This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
I suggest we try a new lead image. The proposed b/w one is crisper, a head shot, and 40x larger. We can solicit other opinions.
Support: Overall better portrait and more fitting for a lead. -- Light show ( talk) 06:52, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Weak Oppose -- Although I agree that this image is a whole lot better than the current one, I don't trust any image that you upload, Light show. Where is the proof that the copyright was not renewed? Cassianto Talk 07:06, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Support - I looked over the info on the picture page which says this image is in public domain. "This work is in the public domain because it was published in the United States between 1923 and 1963" The editor Hohum originally uploaded the image. It looks like Light Show adapted or retouched it, but they did not do the initial upload. I do not see a copyright issue here.
Pauciloquence (
talk) 09:10, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Comment While I think that a less grainy photograph would be preferable, I'd like to draw attention to an earlier discussion LS and I had on this subject. I'm curious about the 180 he seems to have done on the topic as the proposed infobox image is very similar to the one LS so vehemently opposed at the time, except for the fact that it's less grainy and in black-and-white. Also, while the image wasn't necessarily uploaded to Commons by LS —due to the fact that he is/has recently been under a lengthy ban for not respecting copyright laws and causing a lot of extra work for editors— it was he who found it. TrueHeartSusie3 ( talk) 10:05, 23 December 2016 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3
Weak support — Though I was the uploader of the current infobox image, I do think a less grainy image would be better. I'm not completely satisfied with the offered replacement as I think her face looks weirdly flat, but if it is determined to be PD, then by all means lets use it before we hopefully find a better one. TrueHeartSusie3 ( talk) 21:14, 23 December 2016 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3
Hi everyone, I found two images of the current lead image which are both bigger in size and (maybe) higher in resolution than the original image. These two images found are in the same size, but there are minor differences, particular in the shadowing effect. You can try to compare and notice that there are some tiny shadowing differences around Monroe's eyes and the root of her nose if you look closer. The images:
--
Source 1
--
Source 2
From:
User:LoveFromBJM (
talk) at 08:53, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
On 25 March, I added a wikilink from the word "malfunctioning" (in reference to clothing) to the article Wardrobe malfunction, and re-added it on April 1. It was reverted both times, with no explanation other than a source being lacking. I did not change the content of the sentence, only added a wikilink. If the issue (the reason my edit was reverted) is that the content of the sentence is not adequately sourced, then someone should add "citation needed" or "not in citation given", and not remove the wikilink (as it appropriately links to an article describing the phenomenon being discussed). If the issue is that the phenomenon being discussed is not a wardrobe malfunction, then someone needs to explain what they think a wardrobe malfunction is (if not the apparent meaning of a malfunction of clothing resulting in unexpected exposure, which is what the sentence seems to be about). If the issue is that some editors object to adding wikilinks where the text being linked does not exactly match the name of the linked article, then you'd have to remove the wikilinks for "converted", "ectopic", and "detoxing". Is it one of the these issues, or something else? -- HLachman ( talk) 05:18, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
OK, so I'll wait a few days and if nobody objects, I'll restore the wikilink. -- HLachman ( talk) 20:28, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
I waited a month and nobody objected, so I restored the wikilink. If there is any further issue, please discuss here rather than doing undiscussed reverts. -- HLachman ( talk) 13:31, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
It seems that new photos have surfaced of a pregnant MM in 1960, along with a claim of paternity by MM. Here is a link to the pics: http://www.vintag.es/2017/08/never-before-seen-pictures-that-show.html Here is the accompanying text: "Monroe had wanted a baby more than anything in the world, but that joy was denied her. She had three miscarriages prior to losing this baby, all of which played out in the public eye. The shots were taken by her friend Frieda Hull on July 8, 1960, outside Fox Studios in New York after Monroe had completed costume and hair tests for her film The Misfits, starring Clark Gable and Montgomery Clift. The pregnancy was a secret and Monroe told close friend Frieda Hull that Yves Montand, her Let’s Make Love co-star was the father, not Arthur Miller, her husband at the time."
No mention of how the pregnancy ended.
I do not know the original source from which the vintag.es website got the info/photos, but it should be pretty easy to figure out especially given the info in the text, which is incredibly specific. The photos themselves do show a pregnant MMM, and the dates match up to the location. If it is confirmed, I would think that it would warrant an alteration of the section in the article discussing her pregnancies, as well as the relevant portion of the "Notes" section at the bottom. 199.176.233.63 ( talk) 14:49, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
I think the wikipedia article should include something about Marilyn's love of literature. She took literature and history night classes at UCLACite error: There are <ref>
tags on this page without content in them (see the
help page).. Her personal library included four hundred books. A book published in 2010, titled "Fragments" shows her never before seen letters, poems and and diariesCite error: There are <ref>
tags on this page without content in them (see the
help page)..
https://www.brainpickings.org/2012/07/27/marilyn-monroe-fragments-poems/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/7649015/Marilyn-Monroes-diaries-show-her-intellectual-side.html https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fragments-Poems-Intimate-Notes-Letters/dp/0374158355/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1505757488&sr=8-1 Adaluzmora ( talk) 18:59, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
I quote: 'To alleviate her anxiety and chronic insomnia, she began to use barbiturates, amphetamines and alcohol, which also exacerbated her problems, although she did not become severely addicted until 1956.'
Apparently, Marilyn Monroe was severely addicted to barbituates, amphetamines, and alcohol, and this was the case by 1956. Or, as it were, not 'until' 1956. I think that the reference for this is Sarah Churchwell. She is, shall we say, known for her expertise in twentieth- and twenty-first-century fiction. Last I heard, she teaches American literature and culture at the University of East Anglia. For whatever that is worth. However, this is a slippery subject. Such intellectual giants as Norman Mailer, Miller and Joyce Carol Oates are criticised for having been complicit in the commodification and mystification of an icon. Miller, having been married to the woman for four years. So I think that given that Marilyn Monroe is the subject of some 600 books, we might keep in mind that Sarah Churchwell's book is not a straightforward biography. Long story short, I think the essence of the woman is perhaps not that she was severely addicted to barbituates, amphetamines, and alcohol. Anybody can see that Marilyn Monroe was ageless, at 36. Even if somebody were to say that she was severely addicted to drugs and alcohol in the last months of her life, this would be controversial. Sort of like saying that she was 'psychotic', maybe. There is reason to be truly fascinated by Monroe’s personal and domestic life, actually. I think it might be the consensus that she may have developed an addiction to barbituates. Yet I quibble, that there is a distinction between 'an addiction', and 'severely addicted', especially if we are talking about 1956. I mean, 'Some Like it Hot' was made in 1959. And really, what is this about amphetamines? I will paste a quote, nevermind the source it's just some lousy website, to illustrate the kind of thing that tests my patience:
'On Marilyn’s bedside table was a virtual pharmacopoeia of sedatives, soporifics, tranquilizers, opiates, “speed pills,” and sleeping pills. The vial containing the latter, a barbiturate known as Nembutal, was empty. In her last weeks to months, Marilyn was also consuming, if not abusing, a great deal of other barbiturates (amytal, sodium pentothal, seconal, phenobarbital), amphetamines (methamphetamine, Dexedrine, Benzedrine and dexamyl—a combination of barbiturates and amphetamines used for depression), opiates (morphine, codeine, Percodan), the sedative Librium, and alcohol (Champagne was a particular favorite, but she also imbibed a great deal of Sherry, vermouth and vodka).'
Now okay, take Librium, for example. I can allow that actually, it is true that there is a prescription order for Marilyn Monroe signed by Dr. Hyman Engelberg, written on his stationery, for Librium, an anxiety medication, dated June 8, 1962. The prescription indicates that the medication was for anxiety. However, I was asking what is this about amphetamines? Look, don't get me wrong, the point is what is the truth. The truth may not be very nice. We can easily google pictures of Marilyn Monroe's dead body lying next to her bedside table, though, and I don't think there are any amphetamines, and I am perfectly ignorant of any evidence whatsoever that Monroe ever in her life took any amphetamines. I cannot take Sarah Churchwell's word for it. Also, I do not gather the impression that actually, Marilyn Monroe was just this side of entering the looney bin, and a heavy drug user, in 1956. There is plenty of footage from her last uncompleted movie (1962), which shows her in full possession of her acting abilities during filming, and delightful, and sharp. Note that this is not a controversial point, check it out easily. I think one might tread lightly with conveying the impression that she was Truman Capote, in and out of drug rehabilitation clinics (never), or even taking drugs recreationally at all (technically, I'm thinking again this is a 'never'). DanLanglois ( talk) 09:11, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
Oh, you suggest that I read..let me just take a breath. I like to think I'm a reasonable guy. There are actual biographies of Marilyn Monroe to read. Look, the article says she was 'severely addicted to barbituates, amphetamines, and alcohol, and this was the case by 1956'. This is patently ludicrous, but in the first place we're not supposed to just be making this stuff up. I might be willing to take your word for it about what is 'the consensus among the biographers', but you haven't actually given a reference for this. Indeed, it seems to me that you have phrased your point rather abstractly and also informally. What biographers? What counts as consensus? Is this the unanimous view? Is it even the majority view? Of course it is neither. I feel similarly about your point that it is silly to be 'judging whether someone had an illness'. That point is stated so abstractly and informally that I am forced to guess what illness you might mean. And again, I can stipulate your point about whether 'Not all drug users look like they're ready for "The Faces of Meth" gallery.' But let's meditate on this a bit further, while examining such a gallery. Here are 10 shocking before and after pics of celebrities ravaged by drink and drugs:
Now, by contrast, obviously, if you look at photographs of Marilyn Monroe, all of them without exception, from the last year of her life, it's not true that it appears as if her body had been ravaged by booze and drugs, taken with abandon. I mean, what, do you believe in miracles? Have you seen these pictures? I'm not asking about what some consensus among biographers might be, I'm saying look with your own eyes. But I take the consensus among biographers to be that Marilyn Monroe was known as the most beautiful woman in the world.
And then your point that 'As for the use of amphetamines, that was not at all unusual.' I don't have a strong opinion about what might or might not have been 'at all unusual', so what? If I am even willing to take your word for it, so what? Does it belong here because we share this opinion about what is not at all unusual? And so forth, about whether 'you will need something to give you energy/keep you awake etc.', and 'the combination of sedatives + amphetamines was pretty common.'
This is your point about amphetamines? But, I complained that I know of no evidence that Marilyn Monroe ever took any amphetamines. I mean, that's a bald challenge. And you reply by saying that amphetamines did in fact exist at that time, and it wasn't unusual for somebody to be taking them, and such. Well, but this is not the debate. I know that there is such a thing as amphetamines, and I know about Mickey Rooney and Judy Garland, for example. I know that Dr Max Jacobson had Kennedy hooked on amphetamine-based injections. But if Marilyn Monroe was taking amphetamines, then how do you know? Did somebody actually see her put these pills in her mouth? Where did she get them? Tijuana? At this point I anticipate that you might consider it worthwile to reply that in your best guess, she probably could have gotten them somewhere, maybe from one of her friends, who never spoke of this, and neither did she. That's fine, but we are not writing a fictional novel here, right? Arthur Miller was married to Marilyn Monroe for five years. He wrote a memoir, and life with her is treated of extensively in there. Did he mention that she took amphetamines? I might hope that you already know the answer to that question, so take it as a rhetorical question..
I'd say that what is or is not 'unusual' is something to consider, it's an interesting question, but I think it leads us afield. We might say on the Hemingway page, that he took this and that drugs, and that actually, among famous writers or such, it's not unusual. Similarly, about Edgar Allen Poe, or Aleister Crowley, or Kurt Cobain, or Philip K. Dick, or whatever, Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky. Or Robert Downey Jr. It's not unusual. Maybe we consider Samuel Taylor Coleridge, and Sigmund Freud. Or Stephen King. But is this relevant? Is the article on Marilyn Monroe the place to be saying without any evidence that she was strung out on amphetamines that I suppose she must have obtained illicitly, not that you can even give an eyewitness account for this, or a receipt of payment for this, or heck, anything from the coroner's report when she died that she had anything like this in her system. And by the way, she had no alcohol in her system. In sum, there's plenty of evidence about Marilyn Monroe's life, there are many things that can be said about her that are documented facts. That she took amphetamines is not a documented fact. DanLanglois ( talk) 08:22, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Fine, let's go consult Spoto, this is what I find, quoting Spoto: 'she never took amphetamines' Page 328.
You're welcome. - Thank you!
'..she began to use barbiturates, amphetamines and alcohol, which also exacerbated her problems, although she did not become severely addicted until 1956.' -- look, this isn't true, and as falsities go, this is also denigrating and crude. Alternatively, we could be noting that Marilyn Monroe was an avid collector of books, even an avid reader of books. The library of Marilyn Monroe contained over 400 books on a variety of subjects. Extensive library of classics, including books on religion, theater, literature, art, psychology and philosophy. So if you want to say 'until 1956', then maybe say that she didn't marry Arthur Miller until 1956 and leave amphetamines out of it. One could mention that Marilyn Monroe traveled in wide circles, meeting Khrushchev and Nabokov, Dinesen and Sitwell, Bellow and Sandburg, and people who actually knew her agreed about her sincerity and goodwill. Or again, we may consider that she was one of those fortunate few who seemed to get more attractive as she got older, and by 1960 the ordinarily pretty girl of the early part of her career had blossomed into a genuinely beautiful woman.
Fun fact: Marilyn Monroe was the first to wear skinny jeans, breaking the trend of "boyfriend jeans". This had started when she wore them into the ocean then came out to rest in the sun, leaving the jeans skin tight.
http://www.openculture.com/2014/10/the-430-books-in-marilyn-monroes-library.html DanLanglois ( talk) 12:56, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
Is it notable her mother was born in Mexico and she is a descendant of John Alden according to "Ancestry"?
Omaha Dog Bell ( talk) 06:28, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
There should be less and more reliable images on her article, it is full of them, I already made my edition but I was told to start a discussion so, who supports?. TheBellaTwins1445 ( talk) 00:06, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marilyn Monroe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The dates of her first marriage and birth of her children are wrong. Marilyn was born in 1926 how can she have children in 1917 and 1919, then divorce in 1921. At the age of fifteen, she married a man nine years her senior, John Newton Baker, and had two children by him, Robert (1917–1933) and Berniece (b. 1919). She filed for divorce in 1921, and Baker took the children with him to his native Kentucky. 2602:306:B8B0:10B0:341E:FB0F:1730:17B4 ( talk) 14:19, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marilyn Monroe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add the Name on the caption:
change
| caption = Monroe in 1953
with
| caption = Marilyn Monroe in 1953
Archimederoma ( talk) 13:22, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
When I first started editing on Wikipedia a long time ago, I was castigated for not adding sources to my posts. I subsequently learned how to add sources and citations, and I was immediately criticized for adding unreliable, questionable, and inappropriate sources to my edits. It seems that nothing I ever did was done right.
In the case of the Marilyn Monroe article, edits are heavily monitored because it is a featured article and also because Monroe is one of the most famous women of the twentieth century. I question some of the reverts that have been made to this article.
A number of publications and sources have said that Monroe divorced DiMaggio because he was jealous and verbally abusive to her. There can be little doubt that "mental cruelty" figured into the breakup. The shouting match at the Trans-Lux Theatre in September 1954 set the wheels in motion for the divorce. Who determines what constitutes a "reliable" source? An unreliable source might be telling the truth, and a reliable source might be giving false information. President Trump coined the term "fake news," and false information proliferates just about everywhere. If a specific post is deleted because the source is speculated to be unreliable, then technically just about every source is unreliable and should be deleted because it contains hearsay, conjecture, or speculation. Do you remember the 1948 headline, "Dewey Defeats Truman"? In the case of Monroe, Marilyn is the ONLY person who knows the exact truth of why she divorced DiMaggio.
When Monroe died in August 1962, her first husband Jim Dougherty was an LAPD detective. I see no reason why this is classified as "trivial information" that should not be mentioned in the article. There is obviously a difference of opinion on what constitutes trivial information and what constitutes appropriate information. No two people have the same mind, and there will always be differences of opinion. Most of you are too young to remember Jack Webb in the 1954 TV series "Dragnet." He played the role of Sergeant Joe Friday. He might have been right when he interviewed witnesses and said, "Just the facts, M'aam." Anthony22 ( talk) 16:59, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
What makes you think that accepted sources are reliable? You can bet every nickel you own that false information appears in sources and citations that have been accepted by Wikipedia. As I said before, "reliable" sources can be loaded with lies, hearsay and speculation that render the information useless. I have seen more false and contradictory information on Wikipedia than you can shake a stick at. I have followed links to articles that contradict what was said in the previous article. Information taken from Wikipedia could never be used in a court of law.
In reference to the conspiracy theories, Monroe is ALLEGED to have committed suicide. Some people think that it was an accident, others believe that she was murdered in order to cover up affairs between JFK and Bobby Kennedy. I have never alluded to any of those theories. As for the issue of rudeness, I have come across more rude people on this encyclopedia than you can shake a stick at, but I do not publicly accuse any specific individual of being rude, which is rude it itself. Rudeness is not a private affair; stupidity is not a private affair; ignorance is not a private affair. Some people think that they know everything, but in reality they know very little. Anthony22 ( talk) 20:35, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
"Information taken from Wikipedia could never be used in a court of law."
Too late. See Wikipedia:Wikipedia as a court source for a number of cases where Wikipedia was used as a source in court cases. :
Courts usually rely on witness testimony, not testimony from encyclopedias. I have heard from numerous people that Wikipedia information cannot be verified and is unreliable. A judge who would render a decision based on information from Wikipedia might have a drinking problem. Anthony22 ( talk) 20:53, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Can someone definitively say that Marilyn Monroe did her own singing in movies? Every indication is that she did (and IMDb is very thorough in crediting dubbing), and yet, her singing is so good (e.g., "Bye, Bye Baby" in "Gentleman Prefer Blondes") that I'm surprised there isn't much discussion of it. BMJ-pdx ( talk) 14:48, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
An repetitious edit like this is inconceivable to me. Edit-warring over a semicolon to reistate more cumbersome and less smooth language? Smacks of article ownership and/or in any case of something which I cannot find within the parameters of good faith work. Makes Wikipedia work so much less agreeable, little non-constructive reprimands like that. -- SergeWoodzing ( talk) 10:45, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
My edit summary was a result of fat fingers. I reverted to the last good, clean version. Randy Kryn, keep in mind WP:RS. Thanks. Cassianto Talk 18:32, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
For 56 years, Marilyn Monroe's date of death has been known as August 5, 1962. Now all of a sudden her date of death is classified as August 4, 1962. This seems very strange to me. I have heard of inscription errors on tombstones ( Lou Gehrig), ( Harry Cooper), or an unknown date of death ( Yvette Vickers), but I find it very difficult to believe that Marilyn Monroe's day of death has been incorrectly published for more than half a century. Monroe could have died at 11:59 p.m on August 4 or 12:01 a.m. on August 5 Pacific Time. Perhaps her day of death should be shown as August 4 OR August 5. The incomparable Monroe still continues to fascinate and puzzle people. Anthony22 ( talk) 13:51, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Marilyn Monroe lived in at least 43 homes, in such places as Hollywood, Catalina Island, Las Vegas, New York. But she owned only one house, the Brentwood home she died in.
Today, at the Grauman's Chinese Theatre, Marilyn Monroe's handprint in the concrete is the blackest/dirtiest because more people place their hands in her handprint than the handprint of any other star. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.114.108.98 ( talk) 22:37, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
When was this photo taken? Uzeditor ( talk) 03:17, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
Marilyn Monroe reportedly had manly female lovers, yet her lesbian tendencies are not mentioned or discussed anywhere in her article. This is very confusing to me. If you Google this matter, you will see that Monroe had alleged sexual encounters with women such as Brigitte Bardot, Judy Garland, Betty Grable, Joan Crawford, Jane Russell, Marlene Deitrich, Barbara Stanwyck, and even Jackie Kennedy. The article alleges that Monroe was heterosexual because no mention is made of her many female celebrity sex partners.
Monroe's bisexuality and many female lovers deserve mention in her article. This information is not something that should be hidden or classified as taboo. Anthony22 ( talk) 12:47, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
I don't know if the following source is reliable, but go to this link to read about Monroe's alleged female celebrity lovers:
https://www.therichest.com/world-entertainment/marilyn-monroe-15-female-lovers-you-never-knew-she-had-affairs-with/ Anthony22 ( talk) 13:07, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Who cares who she slept with? Cassianto Talk 17:30, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Caring who she slept with is absolutely irrelevant to the topic. If Monroe was indeed bisexual, this information should be mentioned in her article. If any of her alleged female lovers are still living, they are the ones who can substantiate the truth about this matter. It boils down to the age-old question, "How do you know when you have the truth?" You can't use unreliable sources, you can't use hearsay, you can't speculate, you can't use second and third-hand information. I am inclined to believe that Monroe was bisexual, but I don't know where to find a "reliable" source. Anthony22 ( talk) 18:08, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Caring who she slept with is absolutely irrelevant to the topic." -- in your opinion. I couldn't care less if she was bisexual. It didn't affect her abilities as an actress and that's the main thing. Cassianto Talk 19:37, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Brigitte Bardot is one of Monroe's alleged lovers, and she is still living into her mid-eighties. Bardot might be able to verify that Monroe was bisexual. There is a lot of evidence of Monroe's lesbian love affairs on the Internet, but these sources are not suitable for an encyclopedia. The National Enquirer, Daily Mail, and other publications are questionable sources. If The New York Times had an article about this, it might be OK as a "reliable" source. The New York Times has a famous quote: "All the News That's Fit to Print." What that really means is, "All the News that We Want to Print and Want You to See." Anthony22 ( talk) 18:56, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
There have been multiple reports that Marilyn Monroe had sexual encounters with some of the most famous women in the world. These reports have not been verified, but I am saying that the article should contain information that Monroe MAY HAVE HAD sexual liaisons with members of her own sex. This is interesting information that deserves mention in the article. Monroe was famous as a sex symbol, actress, model, and singer, but no mention is made of her bisexuality. Many other famous women have their bisexuality mentioned in Wikipedia articles. There is overwhelming evidence that Monroe was not as straight as a sword. I think that this information is significant and worthy of coverage in her article. Anthony22 ( talk) 22:15, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
How do you determine whether a specific source does or does not merit attention? I concede that there is a lot of false information on the Internet, but MULTIPLE sources have said that Monroe was bisexual. Brigitte Bardot is one of the mentioned women who is still living. If the information about Monroe and Bardot is false, Bardot can sue somebody for a ton of money. A straight person should NEVER be accused of being homosexual. There is a lot of junk on the Internet, but it can be difficult to separate truth from fiction. Anthony22 ( talk) 22:41, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
On a Talk Page, you can say whatever you deem is appropriate. The whole purpose of a Talk Page is to avoid mistakes in editing the article. You can certainly disagree with what someone says on a Talk page, but do not direct that person to another website. The Internet is full of junk, but it is OK to discuss junk and reliable? sources on the Talk Page. It's too bad that Marilyn is no longer with us; she could give us the truth of the matter. Anthony22 ( talk) 00:08, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
If Marilyn Monroe did, in fact, have sexual liaisons with other world-famous women, it would be a tremendous improvement to the article if this information were mentioned. Sexual orientation is a major aspect of an individual's personal life. I'm not talking about gossip, hearsay, or speculation; it is VERY possible that Monroe went both ways.
Monroe had affairs with many famous men; this information is covered in the article. If Monroe also had affairs with many famous women, this information should also be mentioned. Do not equate fact with gossip, and do not necessarily eliminate gossip from articles. Monroe's affairs with JFK, Bobby Kennedy, Milton Berle, Charlie Chaplin, Jr., and Marlon Brando are also gossip, and this information is covered in the article. Anthony22 ( talk) 01:18, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
The article in the Sun immediately mentions that Monroe's death was part of a "new crackpot conspiracy theory." This immediately brands the article as fiction. This scenario is reminiscent of Orson Welles' 1938 radio drama The War of the Worlds, in which hundreds of thousands of gullible people actually thought that we were being invaded by aliens from Mars. Getting back to Marilyn Monroe, she didn't get in on with aliens, but she DID get in on with both men AND women. I don't think that 20 Internet articles would falsely claim that Monroe had lesbian encounters. Anthony22 ( talk) 10:57, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Monroe could not have faked her death if she was wheeled out of her house in a body bag, but she might be hanging out with Elvis in heaven. Getting back to the issue of reliable sources, what makes you think that a source such as The New York Times or CNN is reliable? Who or what determines the reliability of a source? I refuse to believe that umpteen sources that state that Monroe was bisexual are all wrong. The evidence suggests that Monroe had female sex partners. Brigitte Bardot is at least one of those partners who is still living, and there could be a few more. If it could be proved that Monroe was in fact bisexual, this information should receive coverage in her article. Anthony22 ( talk) 12:57, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
The following quote is from Lois W. Banner, who is a respected author: "Monroe “desired women, had affairs with them, and worried that she might be lesbian by nature.”
Click on the following link for more information:
https://www.queerty.com/marilyn-monroe-may-have-swung-both-ways-says-bio-20120724 Anthony22 ( talk) 21:14, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Since Lois W. Banner is a reliable and respected author, It's OK to mention Monroe's bisexuality in her article, using Banner as the source. I'm sick and tired of wasting my time uploading edits that are reverted, so somebody else needs to upload the information. It is definitely appropriate to mention Marilyn Monroe's bisexuality in her article because numerous stories indicate that she went both ways and Banner is credible. FYI, I have a personal link to Donald Spoto, and he is a Monroe biographer.. Anthony22 ( talk)
So, I finally got around to rechecking Lois Banner's Monroe biography, and yes indeed, she does allege that Monroe was bisexual. For example, she thinks that there is probably truth to the claim that Monroe and Natasha Lytess (first acting coach) were in fact lovers, Monroe was close to many 'known bisexual/lesbian' women in Hollywood, and states that in many instances, Monroe hinted in interviews to being attracted to women. Banner does mention that she is the only biographer so far who thinks there's truth to for example the rumour about Monroe & Lytess being more than friends and coworkers. Despite being in the minority with her interpretation of Monroe's sexuality, Banner is arguably one of the most credible Monroe biographers given her academic background.
In short, there's nothing that irrefutably proves that Monroe was bisexual, which of course is not surprising given how taboo anything outside heterosexuality was during her lifetime. My suggestion would be to include a mention in the section where Lytess is discussed. E.g. "She also began working with the studio's head drama coach, Natasha Lytess. Lytess would remain her acting coach and mentor until 1955, and according to biographer Lois Banner, the two were also most likely lovers." [+maybe footnote adding more info on the statements that make Banner think it is likely Monroe was bisexual and a mention that other biographers have not been convinced.] However, I would not add Monroe to any LGBTQ+ categories before we have other RS authors agreeing with Banner.
+ Here's the other 'academic' Monroe expert's ( Sarah Churchwell) interpretation of Monroe's alleged bisexuality.
What do you think? TrueHeartSusie3 ( talk) 13:08, 27 September 2019 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3
TrueHeartSusie3 ( talk) Your funny in suggesting my edits were anything but good faith, you "allowed" some. But insulting me in edit logs and being predatory by WP:owning a page while mocking my edits and using an informal name to address me when doing so is uncalled for. This is an article about a 36-year-old that gives middle names of people she spent months with; it is bloated. Jennablurrs7575 ( talk) 13:41, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
Filling out of log reports where typos can and do occur than indeed, well really.And just copy past my name TrueHeartSusie3 ( talk)its rather disingenuous while provoking another editor especially when you copy pasted to change my ok edits ( other than the stupid prosthesis) Spell check the bane of my existence plus you were up in my edits (check times) so it was a bit hard to correct anything or proof with hyperactivity like that and the accusation of bad faith edits of work and now my typing, oh the horror, but You Know the SpACE Is LIMtEd. But the rest you seem to want to dicker over, and now want to call me to task? I work on a 7" inch android, my space is 1 inch I hope this meets your approval before I hit publish, all due respect you are still coming off gangbusters trying to "put me in my place". You nominated this article, put a lot of work into it, prolly kept it safe, did you create it too? Jennablurrs7575 ( talk) 15:16, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
Is the current lead image (the one with white sweater) good enough for now? I think so but it could have been better. What should we do? Leave it as it is? Roif456 ( talk) 01:54, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
There seems to be a difference of opinion on what constitutes a "notable" name that deserves inclusion into Marilyn Monroe's article. "Kay Brown" was entered, reverted, re-entered a second time, reverted a second time, and recently re-entered a third time by me. I guess you didn't know that Kay Brown was a notable person who has a Wikipedia article.
My entry for Seymour Rabinowitz (not notable) was reverted because of verbiage (a profusion of words usually of little or obscure content). I'd like to know who determines whether a given proper name is notable or not notable. Does a person need a Wikipedia article to be considered "notable"? Many people who don't have individual Wikipedia entries are mentioned by name in the articles of other people. I know that Seymour Rabinowitz was not a household name from coast-to-coast, but that does not necessarily mean that he should not be mentioned in Monroe's article. To use a corollary, Monroe's personal physician, Dr. Hyman Engelberg, was not a household name and does not have a Wikipedia entry, yet he is identified in her article. This appears to be a double-standard. If Rabinowitz is not notable, then perhaps Engelberg is also not notable and should not be specifically identified in the article. His name could be replaced with "Monroe's personal physician".
I concede that I have made some disruptive edits (I didn't notice that "superfeminine" was part of quoted text until after I made the edit; I was going to revert it on my own but Kierzek beat me to it. It is also true that some editors have made disruptive reverts; everything works both ways. Anthony22 ( talk) 20:03, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
The article concerns Marilyn Monroe, not Jean Harlow. The Section "Screen persona and reception" contains a publicity photograph of Jean Harlow. This photo focuses (literally and figuratively) only on Jean Harlow and leaves Monroe out of the picture (pun intended). It's OK to mention Harlow in the article, but a photograph that pertains ONLY to Harlow is inappropriate in Monroe's article. This photograph should be removed from the article. Anthony22 ( talk) 22:38, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marilyn Monroe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add in the section -- 1944–1949: Modeling and first film roles -- the miniature
EnricoMosca31 ( talk) 20:30, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
She was murdered. She died at around 9.30 the evening before she was said to die. One of the Kennedy's visited her on the day she died. She was going to blab about the Kennedy clan and her relationship with the two Kennedy brothers. In the book, the author takes apart the accepted version. There was a massive cover up, people around Monroe lied their asses off. The week before she was in Lake Tahoe at the behest of Frank Sinatra. While she was there she was drugged and compromising pictures were taken of her by a Mafia hood. They thought this would stop Monroe talking. Somebody had other ideas. key people who were around Monroe on the day have all dramatically changed their stories. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.133.152.252 ( talk) 17:22, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
I would hear Marilyn Monroe singing to me pooh pooh bee doo! |
If you like Marilyn Monroe, you can put this Userbox on your userpage like this: {{
User:UBX/Marilyn Monroe}}
--
Tangopaso --
Tangopaso (
talk) 15:59, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marilyn Monroe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Her date of death is August 5, you have it listed as the 4th, that is not correct. Thanks! 70.106.141.238 ( talk) 00:49, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marilyn Monroe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
She died on August 5, not 4 216.223.201.230 ( talk) 14:14, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
On what day do reliable sources say that Monroe died, Saturday August 4, 1962 or Sunday August 5? Please cite sources. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 12:30, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
Ralph Roberts' memoir manuscript, 26 pages (unread)←← Oko5ekmi5 ( talk) 23:17, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
Please put Category:Converts to Judaism from Roman Catholicism. - 2600:1702:31B0:9CE0:5430:7225:74B8:67DE ( talk) 02:12, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
I tried to add File:Monroe in a towel in Niagara trailer 1.jpg to the section Marilyn Monroe#1953: Rising Star and @ TrueHeartSusie3: reverted it with doesnt add anything and not necessarily even free to use. I reverted it back in with It is a public domain image illustrating "In some scenes, Monroe's body was covered only by a sheet or a towel, considered shocking by contemporary audiences." Undid revision 982650762 by TrueHeartSusie3 (talk). TrueHeartSusie3 reverted it again with We cannot possibly feature every image that is somehow referenced in the text. That section already has four images. Please take this to the Talk page first
There are two Niagara pictures in the article, both in the public domain.
Both are illustrative of the text. The other pictures on the section are iconic or illustrate the text. So which pictures should stay? -- Error ( talk) 14:39, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
TrueHeartSusie3 was correct in maintaining original Niagara image that illustrates make-up that created the iconic Monroe look mentioned in text, although towel and sheets are referenced too, I think the reader can understand that text without the lesser quality image. Jennablurrs7575 ( talk) 06:56, 10 October 2020 (UTC)