil for Food Scandal was allowed. Can this be cleaned up to meet the proper standards? It was removed for "remove unsourced section that contravenes BLP"

Here is the article before this section was deleted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maurice_Strong&oldid=348257920

Carbon Taxation Involvement

Jesse Ventura cited Maurice Strong as being a primary developer of global warming [16], with the goal of creating a global carbon credit taxation. Additionally, there are numerous claims that that the Edmund de Rothschild, a member of the well-known Rothschild family, was working with Strong as well. In essence, Strong has been promoting global warming since the 1980's with the long term goal of helping the United Nations create a carbon tax [17] [18], potentially a trillion dollar business, mainly via carbon credit trading. In 1987, Strong, Rothschild, and presented the Brundtland Commission at the 4th World Wilderness Congress for a World Conservation Bank (or Global Environment Facility) which would provide a banking system for carbon taxation [19]. The Global Environment Facility (or GEF) is an existing multi-billion dollar fund through which green projects are created in 3rd world countries (the largest of its kind), while keeping a portion of the funds for management and administrative fees. Additionally, it hopes to trade the world's debt for wilderness lands as collateral.

As of 2010, Strong is believed to be actively working with China on their government carbon credit trading, as well as with attempting to produce the Chinese owned Chery Automobile in/for the United States market.

To insert this, you'd need proper sources. You have none so far. The sources given were false. Then there is the tone and content, implying Strong is involved in a conspiracy to create the concept of global warming, which is nonsense. Why should the opinions of the palooka Ventura be sprayed all over this man's biography? Bottom line: this material contravenes the policy of wp:BLP. Please read the policy carefully. ► RATEL ◄ 22:50, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Citing "Paranoid Fantasies"??[edit]

Maurice Strong article needs to be edited for biased point of view, (npov lacking), against paranoid fantasies of conspiracy theorists. I would reword the sentence to be less offensive to followers of his well-documented escapades and cite the editor of a firmly established publication,Western Standard, or this article I found [1], just based on my quick searches to date. The effect of the original statement aims to discredit anyone who might be suspicious of the intentions of a clearly rich and powerful man by citing only some gun-toting survivalist militias. I admit to being a newbie, but given time, this could be much more objective and less like an advertisement. I only just now became a Wikipede (or whatever?) because all I've found in my research of this man is largely biased one way or another. Thorough research of this man and his "achievements" is WP:FA material, of that I am sure. The article makes it sound like he was actually competent and noteworthy at the posts that he's held. Whereas, for example, the Ontario Hydro cited was run into the ground in a debacle more resembling Enron. And his involvement in that specifically? Well that is part of what I was researching in the first place.--RJT197* 07:11, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Westerm Standard a "firmly established publication?" It was a rag when it was in print and now it's defunct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.226.233.121 (talk) 20:05, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

His biography on MauriceStrong.net says: "Maurice Strong is the world’s leading environmentalist."

In my view this page is nothing short of a hagiography of a somewhat arrogant person. It doesn't need working on. It needs deleting. 92.20.139.121 (talk) 22:56, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I recalled listening to the Glenn Beck radio program about Maurice Strong, another piece about him was on the Art Bell Coast-to-Coast AM program about Strong wrote in 1998 of a "scientific" goal to save the earth, is to reduce the world's population by nine-tenths (90%). The paranoid conspiracy theorists used this as proof Strong has a diabolical conspiracy planned to take over the world(esp. by his ecological activism and calls to regulate economies to evolved into a global socialist "one world order"). I don't get how he's portrayed as a "3rd antichrist", Maurice Strong is just an international diplomat with a circle of friends in the highest places of the world's economic, political and scientific affairs. + 71.102.7.77 (talk) 04:47, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 23:42, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Users Fred Bauder and Stephen Buxton, please stop using Wikipedia as forum for conspiracies. Wikipedia's value lies in the fact that it is neutral, a repository for facts and figures not for malicious gossip. Please stick to the known facts and figures about Maurice Strong (limited as they may be), and do not use Wikipedia as a platform for political polemics and ad hominem attacks.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.104.84.246 (talk) 00:15, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The new article is nothing less than a hagliography. Applications for sainthood should be submitted to the Pope, after death. Wikipedia is an inappropriate venue. Fred Bauder (talk) 17:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maurice Strong page redone[edit]

Following the above comments this page on Maurice Strong has been re-done. The earlier article, which has been reported for "disinformation" has been totally and completely revised and edited by user Dondesnet, to reflect the magnitude of the work done by Maurice Strong, both in the industrialised and developing countries, and for the global environmental movement. comment added by Dondesnet (talk • contribs) 17:19, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced information[edit]

This passage:

"Returning to private life, he acquired effective control and became Chairman of AZL Resources Inc., which had large holdings of ranch lands in the United States, including a major land development in the San Luis Valley of Colorado. This was underlain by one of the country’s largest underground water reservoirs, which, under Colorado law, others could claim if the landowners failed to develop or use it. Accordingly, Strong instituted a program through a company, American Water Development, to develop the property on a sustainable basis and use it locally. When his partners opted for an alternative plan to export the water from the valley, Strong donated his interest to charity."

is unsourced. Please provide a source for the information which it contains. It is generally known that Strong acquired control of AZL, that it owned the Baca Grande land development, and that, together with friends from the environmental movement, created American Water Development and that there is a great reserve of underground water in the San Luis Basin. However, I don't know of any source for the assertions regarding Colorado Water Law, although, perhaps that is what Strong believed. If that is true, please find a reliable source which demonstrates that. In fact, American Water Development, I believe, had to pay the objectors legal fees due to the failure of the corporation to demonstrate facts which would support its application. Regarding Strong's alleged change of mind. While I do not recall it, either from memory, or from the discovery in the case, if he did have such an epiphany, a reliable source is needed. Fred Bauder (talk) 17:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This passage, "to develop the property on a sustainable basis and use it locally." seems rather farfetched. I don't recall any public statement from him at the time, nor I imagine any source for it. If he had such views, please document them by citing a reliable source. Fred Bauder (talk) 17:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Order of Canada (Companion).png[edit]

Image:Order of Canada (Companion).png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bias Tag[edit]

I added the bias tag after see the article and determining that it is written from a non-NPOV and needs a major overhaul. Section titles like "Early years: overcoming poverty and hardship" are not appropriate as is the use of images such as [[Image:Flag_of_the_United_Nations.svg]] and [[Image:UnemployedMarch.jpg]] . 203.20.35.28 (talk) 19:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Concern about the Bias Tag[edit]

I am also a newbie and concerned about the constant attacks and harassment of this individual. This is my first post. To me the article is not biased. The revised article gives a full objective account of Maurice Strong and the impact that he has had throughout the world. The earlier article written about him would have put a smile on Dr. Paul Joseph Goebbels. As I understand it, the revised article was written as the earlier article was reported for disinformation. The Section titles like "Early years: overcoming poverty and hardship" are extremely appropriate for the article as it gives a background to the upbringing of Maurice Strong, important in understanding his concerns about poverty and the environment. The use of the logos are also apt. Maurice Strong was a senior official of the UN. It was under him that the UNEP logo was created. Thus the call for the article to be reviewed for neutrality is superficial. Wikiepedia is a democratic communication tool, which has to be used with responsibility. --Jomoken (talk) 14:04, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sainthood??[edit]

I'm not really all that interested in Maurice Strong; I just looked him up after seeing his name. After reading the discussion page, it sounds like this article has shifted from a conspiracy theorist bulletin board to an application for sainthood. I think somebody needs to tone down the awestricken worship factor. I went back and read a few other biographies on wiki and by comparison this one is almost nauseatingly sweet. Anyone that wields as much economic and political power as him deserves a little more scrutiny into their business dealings and ideology.Mrkf650 (talk) 16:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)mrkf650[reply]


Sweet?[edit]

Sweet? On the contrary, the language is defamatory, often irrelevant, and puts Wiki in disrepute.

"Some consider Strong a frightening power seeker. "He once did a business deal with arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi, and wound up with a 200,000-acre ranch" etc., etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.66.54.66 (talk) 20:41, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The opening sentence, "Maurice Strong (born April 29, 1929, in Oak Lake, Manitoba) fancies himself one of the world’s leading environmentalists." is unfortunate. I don't know how the author knows how Strong "fancies himself", and the comment is defamatory rather than factual. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stconsultant (talk • contribs) 17:07, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly that language is inappropriate for Wikipedia. A strong source would be needed to include such language at all. User:Fred Bauder Talk 21:09, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cult of personality[edit]

This article reads like a cult of personality, like one person wrote it, and they worship Maurice Strong as a hero. This article is NOT WP:NPOV, and Maurice has got some serious scandals around him. The article glosses over them and acts like he is this incredible person. Mac Davis (talk) 18:28, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This entire article is directly copied from Maurice Strong's website.[2] Mac Davis (talk) 18:40, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've edited the article some. In my opinion, it holds a much more neutral point of view and combines the efforts of past editors. Mac Davis (talk) 21:04, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Warning[edit]

Crazy ass Glenn Beck just directed his minions to attack Mr. Strong. You may want to up the protection on this. PartyJoe (talk) 21:37, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See what I mean [3] PartyJoe (talk) 21:53, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
23 edits today, nothing from April 5th to yesterday. Glenn Beck is evil. PartyJoe (talk) 21:55, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PartyJoe - typical Saul Alinsky tactic to name-call, rather than debate. Beck uses videos, tapings or cites chapter and verse when skewering the radical Marxists in our current administration. Guess it must be "evil" to use their own words against them.MasticBeachMemories (talk) 22:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Glenn Beck did not direct his minions to attack. His exact words were: "...We need a research team not of 10, but of 10,000...100,000...500,000. I need you to get on the internet...I need videos. I need anything you can find on Maurice Strong, and you send it to us right away. Please..." He called for research gathering. Not attacking. However, I will grant that it may behoove Wikipedia to monitor or secure this page, as there will be a lot of people who will take it upon themselves to attack. The Relentless (talk) 23:35, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Glenn Beck did not send "minions" to attack Strong (he is not Obama), and yes alot of conspiracies have been attributed to this man, and while there may be a small ammount of truth in them, they are not trust worthy. Instead of calling Beck crazy, why not try to disprove his claims? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.81.206.178 (talk) 12:50, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Section on his views[edit]

We should put up a section on his environmental beliefs. Here is a quote from him on the show Conspiracy Theory on tru tv.
"Under the pollute or pay principle those who create the damage should pay for it, and of course we in the industrial countries are creating most of it and therefore we need to pay most of it."Here's a link where you can watch him saying this at 1:08
Also he used to promote a license to give birth which he was damaged for. Why is this not mentioned anywhere in the article? Ink Falls 22:33, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More stuff from the video:
Maurice Strong proposed a one world bank named the World Conservation Bank.
Many have said they believe he is trying to establish a global government.
British consultant, policy adviser, and columnist, Christopher Monkton, accuses Maurice Strong of stirring up Global warming hysteria and doing it through deception, falsifying the data. Ink Falls 23:05, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have gone ahead and created a section titles "Views and Beliefs". It's a little rough, I'll look for a video from a reliable source of his BBC interview. Hopefully we can expand this. Ink Falls 23:38, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where are you citing this from ? Off2riorob (talk) 23:40, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Known as one of the leading environmentalists of our time, Strong has predicted since the early 70's environmental disaster if the industrial nations do not begin taking steps to prevent it. [1] A self-declared, life-long socialist,[2], according to Strong he had ideas to control global warming through populations controls such as a license to birth, or taking measures similar to China.[1] Strong further added after being met with harsh criticism in his home country, Canada, for suggesting birth licenses he has since not renewed the idea.[1]
Speaking about how the industrialized nations will deal with the environmental problems facing the world Maurice explained "Under the pollute or pay principle those who create the damage should pay for it, and of course we in the industrial countries are creating most of it and therefore we need to pay most of it.".[3] British consultant, policy adviser, and columnist, Christopher Monkton, accuses Maurice Strong of stirring up Global warming hysteria and doing it through deception, and falsifying the data.[3]
During his time in the UN, Maurice Strong proposed a one world bank under the name of the World Conservation Bank.[3] Strong has also often supported some sort of established world government that would oversee global issues facing the Earth.[3]

  1. ^ a b c "Interview of Maurice Strong". Interview. BBC. 1972. {{cite web}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); Missing or empty |url= (help); Text "n/a" ignored (help)
  2. ^ At the United Nations, the Curious Career of Maurice Strong
  3. ^ a b c d "Maurice Strong At Root Of Global Warming Scam". Documentary. TruTv. 2009. Retrieved May 12,2010. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
Just what it says I'm citing this from. A 1972 BBC interview and a tru tv documentary by the show "Conspiracy Theory" on an episode entitled "Maurice Strong at the root of Global Warming Scam". What's wrong with the citing? Ink Falls 23:46, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Its unavailable and it is not reported about. Are there not WP:RS to support this content? Off2riorob (talk) 23:48, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And what is this Maurice strong at root of blog' cite that is also not reliable? Off2riorob (talk) 23:50, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Are you trying to trick me because I'm new or something? Of course a tru tv documentary and BBC interview are reliable sources. Ink Falls 23:56, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm reinserting this into the article for the time being, I think its good info on his beliefs. Ink Falls 22:31, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I found a video of his interview(where I got the first info) from infowars.com, and www.infowars.com/maurice-strong-in-1972-isnt-it-our-responsibility-to-collapse-industrial-societies/ infowars.com is fringe, does not meet our sourcing guidelines and should not be used here it is.] Ink Falls 22:47, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please find reliable sources for this content. Videos won't do. ► RATEL ◄ 22:57, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
But the videos are on a website which is a reliable source, and are created by two reliable sources (The BBC and Tru tv). Are you saying I need a transcript of what the videos say, because if so then that's ridiculous, the video can speak for themselves. Ink Falls 00:15, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
usaelectionupdate.com is not a RS. What someone says on a video is first hand, and we rely on secondary sources here. If the BBC interview with MS is notable, there will be a report about it on the net at a RS. We're not including first hand quotes from an inaccessible source on reliability and notability grounds. And what Monkton says about the subject is not material. Monkton has no qualifications in the field of climate science, and moreover he's a climate change denier and right wing operative. ► RATEL ◄ 01:48, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The video on usaelectionupdate.com is a reliable source, and while the opinions and analysis of that website is not reliable, it is a reliable enough source to trust that they have not tampered with the video in question and that it is accurately taken from the documentary in question. That being said, I can still take the website out of the equation and the documentary stands on its own, the only reason I added the link to that video was for people who wanted to see it to have access. A documentary is a reliable secondary source and as for the interview, primary sources can be used as long as you accurately state what happened. Taking a quote from an interview is not original research. This falls under the guidelines of acceptable usage. Ink Falls 02:04, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Besides, the documentary is a secondary source. Ink Falls 02:11, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I had a look at the blog you call a RS. What a joke! The blog features a video made by Jesse Ventura for his show, with selected snippets that libel Strong and other people. Don't waste your time. This will never get into wikipedia. ► RATEL ◄ 05:21, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, the other site you use, Alex Jones's rightwing radio show site (also not a RS), features an overdubbed video that cannot be used as a source. Strong does not have the strong American accent you hear in that video. ► RATEL ◄ 05:26, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Blog's aern't the reliable sources, its the videos that are the reliable sources, whether you get them on the blog, or Tv, or youtube, or anywhere else. A Documentary by Jesse Ventura is a reliable source along with the BBC interview. The interview took place nearly 40 years ago, his accent has changed since then, that is him speaking, in every version of that video he sounds the same. I'm reinserting this back in unless you can come up with a real argument other then "OMG its so fake!". Ink Falls 05:38, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note that wp:BLP states: "Criticism and praise should be included if they can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, so long as the material is presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a disinterested tone.". The partisan sources you present do not adhere to this. The BBC video, if hosted by a non-partisan RS site, may be used as a source, but the fact that he may once have thought, 50 years ago, that a Chinese system of birth control would save the world's environment is not nearly notable enough for inclusion. ► RATEL ◄ 06:23, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Note that this isn't a praise and criticism section, there is only one criticism and it is well sourced. It doesn't matter who hosts the videos, the documentary and interview themselves- as shown on TV- are reliable sources; the videos I only linked to those websites as an added extra for someone who wanted to access them on the internet. Also note that I did not go to those websites looking for the videos, I did a video search and those websites were the most reliable I found (although I didn't look very far). I can source the video interview and the documentary just as easily without the videos on the website, those are only for added accessibility(if someone wants to check them out on the web). Ink Falls 18:26, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  1. It does matter where the videos are hosted.
  2. You cannot report here what he said in a video; that's wp:OR from a primary source, and in any event fails notability. You have to find it discussed in a RS, preferably several RSes. The source you have presented is not RS for a BLP.
  3. Monckton's comments on Strong are not notable enough for inclusion. ► RATEL ◄ 02:27, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm reinserting this back into the article while you're thinking of a response and adding(with a reliable source) that he is a long standing, self described socialist, something which I find important enough to be in the article, but which isn't mentioned anywhere. Ink Falls 02:29, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note that Off2riorob and I oppose this insertion. You need to read up on wp:CONSENSUS and how achieving it is essential for inserting material. ► RATEL ◄ 09:55, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Off2riorob isn't here leaving just you and me. Why don't we compromise; you just say what parts of this section you have problems with, I'll remove them, and we'll post the rest. Ink Falls 19:10, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am still around and this discussion has strengthened my original position that is also strongly supported and well explained by User Ratel. Off2riorob (talk) 20:06, 15 May 2010 (UTC) Off2riorob (talk) 20:03, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection[edit]

A quick look at the recent history of this article shows to me that some negotiation should take place here. Apart from that, the article has other issues, particularly with images and references, but those can be dealt with at a later stage. I have no stake here, but I an read an article's edit history. Meanwhile, please all look at WP:RS and WP:NPOV. Thanks. Rodhullandemu 22:40, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Glenn Beck has just issued a call for "everyone" to research Maurice Strong. Beck's claim is that "they" are going to sanitize the internet of information on Strong. Since this is a BLP, I suggest that great care be taken to present a Neutral Point of View in this article. Abductive (reasoning) 19:27, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • He has been victimized by conspiracy theorists in the past. He's no saint, but not a devil either. There are problems finding objective sources as he, and his supporters, have courted favorable press coverage while detractors tend to overdo it. Fred Talk 21:13, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Credible References[edit]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/04/AR2007120401739.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64601-2005Apr18.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6233-2005Apr20.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A11884-2003Jan18?language=printer http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A64601-2005Apr18?language=printer http://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/02/world/un-seeks-third-world-ecology-aid.html?pagewanted=1 http://www.nytimes.com/cfr/international/mustreads031003.html?pagewanted=print&position=top http://www.nytimes.com/1992/06/04/world/rio-planner-a-magnate-who-meditates.html http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/07/international/07nations.html http://www.nytimes.com/1997/06/03/world/unicef-says-un-reforms-could-harm-the-world-s-children.html http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/28/world/japan-launches-spy-satellite-despite-north-korean-threats.html?pagewanted=1?pagewanted=1 http://www.nytimes.com/1992/12/01/world/un-following-up-accords-from-rio.html?pagewanted=1?pagewanted=1 http://www.nytimes.com/1992/06/09/business/company-long-distance-recycling-earth-summit-petitions-are-being-put-test.html?pagewanted=1?pagewanted=1

 kgrr talk 14:33, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Autobiography[edit]

Strong's autobiographical writing, Where on Earth are We Going ISBN 978-1587990922 was published in 2001 and is now available in the aftermarket for a nominal price, 32 cents plus postage from betterworldbooks through Amazon (described as good, but actually a new remainder). This material, while inappropriate for use as self-serving explanation or justification of Strong's controversial actions contains a great deal of biographical information that can be used in this article. Although it is edited it also gives a very good picture of how Strong thinks and why he takes the positions he does, as does his website, http://www.mauricestrong.net/ User:Fred Bauder Talk 21:26, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at his version of "facts" about the Crestone area, let me say that there is much error regarding settled matters and little or no fact-checking. User:Fred Bauder Talk 21:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Structure of the article[edit]

Strong has an engaging Horatio Alger style personal narrative and three main areas of activity: political, environmental, and business. This is overlain by his vision of environmental apocalypse and the draconian remedies he proposes and their political context. His political activity involves both his relatively unsuccessful Canadian career and his substantial achievements at the United Nations, as well as his advocacy of authoritarian democracy of the Chinese style. His environmental achievements should form the featured core content of the article. His business ventures, successful, unsuccessful, and ill-advised should be included but not featured. He is notable particularly for his ability to make friends with the powerful and to cultivate those relationships. His spiritual and political visions, unless they should gain more traction among the mass public than they have should be a footnote, noted but not overshadowing his recognized achievements. The existence of conspiracy theories should be noted and explained, but should not be interwoven in his personal narrative absent reliable sources which establish that such activities and motivations are, in fact, his. User:Fred Bauder Talk 22:42, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rockefeller Foundation[edit]

Maurice Strong was affiliated with the Rockefeller Foundation. In 1972 he had his first appearance as a trustee and as a member of the executive committee. http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/uploads/files/7e88fac4-f468-46ba-85b3-9c3bf196e854-1972.pdf (p. 8) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.179.38.216 (talk) 15:16, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So what happened? I remember David Rockefeller visiting him in Crestone, but the Rockefeller Foundation did not seem to be a significant part of his activities, in contrast to Aspen Institute, which he invited to Crestone; they did not stay but moved to Camp David. User:Fred Bauder Talk 09:18, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Maurice Strong FRS????[edit]

I can find no trace of Maurice Strong in the Royal Society records.Plucas58 (talk) 21:06, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It was User:Graham11 some time ago. He added it to the lede, but it was at that point already "sourced" within the article (see below). However, I think it is an error. He isn't on https://royalsociety.org/~/media/Royal_Society_Content/about-us/fellowship/Fellows1660-2007.pdf (and some other living ones are). It was sourced thus: "* Fellow of the The Royal Society (FRS) [1]" However, http://royalsociety.org/page.asp?id=1737 is now dead. But there's an IA from the 30th, http://web.archive.org/web/20071230040853/http://www.royalsociety.org/page.asp?id=1737. That is an "awards" page, and is clearly not a correct source for the FRS info. Ah, and that was [4] by User:Dondesnet who massively extended the article as a hagiography ("Maurice Strong is the world’s leading environmentalist...") and that's pretty well all their contributions William M. Connolley (talk) 23:44, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://royalsociety.org/page.asp?id=1737 Retrieved on December 27, 2007

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Maurice Strong. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:21, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Maurice Strong. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:57, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Maurice Strong. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:41, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Maurice Strong. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:43, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Really needs work - 'Criticism'[edit]

As noted above, Strong is the subject of vague conspiracy theories, and although I expect editors have tried to clean it up, the text still reads as if it were partly written by conspiracy theorists.

Controversy
Maurice Strong was no stranger to skepticism and criticism as a result of his lifelong involvement in the oil industry, juxtaposed with his heavy ties to the Environment. Some wonder why an “oilman” would be chosen to take on such coveted and respected environmental positions. One of Strong’s companies, Desarrollos Ecologicos (Ecological Development), built a $35 million luxury hotel within the Gandoca-Manzillo Wildlife Refuge where development is restricted and must be approved by the Kekoldi Indian Association, which it was not. “He (Strong) is supporting Indians and conservation around the world and here he’s doing the complete opposite,” lamented Demetrio Myorga, President of the Kekoldi Indian Association.[37]
Further skepticism arose due to his continual promotions to titles of power, likely due to his political connections. Additionally, Strong was involved in several legal battles and scandals over the years where he conveniently seemed to recuse himself from the situation before being held personally responsible.[38]

If the first paragraph were sourced and re-written about an incongruity between his diplomatic and industrial roles, and a source better than Canada Free Press found, this theme could be encyclopedic. "juxtaposed with his heavy ties to the Environment" reads as absurd, and it's not clear why "oilman" is in quotation marks.

Maybe add a sourced section on posthumous conspiracy theories instead? Then it might be clearer what had been said or alleged or implied. Really we want someone to write a proper biography. -Cedderstk 20:20, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Maurice_Strong&oldid=1210570709"