Template:Did you know nominations/Michael Jackson and Bubbles (sculpture)

Michael Jackson and Bubbles

 * ... that a porcelain sculpture of Michael Jackson and Bubbles the chimpanzee sold for 5.6 million dollars at Sotheby's?

Created by An.ruck (talk). Nominated by BDD (talk) at 16:36, 2 April 2013 (UTC).


 * The article has now been moved to Michael Jackson and Bubbles, without disambiguation. I don't know whether this page should be renamed too or not. --BDD (talk) 15:14, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I have adjusted the nom to reflect the new article title. There's no need to move this page; it should stay as it is. Chamal T •C 17:52, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Symbol possible vote.svg The background material (i.e. about Jackson) needs referencing or it comes across as personal opinion. Also, unreferenced statements like "The assimilated chimp on his lap underlines this aspect of self-exploration." are original research unless they can be supported by statements by established art critics. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:55, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Symbol delete vote.svg Article still isn't referenced well enough, the original research banner still flies on top of the article and the nominator hasn't edited the article since April 3. Work on the article needs to start within a couple of days, if this nomination is not going to be cancelled.  —♦♦ AMBER  (ЯʘCK)  12:40, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg It seems that the article was translated from the German Wikipedia. I've added some reference citations, so there is now one ref for every paragraph, but I'm bothered by the unsourced statements (not sourced either here or in de.wikipedia): "Koons changed Jackson’s direction of view and thus adjusted the composition to the requirements of a sculptural work which has to take into account many different viewing angles." and "The assimilated chimp on his lap underlines this aspect of self-exploration. He is a traditional symbol in fine arts which serves to mirror human nature. But meanwhile the plastic demonstrates the tragic impossibility of this attempt. The material's aesthetic and Jackson’s aura of transcendence show how unnatural the results of this self-exploration must be." This is long enough and new enough; I didn't see any evidence of close paraphrasing; and the hook fact sourcing checks out.
 * This meets the minimum DYK criteria now, but I'd personally feel better about this one if the unsourced content were trimmed -- and, ideally, replaced by some content that is supported by citable sources. --Orlady (talk) 20:47, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Good catch on the translation. I've documented it as required for attribution by the CC license (See Copying within Wikipedia)...  The fact that the work is only semi-original writing would seem to put this in a gray area, would it not? (Copying within Wikipedia does count as content creation on DYK for obvious reasons; translation involves some effort, but not as much as writing a new article does.) --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:51, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Rule 1f on DYK states that "Articles that are translations from other wikis count as new articles." This article has some issues (which need to be addressed soon), but the translation is not one of them.  —♦♦ AMBER  (ЯʘCK)  07:31, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks for the info. --ThaddeusB (talk) 11:11, 24 April 2013 (UTC)