Talk:Marilyn Monroe/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Time for a wikibox image change?

My edit to the wikibox image was recently reverted and I would like to dispute it. In my opinion, the following image:

File:Marilyn Monroe in 1955.jpg

is far superior to the current one the page is using. I believe this image is more clear, accurate, and of substantial quality. Please let me know if I can change the wikibox image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipedianempire (talk • contribs) 17:05, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Sure, for April 1st! :D TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 20:21, 16 October 2020 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3

No. This image is not superior. It neither captures the glamor of the subject's public persona nor, with the subject's wet hair and water dripping from her chin (fresh out of a pool?), is it representative of how she looked in everyday life. I find it far inferior to the image currently used. 21:03, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@TrueHeartSusie3 The purpose of a wikibox image is to give people an idea of what a subject looked like, right? I think in that regard this picture is far more effective. There are other pictures throughout the page depicting her public persona but for the main wikibox photo I think we should go for something more neutral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipedianempire (talk • contribs) 21:33, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Fresh out of a swimming pool and still dripping is far from representative of normal appearance, except when the subject is a watersports professional. Agricolae (talk) 22:56, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedianempire, if any image in the article shows her public persona, it should be the infobox image. And your image does not do that by any stretch of the imagination. The current infobox image is far superior in terms of photograhic quality and representation of Monroe. Sundayclose (talk) 23:04, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

The article is about Marilyn Monroe, not necessarily her public persona. The current image is rendered inaccurate by the use of makeup and has an awkward angle anyway. The new image is perfectly acceptable in terms of quality and accurate representation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipedianempire (talk • contribs) 01:00, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Saying a picture is rendered inaccurate by the subject wearing makeup is like saying it is rendered inaccurate by the person wearing clothes. If a woman (or a man) chooses to use makeup when presenting herself to the world, it is not our place to decry a representation of the choice as lacking in authenticity, any more than we would reject a picture in which a woman's hair had highlights or braids or was dyed purple. The grooming choices of a person are part who their overall identity. Anyhow, the public persona is what makes her Marilyn Monroe and not just Norma Jeane Mortenson: to intentionally minimize it would be like having an article on Neil Armstrong that plays down the whole astronaut thing. Agricolae (talk) 06:47, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

No. Good reasons given. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:25, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

• Lol. I'll go along with it but only if we change Albert Einstein's lead picture too. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:49, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't necessarily think makeup makes the image inaccurate, but it does compromise the neutrality of the image given that Marilyn Monroe herself rarely used makeup when she wasn't in public. There are plenty of photos throughout the page that give people an idea of the Marilyn Monroe persona, but there is no separate article for Norma Jeane Mortenson. Depicting her as her performance character would be like using a picture of Red Skelton in his clown costume for his infobox photo. Not very accurate. That said, the proposed image is instantly recognizable as Marilyn Monroe and I believe is true to her most usual image. People won't be confused as to who the article is talking about if that's the concern. The change of infobox photo does not minimize her career in the public sphere nor does it portray her in a way that is inaccurate. Please reconsider. Wikipedianempire (talk) 01:03, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

The analogy of Red Skelton in a clown costume makes little sense. There is a huge difference between Skelton as a clown and Monroe as she might be seen in a film role. Again, the image in the infobox should not be Monroe as she looks in the privacy of her home, without makeup, and just climbing out of a pool with wet, stringy hair. Many woman (and men as well) look very different in public than they do in private, not just MM. And how MM might have looked whether as a character or as she would usually look in public can involve makeup. Skelton didn't present himself as a clown in his public life as Red Skelton, nor did he present himself as the way he looked when he just got out of bed in the morning. If you look at the professionally created images in the infoboxes of actors (and many are not professionally done because of copyright issue), they are usually images of how the actors look in public, not how they look in the privacy of their home. Sometimes they look similar as themselves in public and as one of their characters. How different that image is from how the look in a role depends entirely on what kind of roles they played. For example the infobox image for Uma Thurman does not show her in a role; it's how she look in public as Uma Thurman. How close she is to that look in a role depends on the role; similar in Beautiful Girls; different in Batman& Robin. But her bio infobox image doesn't show her as she would look in the privacy of her home. That's just one example; there are many others. You are making far too much out of the makeup issue and how different she might look as one of her film roles compared to how she would look in the privacy of her home. The infobox image can portray her similarly to some of her characters as well as how she appeared in public; those two don't have to be different. She was a beautiful woman, whether she was Norma Jeane with makeup or MM as Rose Loomis in Niagra. The current image illustrates that. Sundayclose (talk) 18:42, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree that an infobox does not have to portray someone exactly how they look in the privacy of her home, if that were the case most images would be invalid! That said, that is not why I chose this particular image. The current image is a glamor shot from the November 1953 issue of Modern Screen for the film River of No Return. While there is nothing necessarily wrong with using this type of image for an infobox photo, it does blur the line between MM and the characters she portrayed. That aside, the current image has an awkward perspective that takes away from its overall quality. Her head is tilted and looking to the side, and the photo was taken at a very low angle. It looks less like a portrait and more like a picture, if that makes any sense. The proposed image features Marilyn looking directly at the camera, perfectly centered and unobstructed. It is a much clearer portrait. Just as the infobox image can portray her similarly to her characters, it can also portray her how she looked most of the time at home. The proposed image portrays MM in a way that is consistant with the rest of the article as well as her public image, and overall provides a more clear and all encompassing portrait.

Wikipedianempire (talk) 19:15, 17 October 2020

As I said, the differences in the images between MM and some of her characters in some cases is nonexistent. In many of her films she plays someone who looks very much like how she is presented as Marilyn Monroe to the public. The character's personality may be different, but the look is quite similar. That argument has no validity. As for the angle of either shot, I really question your understanding of professional photography. The angle and head tilt do not detract from the image quality; in fact the current image is from a magazine that is noted for its pictorials of film stars. As for clarity of image, there's no comparison. The current image is a higher resolution and clearer. I think we are have reached the point of beating a dead horse; we can argue from now till doomsday about what each of use prefers in an image. That's where the consensus process is needed for a decision. Sundayclose (talk) 20:49, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Comment: Aside from the absurdity of the suggestion that we should use this image, I'd also like to point out that whichever image we do decide to use has to be in public domain. This limits our options quite a bit, and I believe also makes it impossible to use this image.TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 20:55, 17 October 2020 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3

Public domain could certainly settle this very quickly. As I see it, the current image is in the public domain. It also appears that the proposed image could be under copyright by the New York Times. My understanding is that a copyright would rule that image out since there are free images available. But I'd like to hear from someone who knows more about wiki policy on images. Sundayclose (talk) 21:09, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I believe this picture was taken by Marilyn's friend Milton Green and was never copyrighted as far as I know. How is the suggestion we use this image absurd? In terms of quality I think there are larger and higher resolution versions of this photo, but the photo itself does quite well as a portrait.

Wikipedianempire (talk) 19:53, 17 October 2020

Wikipedia has very strict rules about use of copyrighted images because of serious legal implications. We must know for sure that the image is in the public domain. If the image is not in the public domain it cannot be used because a public domain image is available. The image was used by the New York Times. The default assumption is that it is under copyright unless there is clear evidence that it is in the public domain. Sundayclose (talk) 21:31, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

The image was actually never used by the New York Times, I updated the image source. It was taken by Milton H Greene, a friend of Marilyn who died in 1985 and the physical photograph was sold in an auction on October 25, 2006 for $1,237. This particular photo was never copyrighted so it seems pretty clear that it is in the public domain. Wikipedianempire (talk) 20:55, 17 October 2020

For Wikipedia's purposes, no it's not clear simply because you think it's not copyrighted. Details about these matters are at WP:NFCC and WP:IUP. A copyrighted image cannot be used if there is a free equivalent (i.e., an image of MM that is in the public domain). Determining whether an image can be used often is not a simple process on Wikipedia, and can require the expertise of Wikipedia editors who have a lot of experience with images. I think you should discuss the image at WT:Non-free content. I don't think the image will gain consensus for use in MM's article, which would make it a moot point here. But you might need some help if you want to use this or similar images in other articles. You could run into a lot of trouble if an image cannot be used because of copyright issues. You're not obligated to do that, of course, but that's the way I would go to avoid problems in the future. Sundayclose (talk) 22:31, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

The creator of the image died in 1985, three years before all photographs became intellectual property of the producer by law in the US. There is no evidence that this particular photo was copyrighted by Milton Greene, and purchasing a photograph at an auction does give claim to ownership of the image itself (just the physical picture.) With all of this taken into account and no evidence to the contrary, I think it's fair to say that this image is firmly in the public domain. Wikipedianempire (talk) 20:55, 17 October 2020 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipedianempire (talk • contribs)

I'm not sure where you're getting your information about copyright law. I don't really know what you mean by "three years before all photographs became intellectual property of the producer by law in the US". Anyway, I'm not trying to tell you what to do, but if it was me I would seek help from Wikipedia editors who know about image issues before trying to use the image. Sundayclose (talk) 23:20, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

There seems to be some confusion here. IF the photo was never published before 2003, it is really simple: the term of copyright is the life of the creator plus 70 years, so in this case it would enter public domain on Jan. 1 2056. If it was published then it gets a lot more complex, and depends on when it was published and whether when it was published it included a copyright notice. Anyhow, I think the copyright issue, while intended to provide a quick resolution, has done the opposite. It is real simple - everyone but the proposer who has commented likes the current image better than the proposed new one. There is consensus against the change whether it is in the public domain or not. Agricolae (talk) 23:37, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Prior to 1978, works had to be published or registered to receive copyright protection. This photograph was not published or registered, therefore it is not copyright protected and is in the public domain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipedianempire (talk • contribs) 00:04, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Although all of this is a moot point because there is no consensus to use the image, I'm curious. Where did you get the information that an image not published before 1978 is not protected by copyright? And what is your evidence that it was not published? Sundayclose (talk) 02:06, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

1) You are making an incorrect assumption that if Federal copyright law did not apply, then there was no copyright protection at all, that unpublished material automatically entered the public domain. (Just think about it - this wouldn't work, as all creative works except live broadcast is by its very nature unpublished from the moment of creation right up until publication: the very act of creation would invalidate any claim to copyright were this the case.) In fact, it was the opposite - in the pre-Berne days, archives would routinely claim copyright over their unpublished holdings even if they were created centuries before. To quote Wikipedia:Public domain#Unpublished works in reference to unpublished works created pre-1978, "Unpublished unregistered works were covered by state law. This "common law copyright" in most states granted unpublished works a perpetual copyright, valid until an eventual publication of the work." The existence of these two alternative sets of copyright laws, and of how a work upon publication shifted from coverage by common-law perpetual copyright to being subject to statutory copyright law, was specifically delineated in Zachary vs. Western Publishing Co., a California appellate court decision from 1977. This separate legal framework was later eliminated by the extension of statutory copyright to all unpublished works and (again from WP:Public domain#Unpublished works) the current law is: "If never published, or published after 2002, the work is copyrighted according to the standard US rules", these standard rules being creator's life plus 70 years.

2) Is there any particular reason you are refusing to sign your posts? Agricolae (talk) 02:22, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

This is a FA rated article and that is a ridiculous choice for a main picture. It neither captures the subject accurately, nor is a quality picture that should be used as the main photo in a information box. You do not have consensus to change it. Certainly, there are other pictures that could be considered. Kierzek (talk) 02:43, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

The proposer has said, repeatedly, that the image currently used is inaccurate because Marilyn Monroe did not usually wear makeup when not in public. I would suggest that she also didn't typically, in private, adopt a 'dripping wet, just out of a swimming pool' look. If the current image reflects only her public persona, the proposed replacement reflects neither typical public not private appearance. It is simply not a viable alternative. If anyone wants to propose a different image, go for it. Agricolae (talk) 15:13, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

As the photograph in dispute is clearly still under copyright, I have nominated it for deletion. (Or at least I tried - I am not familiar with the typical Commons protocols for this.) Agricolae (talk) 16:53, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2020 (2)

Murder Killers: The Kennedy's Marilyn Monroe caused of death needs to be changed to Murder Marilynrose13 (talk) 02:38, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2020

Murder Killers : The Kennedy's Marilynrose13 (talk) 02:36, 5 December 2020 (UTC) Delete — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marilynrose13 (talk • contribs) 02:39, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. --TheImaCow (talk) 06:09, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

WP:URFA/2020

This page is in remarkably good shape for a high-traffic bio, so I commend the article maintainers and writers. But a considerable number of excess images have crept in since the FAC (have they all been reviewed for compliance with WP:WIAFA and image policy?), resulting in layout issues and MOS:SANDWICHing. Checking multiple screens and devices, there are quite a few places in this article where text is sandwiched between the excess images, some of which should be removed or re-arranged to avoid the sandwiching. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:03, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

All set ... I made some adjustments to avoid the MOS:SANDWICH (and in a couple of cases separate the black-and-white images from the color ones), and there are no problems left on any of my three different screens. Very fine article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:46, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia:, thank you for all this work! One problem though: the photos in the 'collage' images are not in a chronological order, which is a bit of an issue. Could you revise this? TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 17:15, 3 December 2020 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3

Sure; which one and what order should they be? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:43, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Ah, I see now ... I think you mean the one at "1956–1959: Critical acclaim and marriage to Arthur Miller" ... going in! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:54, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

I think I got them; is that it? Had to take care to keep people facing the text instead of looking off the page ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:08, 3 December 2020 (UTC) by the way, I just noticed one thing on the prose. Would it be possible to vary the wording a bit on the use of "despite"? It is used ten times, and it seems some of those instances could have more interesting word choice ... Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:08, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Good point, I'll try to find time to go through the article at some point. Meanwhile, another editor has taken it on themselves to unfortunately revert all your work, without first taking part in this discussion... TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 18:34, 5 December 2020 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3

Accidental overdose being the actual cause of Death according to MM's spirit voice

Séances, extraterrestrials, impostors, spirit voices, Catholic deception. Bonus video. What, no Xenu?

As no one person of good will and having an open, unbiased mind can deny or even try to debunk (on a factual base) the séance tape recordings made possible by the rare and seemingly miraculous psychic gift of famous British direct medium Leslie Flint (1911-94), all sceptics should finally sort of surrender and leave it to the extraterrestrial evidence for leading us to the one and only historical truth. I, for my part, am feeling not the slightest doubt as to the identity of the so-called communicator during these tape recorded séances (beginning on Dec 20, 1973), even if the tenacious question after her home town is answered with ... silence (presumably losing control). Neither do we, by claiming the above, fall victim to a female impostor or "con artist" which materialistically inclined people would tend to argue. Look at and listen to the others - overall hundreds - of Leslie Flint's recordings, tally them with your own experiences of fraud or fake. And your critical, but nonetheless open mind will urge you to accept or better: welcome it as truth. A truth as a matter of fact that has been obscured for centuries by Christian dogmas and false beliefs. And one day the Roman-catholic church will have to be held accountable for this gigantic millennial deception! Now, just relax and listen to what MM had the fervent desire to tell the world some ten years after her death: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O39mtPnRwtM A) min 2:13 / 2:20 ; B) min 8:55 / 9:21 ; C) min 12:08 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orbis*Non*Sufficit (talk • contribs) 00:44, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Entertaining nonsense, if you've finished up for the day. Collapsed per WP:NOTFORUM. Mathglot (talk) 05:15, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Where did the surname "Mortenson" come from?

Does anyone know how she got the surname Mortenson? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.45.43.186 (talk) 03:15, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

True Heart Susie's Edit: the final straw.

Hello. You meant well, and I don't mean to be harsh on you, but I do need to take a stand; not only for myself, but for any sincere person who may be thinking of withdrawing from Wikipaedia, as I am now: along with the albeit small donations I make. That reference to the 1901 inspiration for 'The Seven Year Itch' possibly being ' Twenty-third Avenue, New York City', (sic), with link, was perfectly reasonable. Anyone interested in Marylin should be interested in that; I've never encountered that reference myself, after years of reading, and I'm certain that many others haven't, either. Amd there's so much trite, repetitious, obvious cliché, line after line of it, just sitting there, asking for others' admiration, impervious to criticism. As I wrote, you meant well, and I'm sure there shant be any weeping from anyone, but, after that, I and my little money are off. I'm very far from not being able to accept criticism; it's not pride; but I am against editing for editing's sake. Sincerely, regards to you. Heath St John (talk) 20:30, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

I agree with TrueHeartSusie3. It's mentioned in the film's article, and that's sufficient. As a part of the entire life and career of MM, that comparison is trivial. You're welcome to wait to see if there is any support here for your edit. But threatening to take your money and leave doesn't help your argument in the least. No one here is irreplaceable. If you want to edit collaboratively to improve Wikipedia like the rest of us here, that's wonderful, but it doesn't entitle you to special privileges. Sundayclose (talk) 21:14, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello. Quite intentionally I left it before till the very last to state that I'm neither beyond criticism, nor is it the result of pride.If I had the latter, I'd pretend to knowledge, not humbly defer to others' knowledge every day, from which I've learned so much. That was an obvious defence, which my previous conclusion, above-described, anticipated; I really hoped I'd be wrong in the accusation's arrival; alas, no; like the article itself, with the untouchable clichés to which I refered, I suppose the inevitable is irresistable. I hope others reach for a broader understanding, making such a defence again necessary. If I, too, must have recourse to the obvious, yes, I agree, "No" [contributor] "is special": so that dispenses, (we'll see), with that. However, a more sensitive thought should be that each is equally very ! special. A moments recollection, you see, could encourage, with very little effort, anyone knew ti the site: alas, what happens is described in a moment, below. As for "Trivial" ! My word ! Remove that ! from some articles, "Sex symbol", "Blonde bombshell", yah-de yah-de-yah, and you'll certainly find examples enough, and with a much finer purpose, to exercise editorial skills. This of course makes me sound bitter; an accusation as obvious as the one already made, and equally wrong. Now, if I were criticizing instead, what's the first obvious remark I could reach for?: buyer of privilege, perhaps ? See how easy it is ? What has it added ?: nothing; least of all any truth. The simple truth is this; I assure you it's the truth. I just became exasperated upon reading many edit (no, not just my own), because I enjoyed reading them, as well, which reminded me of typical office middle management: it takes a few years for the Tea Boy to reach a position where he can put his own brass name plate on the door, but, once it's on, beware ! Being neither owner nor underlying, now that petty-power has been tasted, how energetically, if not constructively, it's wielded: for ambition is always voracious, and there are other aspirations: the office with a bigger window, perhaps ? Or, a greater number of edits to their name ? Finally, it's the tone, you know, the obnoxios, impudent tone. Not mine, here; though over time I'm surprised and saddened at my increasing asperity. I've never encountered in response to what must have been some very hurt individuals, who were only trying to do their best, no doubt, (in the Editorial comments, sometimes), such bumptious, graceless, high-handed conceited dismissiveness as I've seen some editors dispense to genuine enthusiasts; insread, the big rubber lunges from the heavens, erases the lesser mortals, and demoralises so very many, I'm sure, from ever making another attempt; those who in their innocence thought that from such collaborative works a union of collective friendliness could be expected, find themselves far, far away from such perfumed gardens from which some, some editors have strayed; who knows what's been lost from those who understandably should never trouble themselves again ? Again, please, in further anticipation, no, I'm not refering to the obvious vandalising oafs; and yes, Editors are needed. That's about all I feel I need to say. I'll respond to anything that's original, and not "Trivial". Best regards to you all. Heath St John (talk) 23:21, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Sexual Revolution

Marilyn Monroe can not be “emblematic” of the era of sexual revolution — it’s in the 60´s but more around 1968 — because she died in 1962. As she became older and there were a new generation coming — the peace, love, drug, rock’n’roll generation—, she wouldn’t have been able to be part of it. What made her in some way this “emblematic” icon is, and it’s the truth, her death and the speculation around. She was simply another famous sex-symbol of Hollywood in the 50’s.

I write what’s on my mind so I can edit it with something more accurate. Cookiecheerie (talk) 18:11, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

The era began in at least the 1950s, Monroe's work in the first issue of Playboy, etc. Randy Kryn (talk) 18:26, 15 June 2021 (UTC)–

“ The sexual revolution, also known as a time of sexual liberation, was a social movement that challenged traditional codes of behavior related to sexuality and interpersonal relationships throughout the United States from the 1960s to the 1980s ”

This is an extract from the Wikipedia page about sexual revolution. It’s says from 1960s to 1980s.

The major party of Marilyn Monroe career was in the fifties no during the sixties. The fact that she appeared on PlayBoy magazine doesn’t mean that she began any sexual revolution movement, and the thing is her appearance in this magazine was against her will.

But. You have to understand that Marilyn Monroe was another sex-symbol as Hollywood used to fabricate. So is this mean that they were sexually free ? No. This image was made because when we talk about body and sexual behavior, it attracts the curiosity of many people. If that isn’t argumentative about the fact that Marilyn Monroe wasn’t emblematic of the sexual revolution era.

And we do not have to forget that there were another well-known blond bombshell/sex-symbol in the 1950. It was Jayne Mansfield. She was as famous as Marilyn was. When I said that the death of Marilyn helps in some kind of way to preserve her popularity during those years, i will prove that with this example.

If Marilyn died in the same way as Jayne Mansfield died — because Jayne and Marilyn had the same level of popularity in the US in that era —, she will not be remembered as she still is today and people won't do theories about her death in implicating the Kennedy's brother.

I will wait for your response to be polite but what i change is more accurate. :) Cookiecheerie (talk) 20:36, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Odd that the page would define 1960s to 1980s, seems to start and end too late. In any case, taking that as a timeline, Monroe was still alive in 1960, 1961, and 1962, and then her image lived on until the present day. Monroe's and Mansfield's 1950s images fueled much of the revolution, and that page itself relies heavily on the decades before the 1960s (including Margaret Mead's 1928 book as a starting point). By the 1980s the sexual revolution was no longer a revolution but a societal shift. Yes, Monroe had a great deal to with that, alive and dead. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:55, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

You don’t seem to be objective about Marilyn Monroe.

She was still alive during the first three years of the sixties but most her career was during the fifties. She didn’t have anything to do with the sexual revolution. It wasn’t even her generation.

It’s not odd that it dated — the sexual revolution era — from 1960 to 1980 because the young generation of rock’n’roll with Elvis Presley, the Beatles, Bob Dylan, etc started to create values based on freedom and not only sexual but it was a part. If you want to know a woman we can defined as a sexually free woman at that era was Brigitte Bardot. She was seen as a liberated woman by people and intellectual between 1956 and the end of the sixties. Marilyn was seen as a dumb blond and most her image was made by the studio, what she hated too.

You don’t want to accept it maybe because you’re a fan of her. I won’t judge.

A revolution is a societal shift, indeed. And a revolution take time and need mass support. The term of sexual revolution was used before this great shift of 1960 because some intellectuals think about it because it was seen as bad and as a sin by the convention.

So to speak about Marilyn, what truly conserve her fame until now is her death. This is what a tried to explain. If there weren’t many books who are mainly about the theories about JFK and all these, forget my french, sh*t, people wouldn’t be interested in her today. It’s a fact not because I want that to be but because it is.

Why Jayne Mansfield, as you said and think, is not remembered today since she had the same image as Marilyn had ? Because there weren’t many conspiracies surrounding her death.

Just try to be objective because it’s a Wikipedia page and not a fan page we’re you can write something depending on what you feel about the person you write about.

Saying that Marilyn was emblematic of that era is a misinterpretation. Cookiecheerie (talk) 07:07, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

[ I’m sorry for my misspellings ] Cookiecheerie (talk) 07:10, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

In case you tell me that Brigitte Bardot was in the 1950s because her career took off in 1956, I would already like to say that 1956 was the approach of the 1960s. Her career began in the late 1950s.

The thing with Brigitte Bardot is that in her films she embodied the image of a sexually free woman enjoying life. Marilyn Monroe, for example, portrays the image of the brainless and just sexy blonde. There is nothing gratuitous in this image, even if it is not what it was, it is the image that the media gave of it and therefore what makes it have nothing to see with the sexual revolution which consisted in the emancipation of sexual stereotypes and moral shackles. Cookiecheerie (talk) 07:20, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

i wanted to write free instead of gratuitous lol Cookiecheerie (talk) 07:22, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Addition of important files

Here are some of the images I have recently found of her on commons which are historically important. As I have been said, I need to start a discussion before, here they are:

• 
  This was taken in 1962 and distributed by Associated Press, important for her biography since she made this trip to Mexico the year she wanted to have the "Mexican divorce", plus she is here with two of the most mythic and historic figures of the artistic life in Mexico; film director Emilio Fernández, and actress Columba Domínguez. It was also the first and only time she visited Mexico and one of her last trips before passing away.
• 
  Not sure about the addition for this one, please discuss, distributed by the US government, she is here with JFK, I don't know if it was taken before or after her performance of "Happy Birthay, Mr. President", also 1962.
• 
  Part of a series known as "The last photos", public domain and taken by George Barris, a picture of one of the very last photoshoots she had before passing away, date July 13, 1962.
• 
  Known for her relationships too, here is a picture distributed by Associated Press with her last lover, Mexican film director José Bolaños, also 1962 during her visit to Mexico.
• 
  This portrait of Monroe by James Gill is way better than the current one on her page, talking about; File:James Gill's "Marylin Tryptich".jpg, trading this would be better.
• 
  Or this one too, also by James Gill.

Greetings. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 21:52, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

First off, the images that were in the stable version of the article had gone through the FA process. As for the criteria for which they were chosen, besides of course having no copyright issues, was that they help explain the content of the article visually.

As for the particular images above:

1.) I've read most Monroe biographies in preparing this article, and don't find any basis for your claim that this trip was somehow historic. Yes, it was Monroe's first time in Mexico, and yes she died soon after, but I don't think that is criteria for adding a blurry newspaper image of her doing tequila. The trip may have been historic in Mexican context, but in the overall biography of Monroe, it's not a key moment.

2.) I see no reason to add this when we have plenty of better quality images already in the article.

3.) It's not a very good image from this photoshoot, IMHO. Something's Got to Give and all the drama that went on during the shoot was a much more important part of Monroe's last months, hence why an image of Monroe on the set was chosen when it became available.

4.) See reasoning in #1. Why should this image be added to the section instead of images from her last films? It's also very poor quality.

5.) James Gill – The current Gill image in the article, the panel from the triptych, was not chosen because it would be somehow the most aesthetically pleasant, but because it best exemplifies the cultural discourses around Monroe. The two other paintings don't do this as effectively, as they are mainly publicity shots with changed colours.

Please also remember that we simply cannot add all good images to the article, so we have to choose ones that best support what's being said in the article. TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 07:59, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

I have to agree with the reasoning of TrueHeartSusie3. This article was first vetted when it was brought up to GA status. It then went through a more rigorous process when vetted for FA status. It just does not need much as far as changes or photos. Also, we would not want “text squeezing” because of the placement of added photos or un-needed clutter, so to speak. That is another consideration. Kierzek (talk) 00:33, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2021

Change "an abusive man nine years her senior" to "an abusive man ten years her senior".

Gladys Pearl Baker was born in May 1902, according to her Wikipedia page. Her ex-husband was born in 1891, also according to a source on Gladys' page. He was either 10 or 11 years older. 162.245.132.146 (talk) 23:29, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Please provide more sources to your edit request and I'll consider adding them to the article. WikiSilky (talk) 07:42, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. -ink&fables «talk» 09:10, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2021

"Good feelings heart" is an ungrammatical caption on one of the last pictures on the page. It should be "a good heart" 173.66.69.143 (talk) 00:49, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

 Done, good catch. I didn't check to see if this is a recent error or has been there awhile. Thanks for caring enough to follow thru. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:42, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Question

Hello people, I have a question, why is her introduction starting as:

• Marilyn Monroe (/ˈmærəlɪn mʌnˈroʊ/; born Norma Jeane Mortenson; June 1, 1926 – August 4, 1962) was an American actress... and not as
  • Norma Jeane Mortenson (June 1, 1926 – August 4, 1962) known professionally as Marilyn Monroe (/ˈmærəlɪn mʌnˈroʊ/), was an American actress...

I see that other notable figures such as XXXTentacion start like this

• Jahseh Dwayne Ricardo Onfroy (January 23, 1998 – June 18, 2018) known professionally as XXXTentacion (often stylized as XXXTENTACION) and commonly referred to as simply X, was an American rapper... Instead of
  • XXXTentacion (often stylized as XXXTENTACION) and commonly referred to as simply X, (born Jahseh Dwayne Ricardo Onfroy; January 23, 1998 – June 18, 2018) was an American rapper...

Which one is the correct way? Is just a question, hope someone can answer, greetings. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 19:26, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Good question. Note A mentions that she made her screen name her legal name in 1956. Monroe was her mother's maiden name. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:34, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Randy Kryn thank you for that fact, I was not aware of it, actually I made a change similar to what I told in here with the page of Janet Leigh, which as far as I am concern was just her professional name and not her legal name, you think this change here was done right? - [1] hope you can give me some feedback, greetings. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 16:04, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

No idea. On a quick scan of the page I don't see an explanation of her name, but do point out that it's used on her gravemarker along with the last name of her husband. Maybe ask over at the film wikiproject talk page. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 17:08, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Wrong information about Jewishness

Hi, Monroe is not ethnically Jewish, she was just Jewish in culture, being a Convert to Judaism from Roman Catholicism. Could someone please add the category? - 2600:1702:31B0:9CE0:DDE2:FBC4:9592:AB60 (talk) 04:49, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done, as the article text doesn't mention this. (This IP has been adding a lot of incorrect or openly false categories today.) --Lord Belbury (talk) 09:04, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

No, it's not false, it's the facts. - 2600:1702:31B0:9CE0:BCD9:BF19:12EA:B506 (talk) 03:21, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Inserts and Excerpts

Going to school makes people aware of the fact that children read, write and know how to spell arithmetic. Many fans of this lady have followed upon such trials such as schools for modeling such as Marion's where she appeared in school before her transfer to separate school. Afterwards B&W images appeared and futuristic beginning labels to movies appeared with her picture. Tell me, how old does this woman look? I ask if any other rare photographs appear in color. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:6011:C829:2B5A:315F:7EF9:94B0:53 (talk) 06:00, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

"Life and career" section on mobile view

Sections have been collapsed on mobile view by default. This also results in collapsing and expanding all of subsections in the "Life and career" section. I think the "Life and career" header should be scrapped out, and the sub-headers should be converted to lv-2 headers for better mobile reading. --George Ho (talk) 09:11, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Copyvio in part of personal life

Hi, I hve re-redacted the advice into the "personal life" section of the article to be re-added, check it out first and if there is any correction needed, please let me know to change it:

Appart from her marriages, there have been more men with whom Monroe is rumoured to had affairs and relationships. Among them its Charles Chaplin Jr., son of Charlie Chaplin, both dated in 1947 and they supposedly ended their relationship after Charles caught Marilyn in the bed of his brother Sydney. The actor talk about it in his autobiography released in 1960 and Irish author Anthony Summers mentioned about this in his book Goddess: The Secret Lives of Marilyn Monroe.

In 1948, she met Milton Berle on the filming set of Ladies of the Chorus. Berle himself claimed that although at the time he was dating actress Adele Jergens, both, Monroe and him, had an affair. He also stated that "Marilyn had respect for herself and that she was a lady".

Actor Tony Curtis wrote on his 2009 published memoirs that he lived a "passionate love story" with her in the early 1950s. Both starred together in the 1959 film Some Like It Hot and hide their affair. Curtis even admitted to have been the father of the child that Monroe was expecting during the shooting, while she was married to Arthur Miller and she lost during an umpteenth miscarriage.

Marlon Brando also revealed in his 1994 autobiography entitled, Songs My Mother Taught Me, that he and Monroe began an affair after they bumped into each other at a party.

During a trip to Mexico in 1962, Monroe met Mexican José Bolaños Prado, and aspiring film director who turned into whom today is known as the "last lover of Marilyn Monroe" since they both started a romance and was the last man to have a public relationship of love with her. This information was revealed in the 2012 spanish wirtten book by Xavier Navaza, El último amante de Marilyn Monroe (The last lover of Marilyn Monroe). The book also stated that the affair only lasted 14 days, but that was enough for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to initiate an investigation about Bolaños, since it was not the first time that the actress had been linked to communist sympathizers, such as her ex-husband Arthur Miller.

Regarding the references, there must be new one for the Marlon Brando information, but "Infobae" and "Vogue" are reliable sources to use, so there must be no more issues about that. Greetings and await for feedback and comments. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 06:38, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

"Dumb blonde"

"...established her star image as a "dumb blonde"; Citation needed and proof there is such thing as a "dumb blonde". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.116.66.116 (talk) 09:21, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): BLT93.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:23, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Marilyn Monroe ‘Story’ Is Attributed to Ben Hecht

• Hecht, Ben; Monroe, Marilyn (1974). My story. New York: Stein and Day. ISBN 9780812817072. OCLC 461777186.
• "Marilyn Monroe 'Story' Is Attributed to Hecht". The New York Times. 26 June 1974. Retrieved 31 January 2022.

0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 17:43, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Wolves I Have Known By Marilyn Monroe, as told by Florabel Muir

http://www.marilynrememberedfanclub.com/article-marilyn-monroe-wolves-i-have-known/

? ... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 18:25, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Date of passing

Marilyn Monroe passed away on Aug 5th not the 4th. Your page on her is incorrect. 23.91.206.88 (talk) 03:55, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

She was discovered dead on the 5th, but had died the previous evening, on the 4th. Rcarter555 (talk) 08:29, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 March 2022

Change Marilyn Monroe’s date of death to August 5, 1962. It is currently listed as August 4, 1962 which is incorrect according to her death certificate, her tombstone, and historical literature. 98.125.178.198 (talk) 18:38, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: The current date is correct - FlightTime (open channel) 18:43, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

And a correction, her grave marker has years (1926-1962) not dates. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:39, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Wrong dates

In the section about her birth and early life it states she was born in 1926, had children in 1917 and 1919 and divorced her first marriage in 1928. Those are some big mistakes. 2001:7D0:8489:9680:FDDD:1E28:58B3:7F87 (talk) 17:42, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

I'm guessing you mean the paragraph obout Monroe's mother. I've changed an instance of "she" to "Gladys" which might make this more clear. Is this what you meant? -- Gyrofrog (talk) 19:28, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

You can introduce officially that Marilyn Monroe father is Charles Stanley Gifford — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fifi Le Bel (talk • contribs) 12:14, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Her last 24 hours

Allegedly Eunice Murray said at the conclusion of her (1985?) BBC interview - not realizing that the mic was still on - something along the lines of "Why at my age do I still have to cover for these things?". I didn't find the audio segment in question. Is there any truth to this and if yes, what was she referring to? 109.76.251.210 (talk) 19:00, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Requested update

In the 2022 Netflix documentary “The Mystery of Marilyn Monroe: The Unheard Tapes”, it is discussed that Marilyn Monroe had ongoing sexual relationships with brothers Robert Kennedy and John F Kennedy from the mid1950s until just before her death when she was told to no longer contact them, likely due to the FBI monitoring her for communist association and discussions about the atomic bomb. The documentary indicates that Robert Kennedy visited the evening of her death 4th August 1962 where an argument ensued between them and at some point the FBI were also present. Marilyn was picked up alive at home and taken to hospital but reportedly died in transit to the hospital. The documentary does not disconfirm that Marilyn died from overdose or suicide from barbiturate use, but provides significant evidence that critical details of the context of Marilyn’s death have been covered up. 120.155.176.40 (talk) 08:28, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Date of Death Wrong

Marilyn Monroe died on August 5, 1962. The date currently listed as August 4, 1962 is incorrect. 98.125.180.207 (talk) 00:31, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: any WP:RS for such statement? A09090091 (talk) 19:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Marilyn's Real Father Finally Confirmed

Unless you've been living in a cave, the news that Charles Stanley Gifford has been confirmed via DNA testing as Marilyn's true father is all over the international news. "Paris Match" initiated the confirmation of Marilyn's true parentage by having experts compare a sample of Marilyn's hair with Charles Gifford's son and granddaughter's DNA. It was a match. Gladys, Marilyn's mother, had always told Marilyn that Gifford was her father and even kept a small picture of him and occasionally showed it to Marilyn. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.235.188.114 (talk) 20:36, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Find a reliable source for this info and it can be included. Rcarter555 (talk) 22:21, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Here's a source which I believe is reliable due to the fact it is a major news network https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNy_2yBMiRY (talk) 9:45, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Inside Edition is a tabloid fluff show. You’ll need something more reliable than that. Rcarter555 (talk) 13:56, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

This looks OK.--SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:50, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

 Done --SergeWoodzing (talk) 00:02, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Why does the page does not name him in the parents section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:44B8:272:5700:F9AC:DEFE:A585:5908 (talk) 11:06, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

There are number reasons of why Charles Stanely Gifford has been proven to Marilyn biological father. Biological research DNA research conducted by Ludovic Orlando, an expert in molecular archaeology working in Southern France was based on samples of Marilyn's hair and saliva samples from a grandchild of Charles Stanley Gifford has given scientific proof. "Marilyn, Her Final Secret" is the name of documentary airing in several European counties This has been reported by mainstream news outlets https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/other/marilyn-monroe-s-biological-father-revealed-in-new-documentary/ar-AAVRiZ2 At this point the parents section needs to be changed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:29C0:FA00:DDCC:7341:A37A:121F (talk) 20:17, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Two children have birth dates before Monroe’s

“ They had two children named Robert (1917–1933)[7] and Berniece (1919–2014).[8]”

Monroe was born in 1926. Noenthusiast (talk) 03:11, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Never mind - just realized those are Monroe’s siblings. Maybe the subject of that paragraph should be Monroe and not her mother? Just a thought. Noenthusiast (talk) 03:16, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 August 2022

92.184.98.173 (talk) 18:25, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Monroe is also in Sunset Boulevard. Though not credited. (She is in the scene, at the party. Seated on the sofa next to William Holden). Should that be included in her filmography?

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:30, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 September 2022

per Marilyn Monroe family tree, we has a Hispanic community would like to request that "Marilyn Monroe (born Norma Jeane Mortenson; June 1, 1926 – August 4, 1962) was an American actress, singer, and model." be changed to Marilyn Monroe (born Norma Jeane Mortenson; June 1, 1926 – August 4, 1962) was an Mexican American actress, singer, and model. per her mother being born in Mexico "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladys_Pearl_Baker" TY 2600:8800:32A7:BD00:F4EA:6719:21A3:54AB (talk) 05:16, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. This is clearly going to be a contentious change. There is no standing consensus of when exactly nationality should be applied in the lead. I suggest you provide sources that refer to her as Mexican American and convince other editors that it would be the label applied in the lead. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 09:25, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

I know of no evidence that her mother or any of her ancestors had Mexican citizenship or spent any significant amount of time in Mexico. Monroe's mother was in Mexico only briefly. To say that this would be contentious is an understatement. I estimate the odds of getting a consensus are close to zero. Sundayclose (talk) 14:16, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Not a stable home life

I have no idea what human though having a drunk, schizophrenic mother created a happy stable home life... but you are psychotic for writing that. Just wow. Wow. You have no context. 2601:183:4A7E:BE80:D8:D8C5:E81D:1A43 (talk) 21:41, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Wording

Maybe not say “sex symbol” as it is an official page and supposedly formal 95.60.38.218 (talk) 19:31, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

• Wikipedia uses plain language. We even have an article sex symbol. EEng 19:54, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Adding father to the infobox

Noticed that Lady Lotus has removed Monroe's real father's name from the infobox for not being notable, and as this seems to have been added more than once it probably should get a talk page discussion. Maybe my fault, but on an admittedly quick look I can't find in WP:INFOBOX that notability for parents has to be in the form of a linked Wikipedia article. Can you or someone point to that requirement? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:33, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

See Template:Infobox person - “Names of parents; include only if they are independently notable or particularly relevant.” The father is talked about in the article which should be sufficient. LADY LOTUS • TALK 15:36, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response and education, I haven't read that page before. The words "particularly relevant" could easily apply, as Monroe's real father was a mystery recently solved and may be of interest to readers who only read the lead and the infobox, or read the infobox and then go to a particular section of the article. He can even be arguably the subject of a stand-alone Wikipedia page, as a full one-hour documentary aired heavily throughout Europe and covered by Variety focuses directly on him. I'd personally be in favor of including his name in the infobox as relevant to such a high-profile individual as Monroe. Since you deleted it in good faith and other editors have added the name in good faith (I haven't done so), this seems a good topic for this wider talk page discussion. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:47, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

I've never really seen the point of having non-notable parents in the infobox if it doesn't link anywhere since the Early Life section includes the parents and is usually the first section of any article but certainly anything is up for discussion and if consensus is reached to add him back in then you won't here any further argument from me lol :) LADY LOTUS • TALK 13:10, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Press party at home, March 1956 ?

https://www.gettyimages.com/photos/marilyn-monroe-press-party-home-March-1956

0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 10:43, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I agree that this should be added to the death section! JointCompound (talk) 18:45, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Frank Sinatra's murder speculations?

Frank Sinatra-- and many other notable people-- have made their opinions on Monroe's death well known. Surely this belongs in the section on her death? There is no mention of the press conference that was scheduled to be held the next morning (the subject of which was speculated to be details about her affairs with the Kennedys) JointCompound (talk) 18:45, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Gladys Pearl Baker's first husband

The Gladys Pearl Baker article states that her first husband's name was Jasper Newton "Jap" Baker and he was born in 1886. In this article, her first husband is named John Newton Baker, and he was nine years her senior (born in 1893?). What is the real name of Gladys Pearl Baker's first husband and when was he actually born?--Ed1974LT (talk) 10:13, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Legal name

She legally changed her name in 1956 to Marilyn Monroe and that's the name on her death certificate, driver license and other legal documents since then. I recently rm a "pseudonym" category, which was reversed. I will be removing it again. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 00:51, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

As mentioned in the article, "Monroe's contract began in August 1946, and she and Lyon selected the stage name "Marilyn Monroe"".

The article stage name begins by "A stage name is a pseudonym used by performers and entertainers".

Its image says "Marilyn Monroe (born Norma Jeane Mortenson) created her stage name by combining her mother's maiden name with the first name of Broadway star Marilyn Miller. It became her legal name in 1956.".

So "Marilyn Monroe" is both her stage name (until 1956) and her real name (from 1956). The RedBurn (ϕ) 15:15, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Not fully true. Her stage name was Marilyn Monroe until she adopted it as her legal name. It was never "both". --SergeWoodzing (talk) 19:56, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

It is not appropriate to categorize Marilyn Monroe as a pseudonym just because she had a stage name for a few years. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:00, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

I mean it has both been her stage name (until 1956) and her real name (from 1956).

The Pseudonym category doesn't mean that the subject of the article is currently known under a pseudonym, but that it has been known at some point in time under a pseudonym. The RedBurn (ϕ) 12:31, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

No that is not what that category is for. It's for names, not people, and names that had the distinct, lasting and exclusive form of a pseudonym. This article is a biography pf a person not a text about a name. There is no [[Category:People with pseudonyms]] as far as I can find. Do we need one? If so, we also need [[Category:People whose names were changed]] --SergeWoodzing (talk) 00:22, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

I rephrase my previous reply:

The Pseudonym category doesn't mean that the name of the article is currently a pseudonym, but that it has been at some point in time. The RedBurn (ϕ) 19:43, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Marilyn Monroe's Death

Interesting topic on Coast To Coast AM Monday Evening: https://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2023-01-23-show/

Read the first section about the interview with former LAPD Detective Mike Rothmiller. 174.24.70.186 (talk) 21:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Editor

My Problem: The entry to CHANGE the date of death on the Wikipedia page of Marilyn Monroe is still not done. (Asked - 2 weeks ago)

It's NOT 4 August 1962 - It's 5 August 1962

Her DEATH CERTIFICATE states 5 August 1962 / www.mirror.co.uk/news/gallery/marilyn-monroe-death-scene-photos-13311876

PLEASE do the adjustment or I will hand you over to a leading publishing ethics committee in New York

Kind Regards

Evan 41.116.65.137 (talk) 06:53, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Although she was declared dead by the attending physician on August 5th, toxicology reports indicated she had died on the evening of the 4th, as is indicated and sourced in the article. Rcarter555 (talk) 07:31, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Kennedy

Is there really doubt that she did have an affair with President Kennedy. PatGallacher (talk) 20:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Marilyn Monroe’s Wikipedia page (Correct the date of death entry)

Hi

August 4, 1962 as listed on Wikipedia (Marilyn Monroe’s date of death) - IS INCORRECT

August 5, 1962 IS THE CORRECT DATE OF DEATH as stated by her death certificate

www.mirror.co.uk/news/gallery/marilyn-monroe-death-scene-photos-13311876

Kind Regards

Evan 41.116.24.166 (talk) 05:04, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, she was found and declared dead on the 5th. However, according to the article, rigor mortis had set in sufficiently to indicate that she had died between 8:30 and 10:30 pm the previous evening. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 06:12, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 April 2023

Though Monroe's popularity continued well after her death, her image and likeness did not consistently generate substantial money until the early 1980s when Lee Strasberg's widow and second wife Anna, inherited the Monroe estate and hired intellectual property management firm CMG Worldwide to license relating products. This, combined with the rise of pop star Madonna, who was well known for copying Monroe's look early in her career, helped the estate soar in value. In 2018, after a variety of lawsuits, Anna Strasberg sold what remained of the Monroe estate to a new company, Authentic Brands Group, or ABG, for an estimated $20 to $30 million. Strasberg remains a minority partner in the deal. Sources:https://www.licenseglobal.com/industry-news/authentic-brands-and-neca-acquire-marilyn-monroe AND https://www.npr.org/2012/08/03/157483945/monroes-legacy-is-making-fortune-but-for-whom AND https://mbcantim.wordpress.com/madonna-is-unoriginal-index-page/madonna-regularly-ripped-off-marilyn-monroe/ ThePopCynic (talk) 07:47, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. --Pinchme123 (talk) 14:07, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Audio

@Shearonink When the filename parameter is empty, why should the template stay? Aramesh.aram (talk) 14:28, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Nevermind, the file was deleted. My mistake on restoring it...I do have to say, edit summaries can be really helpful in these cases. Shearonink (talk) 17:24, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Maryland Monroe

Maryland Monroe is the name of the street she has. It was made under her name and so people remember her for who she was and the effect she had on our world. She will forever be remembered as Maryland Monroe because of this street Maddiesternberg (talk) 12:28, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Image

I suggest changing the image from the current one to this 83.53.75.198 (talk) 13:45, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

The color image seems better, as is the natural pose, but your image choice should be placed on the page somewhere due to its fame (much of that due to Andy Warhol), thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:59, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

I don’t know when it should be placed as all of the article’s sections are well illustrated 83.53.75.198 (talk) 14:06, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

It is used by several Warhol pages. Maybe it should also feature on the Marilyn Monroe in popular culture page in the arts section with a Warhol-related caption. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:47, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Good idea 83.53.75.198 (talk) 19:02, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Have added it to the 'Art' section of the popular culture page, and thank you for bringing this here. It seems an important image, due largely to Warhol's use of it in his work. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:47, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Replace image in infobox

Image choices

• 
  Current
• 
  Proposed

For another actress I would say it's a passable main image, but for the most famous sex symbol/icon of the 20th Century, Marilyn at least deserves an image where her blue eyes are clear to the viewer. Proposed is much clearer, Marilyn is doing her classic pout, her eyes are looking into the viewer, it's very distinctly her. It's not a perfect image, but it's much more appropriate than the current one. I get the purpose of Current, Marilyn in a natural pose, and so forth, but the image quality is poor, far too hazy/blurry. Also, the purpose of the main image is something identifiable to the public.

I'm curious what others think. Michael0986 (talk) 01:21, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

The current image seems to define her as herself and not as the character she was able to "put on" at a moment's notice. Both images are nice, yet the current one seems to capture more of the real person. The proposed picture should continue on the page in some capacity, and is currently displayed in the Legacy section. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:56, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Good points Randy, for me personally I admire glamour, and when I come to a page about Marilyn Monroe, of all people, I want to be wowed by the main image. Marilyn is meant to wow in the first image, but I'm always underwhelmed when I come onto this page. The faded colour, hard-to-see eyes....etc etc. I guess "underwhelmed" is the word. I love main pics of say...Joanne Woodward, Grace Kelly, Rita Hayworth, Elizabeth Taylor, Cary Grant, Clark Gable. All these people had their public personas and real personalities off-screen, just like Marilyn, but we all admire the mystique of old Hollywood glamour. I know I do. Michael0986 (talk) 12:11, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

And you make good points as well. It's a good picture, and I think I actually have that magazine cover. To be the devil's advocate, Monroe may deserve the softer image as her opening photo on Wikipedia, it sums up her life in a way the other photos may not. The sweater (and what a sweater) is both sexy and provides a softer look than her overtly sexual images. Her face seems fine, with a nice look. I guess I'm as much a Norma Jean fan as a Monroe appreciator, she is probably America's goddess when in character but was able to put on and take off the character in a moment while not really being "her" in reality. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:32, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm enjoying the rationale behind why this image has been main for so long, honestly, I'm not against a more natural image, Lee Remick's is wonderful, or any of Allan Warren's portraits I admire very much. The quality of the photo itself is really my main issue. I agree 100% in regards to the sweater, and Marilyn looking great. But, for the sake of the page I still think something more eye-catching, and higher resolution, should be the more preferred image, regardless if it's Marilyn in the garden, or Marilyn on the red carpet. I think a great lead image is important, especially a page like this. And for a featured article to have such a grainy image as the very lead, I still can't quite grasp it. Michael0986 (talk) 22:13, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

ipa for name incorrect

ipa for her name has r, should be upside down r (can't type it on mobile) 206.83.114.18 (talk) 01:55, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 July 2023

Remove date of first divorce as 1923 is before she was born! 2A00:23C8:1C89:7601:AD7B:6DB2:A233:E27F (talk) 17:06, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: The 1923 date is correct. It is the date/year of Gladys' (Monroe's mother) first divorce, from John Newton Baker. Monroe was born in 1926 when during Gladys' marriage to Martin Mortenson. Shearonink (talk) 18:05, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 August 2023

Insert: '(without her permission)' after the sentence about Playboy re-using her nude photos. What follows says she mainly controlled her public image but on this occasion she did not. 2A00:23C8:1C89:7601:4C28:369A:2718:753A (talk) 19:33, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —Sirdog (talk) 19:58, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 November 2023

Please remove "Los Angeles" from the infobox per MOS:OVERLINK. 49.150.4.134 (talk) 06:12, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: Per WP:GEOLINK Lightoil (talk) 19:43, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

significant career

Look: special:diff/1187466996. @Krimuk2.0: Have you read the article? If not, see this sub-heading: "1953: Rising star".

Gentlemen Prefer Blondes was released shortly after and became one of the biggest box office successes of the year. Crowther of The New York Times and William Brogdon of Variety both commented favorably on Monroe, especially noting her performance of "Diamonds Are a Girl's Best Friend"; according to the latter, she demonstrated the "ability to sex a song as well as point up the eye values of a scene by her presence". Aramesh.aram (talk) 12:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

and where does it say singing is her primary profession? she also danced in the song -- was dancing also her profession? Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:28, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

@Krimuk2.0: When her songs are reviewed, it must had an impact. Also, when Monroe songs has influenced an artist like Madonna, it highlights her as a singer. Aramesh.aram (talk) 07:44, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Which part of "primary" in "primary profession" do you fail to understand? Krimuk2.0 (talk) 11:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

@Krimuk2.0: which part of my sentences and "the role is auxiliary to a main profession of the person" are hard to understand? Obviously, the song "Material Girl" by Madonna is based on "Diamonds Are a Girl's Best Friend" by Monroe. The reviews of her songs are also in the article. What else is needed to prove the impact of singing on her career?

I have a request for a third opinion. Aramesh.aram (talk) 15:24, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Home Town Story 1951 (MGM)

Home Town Story 1951 62 Mins Comedy Genre Production MGM (Amazon Prime MGM+) Director Arthur Pierson Starring Jeffrey Lynn, Donald Crisp, Marilyn Monroe, "After failing to the re-elected,politician Senator Blake Washburn returns home and becomes editor of the local newspaper. When he notices the influence the paper has on the public, he uses it to appeal to potential voters." Plans to wed Janice after 7 years engagement. Blake has been in the war previously to Senator elections after one term. Votes removed him from his position on seat. He would be along his side though lives her life apart from his position. Katie his sister attends local school district while their mother tends to their needs. JassBarnes96 (talk) 04:50, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Dance "pacer"?

Google did not turn up a good explanation of the job of a "dance pacer" which Marilyn worked in the film studio(s) early in her career. I would like to know more about it. Eemstewart (talk) 03:52, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Her first in camera cameo is about 15:40 her dialogue started a few second before her frame in view she plays Iris JassBarnes96 (talk) 04:55, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 January 2024

In "Screen persona and reception" content, it is mentioned Marilyn Monroe was associated with "white ethnics". It gives Arthur Miller as an example but writes "Jewish" as his ethnicity. Miller is white, an Ashkenazi jew to be exact. Writing "Jewish" isn't enough as the majority of jews have Mizrahi ancestry (jews with middle eastern, north African and central Asian ancestry). This tiny correction can help acknowledge the existence of Mizrahi jews which keeps being ignored. 2A0D:6FC2:4201:1700:C080:A63C:CDF2:FDCA (talk) 15:31, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:48, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

This reversal

Not sure why my edit has been reverted. The lead doesn’t mention Monroe's singing career. MOS:ROLEBIO says, "In general, a position, activity, or role should not be included in the lead paragraph if: a) the role is not otherwise discussed in the lead (per MOS:LEAD, don’t tease the reader) ..." Thedarkknightli (talk) 19:42, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I find no justification of any kind via those links for this reversal, and the "a) ..." part seems to be free fantasy. Monroe is highly notable as a singer with not just one but several more very famous songs in her recorded repertoir. That's enough to call her a singer in the short here. I will revert this again unless someone can come up with a clearly defined, clearly linked guideline showing that I shouldn't. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:07, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 May 2024

Change “At age 15, Gladys had married John Newton Baker, an abusive man nine years her senior.” to “At age 15, Gladys had married John Newton Baker, an abusive man 16 years her senior.” 81.109.238.134 (talk) 01:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. M.Bitton (talk) 01:19, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Recent edits

I haven't checked in detail, but I can see that recent edits include unreliable sources such as WP:RSPHISTORY. These revisions may need to be reverted or the article may lose its featured article status in the future if this continues. ภץאคгöร 09:15, 3 July 2024 (UTC)