Talk:Imelda Marcos

stole billions? convicted criminal? please fix this

someone please edit this, google/Wikipedia is meant for true facts not wrong accusations. Gooskitzo (talk) 11:43, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

All fully sourced to WP:RS? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:49, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes sources came from medias that supports the obligarchs and leftists Showbizph (talk) 07:01, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

@Showbizph: Please provide a link to actual reliable sources that prove otherwise. Chlod (say hi!) 07:06, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Pls correct this.. for once stip being bias Showbizph (talk) 16:54, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@Chlod i agree that your article for Mrs Marcos is well provided with sources. Sources from the leftist and from medias whom nothing good to say about the Marcoses. Let me ask you one thing, Are you aware that the family was acquitted and found inocent in so many cases filed to them. That your sources wrote that when they're still undergoing that trial and how about now that they got acquitted in their so called claims? Did they took time to revise their "accusations"? Guess you have to update your outdated and must say bias article. Showbizph (talk) 15:11, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Bias

Whoever author this pls stop being bias. For 36 years filipinos have been brainwashed by this leftist.. Imelda Marcos was acquitted in thousand cases filed by the Aquino's using the power of government and medias to strengthen thier claims against the Marcoses.. Showbizph (talk) 16:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Your claims is blatantly wrong and does not promote neutral point of view. Seems like a pro-Marcos guy trying to start an edit war against other editors here. The almighty anomalocaris • chat 11:57, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Where are your concrete claims to prove that Imelda is finally innocent? (I'm sorry I can't allow YT conspiracy videos due to being user-generated content which is sometimes not reliable. Thanks. The almighty anomalocaris • chat 11:58, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

So... about the shoes

Are we just failing the article having only a single pair here and at Wikicommons? or there legitimately aren't actual photographs of an actual collection and this is just a successful urban myth / political hit job? — LlywelynII 13:24, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Vice has a piece here (with photos!) Howard the Duck (talk) 17:16, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Why is the picture of Marcos used on this page so creepy?

Can it please be changed? PLEASE??? Disabled Lemon (talk) 1:47 2 September 2024 (UTC)

There was a discussion on the lead image about three years ago. See Talk:Imelda Marcos/Archive 4#Photo. Perhaps we now need a re-run? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Disabled Lemon: & @Martinevans123: I came here for this reason as well. Having been a key contributor to the discussion three years ago, I have always found the current picture so unflattering. I found an alternative and I'd be okay to re-open another discussion. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:22, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

RfC: Infobox image

It's been three years since the last discussion was held in regards to the infobox image. As I believed so back then, the current image (which was reached by consensus albeit) is unflattering and as one user noted above, it's a bit creepy. I created a cropped close up so you can see what I'm talking about. Her eyes are half-open, quality isn't the best and if this is truly the 'best' picture that captures what she's known for (as stated in the last discussion three years ago in terms of her outfits), then perhaps it's best to asses an infobox image based on quality over what she's 'known' for. If this is the best picture that shows her during her 'comeback' (as stated in last discussion), then once again, I must emphasize the quality of the picture (awkward lighting, unflattering eye pose, not the best in quality). These are the current images at commons that are best suited for an infobox image. As noted in other talk page discussions, when the subject of an article passes away, their infobox image is also replaced with a black and white picture or of one that captures them in their 'prime' so to speak. Although (as of now) Marcos is still alive, I feel that Option B is in better quality than the current picture, shows her as her time as First Lady (much like other first lady articles) and will depict her in her prime when she passes away (not a huge factor now, but worth thinking about). Pinging previous contributors to the discussion three years ago for good measure: @Chieharumachi:, @Crisantom:, @Object404:, @Unilimited247:, @Lochglasgowstrathyre: TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:28, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Options

Cast your !vote

• 
  Option A (current infobox image)
• 
  Option B (preferred)
• 
  Option C
• 
  Option D
• 
  Option E (former infobox image)
• 
  Option F
• 
  Option G
• 
  Option H
• 
  Option I
• 
  Option J (cropped close-up of current infobox image)

• Option B or E As stated above, these two images are in better quality than the current image and best depicts Marcos in her prime as First Lady. If I had to pick between the two, Option B is far better. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:30, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
• I think the relevant policy is WP:BLPIMAGE. And I don't see anything there that invalidates the current image and we have no obligation to choose an image that presents a subject in the best light. It is also a long-standing practice that we use contemporary photos (and not decades-old photos) of subjects that are still alive so I think almost all other options wouldn't normally be chosen. So I prefer that we stick with the status quo unless we actually have a "better" contemporary photo. —seav (talk) 21:31, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

  While I agree that there's slim pickins currently available, how is the (among other users's opinions including my own) unflattering picture of her with her eyes half-open any better from the ones in which is somewhat more flattering (in terms of less awkward posing). I understand that this one may be the only recent image we have, but given the decades-old pictures that show her in a more less awkward fashion, surely there has to be an exception aside from dates. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:24, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

• (Summoned by bot) Unfortunately, A is best until we get a better recent photo, but once she has died I am 100% on board with one of the more flattering and emblematic images. TheSavageNorwegian 21:39, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
• I don't like her. But I consider A and J gratuitously unflattering. We wouldn't use those for any honest person while there are better pictures available; and I don't think WIkipedia should be influenced in this decision by her history as an embezzler. Maproom (talk) 21:45, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

  Which of the options (slim pickins it seems) would you prefer to substitute A? TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:21, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

  B, if I have to choose. Maproom (talk) 09:25, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

• Anything but A, disregarding the "avoid flattereing the subject" issue, A is a terrible, unclear, photo. The coloured ones are far from perfect, but one of those or a B & W one identify the subject better (B is probably best of the B & W ones)Pincrete (talk) 09:39, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
• B, then E. Absolutely not A, which as mentioned by other editors is unflattering to the point of unusability. — Goszei (talk) 09:54, 28 December 2024 (UTC)