Talk:Imelda Marcos

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Imelda Marcos article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
This article has an assessment summary page.

Contents

[edit] POV

Too much POV on both sides, for and against. It also lacks a lead paragraph. What is she famous for? Not worthy as an encyclopedia article. KaElin 09:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] comment header

I remember reading (in the memoirs of a lawyer whose firm was briefly associated with Imelda) that the majority of her vast shoe collection was the result of Phillipine shoe companies donating to the President's Wife, for the prestige. DS 00:00, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Could be...remember that most, of not all of the alleged Marcos ill gotten wealth came from big Philippine corporations trying to seek favors from president Marcos. User: Soup

First, the shoes. If Imelda's shoes were truly 'gifts' from Manila's shoe industry, why then all the expensive European brands?

Reply --Most of her shoes with European brand names were actually made in Marikina, Philippine shoe capital. Then they were exported to Europe and were given expensive brand names such as Salvatore Ferragamo and Imelda shoe. To the one who wrote the comment about Imelda's expensive shoes, I strongly recommend that you visit the Marikina Shoe Museum and see for yourself some of Imelda's expensive "European" shoes -Angeles624 21:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

What's your reference? BBC states that fewer than ten of her pairs of shoes were made in the the Phillipines.

Secondly, the money. It has been estimated that Ferdinand Marcos, his wife and his cronies looted the Philippines of up to $25 billion during his 21 years of power, not $600 million as stated in this Wikipedia article. To suggest that Marcos 'earned' this amount of wealth legitimately is nonsense, considering that his official annual salary at the time averaged $13,000 a year! When Marcos established himself as dictator, refusing to give up the presidency in 1972 by declaring martial law, he eventually held absolute power as did his wife. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, as one sees so clearly by the Marcoses' example.

What is tragic is the impact this has had on the Philippines' 85 million people most of whom live in desperate poverty as a direct result of the Marcoses' economic mismanagement, cronyism, excesses and theft.


Loyalists claim that Marcos was already a rich man when he entered office...the so-called "buried yamashita treasures" come into mind. Add that to 25+ years interest money in Swiss banks and Imelda's "gold-mining expeditions", that makes a shitload of money. But that's from the loyalists.

In truth, most of that money came from the prevailing economic trend - crony capitalism. According to the book "America's Boy", briefcases were coming in and out of Malacanang Palace.

About economic mismanagement, the Philippine economy actually enjoyed a substantial growth during the Marcos regime. Trouble was, when the regime became unpopular during the 80s, and especially after the Aquino assassination, the economy became one big clusterfvck. Too much political turmoil.

$684 million has been recovered in only ONE Swiss Bank Account, and it is estimated that the Marcoses have about 10 of these. I may be wrong, but that is the estimated number of accounts. $10 billion is the most common estimate of the Marcos wealth. Imelda once said along these lines, "If you can count your money, you're poor. I don't even know how much money I have." One of the classic "Imeldisms". I suggest you to watch the award winning documentary film "Imelda" to understand more the personality of this controversial political figure.

[edit] What does this mean?

This is an odd sentence:

She had previously been found guilty of similar charges in 1995, but was acquitted.

Does this mean that she was charged in 1995 and acquitted, or that she was charged and convicted but acquitted on appeal? --Delirium

[edit] Mark Knopfler Song

There is also a Mark Knopfler song called "Imelda" (from the Album "Golden Heart", released 1996). Although not explicitly named, I think one can savely assume that the character in this song who is going shopping for shoes on the Champs Elysées is meant to represent Imelda Marcos. GeckoCode 16:22, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

This is correct - it is very obvious from all of the lyrics that the subject is Imelda Marcos. Also a song about Napoleon on this CD


[edit] Shoes and POV

The second BBC article that this article cites states that fewer than ten of her pairs of shoes were made in the 'shoemaking capital' of the Phillipines, yet this article suggests that all her shoes were made in the Phillipines. Also, using words like 'notorious' seems to me POV--the reader can decide for himself whether a collection of 3000 shoes is excessive. Stearnsbrian 02:20, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

How many feet does the average human have? 2? Then I think "3000 shoes is excessive" is an obvious fact. Assuming that's pairs, it would take you over 8 years of wearing a different shoe every day to go through the entire collection. Anyone owning that many shoes is extravagant not frugal. If each pair of shoe costed $100 (in today's dollars this is a fairly conservative estimate), that would be $300,000 spent on shoes alone. Imagine how much food that could buy for an impoverished country.
Most of her shoes with European brand names were actually made in Marikina, Philippine shoe capital. Then they were exported to Europe and were given expensive brand names such as Salvatore Ferragamo. To the one who wrote the comment about Imelda's expensive shoes, I strongly recommend that you visit the Marikina Shoe Museum and see for yourself some of Imelda's expensive "European" shoes -Angeles624 21:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
What's your reference? BBC states that fewer than ten of her pairs of shoes were made in the the Phillipines.
I think Stearnsbrian is right about this - the amount of shoes that a person considers excessive is subjective, it is not an "obvious fact" regardless of the number of feet, time taken to wear, or number of people the money spent on shoes could feed. A stamp collection is not usually considered an excessive number of stamps simply because an average person would not go through that many stamps in 8 years.

[edit] Birth Date

I have changed the birth year back to 1929 (from 1909). All the sources I checked give that date. Do not change back without discussion and citation. --Brat32 05:25, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] collection

On bbc, I just heard about some clothing & jewelry named "Imelda Collection". Should this have a section, an article,...?

Does anyone have a guess as to how many more careers she would have,... or, even, how many she's already had? I am truly surprised about today's news. I'd never heard this previously. This persistence should be written about, somehow.

Thank You.

hopiakuta ; [[ <nowiki> </nowiki> { [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] } ;]] 14:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Beatles snub...

The beatles snub section contains some POV:

...they refused to attend this "command meal" of the nearly comically highly vain and superficially egotistical outlandish Ms. Marcos as it was a rare and needed day off for the young entertainers.

The section goes on to say that Marcos attempted to have the Beatles killed; there's no citation for this and as Marcos is still alive this seems a very serious acusation. 212.84.97.143 19:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the attempted Beatle murder claim - it was uncited and is surely a libellous claim. If there's a good, legal, citation then presumably it could go back.

Apepper 15:35, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Racketeering Charges...

Some POV in this section:

...represented by the "infamous" trial lawyer Gerry Spence...

...actor George Hamilton was a star witness for the defense.

However, the Time/CNN article cited ("Judge Wapner, Where Are You?", Time/CNN, Jul. 02, 1990. Retrieved on 2007-09-11. ) clearly states that "the defense would call no witnesses because the Government had 'utterly failed in this case.'" (page 2). George Hamilton was a star witness, but seems POV to say he was "for the defense."Aviendha16 19:08, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Irm.jpg

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

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

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

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:34, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] iron butterfly nickname?

Iron Butterfly (disambiguation) claims: "A nickname for Imelda Marcos." Is that true or false? It shouldn't be on one and not the other. --Rajah (talk) 14:53, 29 May 2008 (UTC)