![]() | 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 15 | ← | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | → | Archive 25 |
The Times (long time MJ bashers) have used this article in a recent career overview of Jackson. It's almost done in the exact same wording and everything, although they has spun a few things to make them slightly more anti Jackson. See here. — Realist 2 20:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
The Times made an article over-viewing Michael Jackson's career which they released on August 15, 2008 Seen here. It is quite clearly plagiarism of the Jackson article, take a look at the August 14, 2008 version of the article. That article took me a long time to get to featured states, it appears that they did not acknowledge me or more importantly Wikipedia in their publication. I might add that The Times's (long time Jackson bashers) version was not as neutral as mine. I'm unhappy with the way they presented the information on vitiligo, the label dispute of 2000-2002, the critical reception of the Invincible album and the commercial reception of Thriller 25 (they only mentioned the "moderate hit singles", but not the successful album itself). I apologize to offended readers and the article subject, I do not endorse the manner in which the publication cherry picked information from the article to meet their own ends. In some respects it is probably best that they did not name us as their source. I only hope that the publication will learn from it's mistake and continue to produce neutral material. — Realist 2 00:25, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
I know I dont have proof yet, but isint Michael Jackson the biggest selling music artist that is "alive"; he might not be first in history, but isint he first in people who are alive?
If u you think differently please do fight back, if you think this is true please find some proof, this would be a great addition to the main article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafichamp ( talk • contribs) 18:31, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I am just talking about the solo careers, im not looking at band sales, mostly because those sales are made as a band so it should not count as one artist's sales. As for Elivs, we dont even know his official record sales, so Michael Jackson is the biggest selling solo artist alive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafichamp ( talk • contribs) 00:56, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
I am sorry if I seemed like a person who doesnt add sources, someone please tell me how you add sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafichamp ( talk • contribs) 03:20, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
The following sources were added to the lead of the article to say that MJ was the biggest solo artist since elvis. The sources were [1] [2] [3]. Personally i don't think they pass WP:RS for a featured article like this, thoughts. — Realist 2 07:15, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
I have added a source by bbc.com saying that michael jackson is the most successful entertainer of all time and one of the biggest selling music artists.--
rafichamp (
talk)
22:56, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
The placing of this statement may give the misleading impression that Michael's abusive father was a Jehovah's Witness. It appears after Joseph's employment details and before his reported vile behaviour towards his son.
I feel clarification of this point is further necessitated by the later sentence about Michael appearing in a Christmas recital when he was five.
May I suggest a straight replacement:
'Katherine became a Jehovah's Witness when Michael was seven years old and thereafter raised her children in the faith.' Norm Eagle ( talk) 10:29, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
We should add a new section about his money, mostly because ive heard a lot of people reportedly calling him broke, I know that it is impossible for him to be broke, we need to add some of his business deals and etc he has made and estimates of the never-land ranch also him signing the biggest recording contract ever in 1992 with sony. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafichamp ( talk • contribs) 22:53, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Where does those scenes from movies that Michael Jackson always lose his nose and did he really change his gender? i think those should be in there to satisfy curious minds... Pirateer011 ( talk)
It seems that the article glossed over these points Myportal ( talk) 15:01, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
According to its date, the picture is 20 years old. Maybe a more recent picture can be provided 99.226.179.220 ( talk) 17:34, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
As there was no opposition, I changed it. Dalejenkins | 13:17, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
This photo is terrible. It's unprofessional; just a holiday happy snap. I thought the old picture was him wearing one of his crazy suits at the White House. An encyclopaedia article should have a photo of him from the peak of his career. Why does it have to be recent? Are you going to get pictures of skeletons for dead people? Huey45 ( talk) 09:33, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Can people look out for some sources regarding the extent/degree of Jackson's fame. There is a pool right now on tiscali and Jackson is currently in first position by some margin for the most famous person dead or alive. It would be nice to see if there is a reliable source that cites him as the worlds most famous human being. — Realist 2 02:55, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
I heard that some corperation had went out to do a survey to find the most famous person dead or alive in history, the first survey was in 1997, number 1 was michael jackson with 97.5% of the world knowing him. They toke the survey again in 2006, michael jackson came in at number one with 95.4% of the world knowing him. So with-out the doubt in this article someone should say that he is the most famous human being at this point. Rafichamp ( talk) 04:37, 15 August 2008 (UTC) 12:37, 15 August 2008
As if Michael Jackson is the most famous person ever. I've heard about this thing before and I there was a top 10 list. Jesus Christ and Confucius were there, but I can't remember any others. There are so many extremely famous people that the single most famous person ever couldn't be accurately determined anyway (unless you surveyed almost everyone in the world, which is just ridiculous)
Huey45 (
talk)
09:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
I've found information via Forbes magazine that says and I quote; 'Jackson, too, could pay millions for his defense despite his heavy debts: The entertainer is a partner with Sony in a music publishing business, which owns more than 300,000 songs and generates as much as $75 million a year in income for him.'
So this suggests that Jackson earns $75 million in royalties alone - maybe best adding this to the page regarding finances, as everyone would rather be of the opinion that he's broke. Here's the link; http://www.forbes.com/2005/06/14/jackson-celebrity-trial-cx_da_0614topnews.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.132.209.207 ( talk) 23:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for adding it. It is strange though how Jackson hasn't appeared on any Forbes rich lists for quite some time. The majority of his money was probably raked in by around 1998, after which he quietened down his career. At least adding this information shows that he has a means to support his lavish lifestyle. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8149929/
Who supports holding a one minute silence for the deleted main picture. I do.
Can people help find some updated sales figures for Off the Wall which we currently have at 15 million copies (it's closer to 20 million) and Bad which we have at 25 million (closer to 28 million). Cheers. — Realist 2 16:24, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Man I have looked every where but all of them are biographys about Michael Jackson and they all list Off the Wall as 19million and 7million in the US, can someone please look for sales figures of Off The Wall.-- rafichamp ( talk) 17:45, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Realist 2 I have found a site that lists Off The Wall as 20million here is the link http://www.contactmusic.com/new/artist.nsf/artistnames/michael%20jackson could you check if this is good enough.-- rafichamp ( talk) 17:51, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I don't know if my statement is relevant, but I don't see how it's possible for Dangerous to have out-sold Bad. For starters, the single releases from Bad were more successful than those from Dangerous. The Bad Tour played to 1 million more fans than the Dangerous tour did. It was on the market 4 years longer and has sold 1.8 million copies more in the combined U.S & U.K markets. Anyway, I have found sources which claim that Off The Wall has sold 20 million; http://www.allmichaeljackson.com/era/off-the-wall/index.html and that Bad has sold 32 million; http://www.allmichaeljackson.com/era/bad/ - although I doubt the reliability of this as it's a fan site.-- filthyralph ( talk) 19:44, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
"Black or white" is also a rock song
-- Alexanderfriend ( talk) 17:28, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
It clearly has a rock guitar part in it... Marnifrances ( talk) 02:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
So you actually need an article that says the word "rock" for Black or White. I am sure i can find one. :) Marnifrances ( talk) 02:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
SONY actually says the song is hard rock-
Incorporating more elements of hip-hop (guests like Heavy D on "Jam") and hard rock (Slash on "Black Or White"), Michael once again updated his sound to appeal to current pop sensibilities while maintaining his incredible songwriting and socially conscious lyrics.
http://www.sonybmg.com.au/cd/releaseDetails.do?catalogueNo=5044242000 Marnifrances ( talk) 02:32, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Allmusic's Stephen Erlewine states that Dangerous presents Jackson as a stark paradoxal individual.[149] He comments the album is more diverse than his previous Bad, as it appeals to an urban audience while also attracting the middle class with anthems like "Heal the World".[149] The first half of the record is dedicated to new jack swing, including songs like "Jam" and "Remember the Time".[150] The album is Jackson's first where social ills become a primary theme; "Why You Wanna Trip on Me", for example, protests against world hunger, AIDS, homelessness and drugs.[150] Dangerous contains sexually charged efforts like "In the Closet", a love song about desire and denial, risk and repression, solitude and connection, privacy and revelation.[150] The title track continues the theme of the predatory lover and compulsive desire.[150] The second half includes introspective, pop-gospel anthems such as "Will You Be There", "Heal the World" and "Keep the Faith"; these songs show Jackson finally opening up about various personal struggles and worries.[150] In the ballad "Gone Too Soon", Jackson gives tribute to his friend Ryan White and the plight of those with AIDS.[73] The album also contained one of his first power ballads, "Give In to Me".[150]
No more info on the dangerous album, we have enough. Take it to the album. — Realist 2 02:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
I have updated the link to the old MGM Grand Casino in Vegas, as that was the one, not the current one, that Jackson met Lisa Marie Presley at in 1975. Bh02306069 ( talk) 23:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I suppose I'll make this an open question. Has anyone read 'Michael Jackson: The Magic & The Madness' by J. Randy Taraborelli? If so, there a deal he mentions in the book, regarding ATV. In 1993, amidst the original child abuse scandal, Jackson signed an agreement with EMI; $150 million to administer the songs from his ATV catalogue. Upon signing the contract, $70 million was deposited into Jackson's bank account. Although I've read other sources which put the agreement figure at $200 million. I thought this was worth mentioning as it isn't mentioned in his finances. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Filthyralph ( talk • contribs) 23:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Hehe, I know this is probably inappropriate but I must say, despite everything that has happened, good and bad. Michael Jackson truly deserves respect for the music and charity work he has done. As a fan it is truly disappointing to see the tabloid press talk about his plastic surgery over his many achievements on this special day. You would think on this one day they would give it a rest, but obviously not. Stay strong, don't let the crap get to you, your millions of fan's still respect you greatly. Happy Birthday Mr. Jackson. — Realist 2 00:30, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Could it be? & Surely not. — Realist 2 02:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Michael Jackson is a nominee for best act ever in the 2008 EMA awards, http://ema.mtv.tv/vote/ go to that link to vote for Michael Jackson, also the Jackson 5 were honored in the BMA awards this week-end http://www.bmi.com/ go on that site the Jackson 5 are on the front page. If you know anymore awards that Michael Jackson has won or is a nominee in the year 2008 please add them and the source.-- rafichamp ( talk) 17:39, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Yes but the Jackson 5 has been honored already in the BMA's so could you please add that to the Jackson 5 section of the main article?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDt_fS63MVE watch this video and also read the video description to view all the awards he has won in the video and realist 2 please add those records to the main article and please dont erase what I have just wrote, its all in the video just watch it or you can just modify my writting I did on the main article.-- rafichamp ( talk) 17:52, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
In the main article, cant we atleast say that he is one of the biggest selling music artists ever, like common.-- rafichamp ( talk) 22:16, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
I added that Jackson is a business person to the lead of the article. Now I know this will shock those who only read the tabloids, and it's certainly not in the media talking points when discussing Mr. Jackson. However, the article clearly establishes that Jackson is a businessperson. Since he hasn't released a studio album in 7 years or performed in 7 years, it could be argued that his business career has come to the forefront today. Objections? — Realist 2 23:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Well he hasent sent out a album in 7 years now soon to be 8, (i hope not), but he still owns never-land, and the mortgage there is about 20million per month, so he has to be doing something to be bringing in those large amounts of money, so i agree with you and think that it should be put up.-- rafichamp ( talk) 22:37, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Another thing is that I am finding that people arnt discussing about this article as much anymore, anyone think im wrong?-- rafichamp ( talk) 22:37, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Can somebody please post a link to see the top 100 most viewed wikipedia articles?-- rafichamp ( talk) 20:36, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone think we need to expand the info on the 2005 trial a little? — Realist 2 23:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
excuse me, it has nothing to do with 2005 trial but i didn't see the article "Was Michael Jackson Framed?" by Mary A. Fisher GQ magazine 1994 in the source list. wasn't it used as a source about 1993 child sexual abuse accusations? -- X7000matrix ( talk) 15:29, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
the article tells the story of 1993 allegations from the very beginning (Jackson's troubles began when his van broke down on Wilshire Boulevard in Los Angeles in May 1992. Stranded in the middle of the heavily trafficked street,...)in a very smooth way. I suppose it was published recently too.--
X7000matrix (
talk)
17:34, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
sorry, I don't have access to Tarabarelli's book.-- X7000matrix ( talk) 19:49, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't know how it doesn't- it's simply the article from GQ 1994 by Mary Fischer- it's an article, and I could easily look up the issue number etc for you. Tarraborelli's book even used this article. Tarraborelli's book is not neutral at all, but I won't push it further. All you need to do is look at his "sources" in the back of the book ;) Marnifrances ( talk) 08:07, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
check it out everybody....
http://i38.tinypic.com/2nq6tr8.jpg
don't you think we better consider it?-- X7000matrix ( talk) 19:32, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
yes, it is very interesting to show his appearance hasn't changed. media is talking about it like it is happening constantly (MJ nose-drop stuff, gossip, fake photos, tabloids). making news that at least be labeled by his name this way. it hurts his public image and of course is cheaper than talking about his efforts and style. you know, people will find it so ridiculous if they realise that all this stuff tabloids try to build up (and make it the first) on the way of the true MJ to public mind, actualy belongs to 20 years ago (20 YEARS AGO MAN!!!!:-0 tabloid's BIG MJ-to-cash secret).though it is also a personal case.
well, showing it can be a possitive point against this vandalism.:-) -- X7000matrix ( talk) 16:49, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
The stuff that really changed his structure??? if we take a look at the Jacksons face structure we can find his face structure elements --apart from the nose and the chin-- in the others too. take a look. just like the contrast between what tabloids put in and the case that was previously mentioned. y'know...actualy, if this image wasn't here, bringing up the issue would rise controversy. it wouldn't be that easy to make it clear for every one that the tabloids are vandalizing irresponsiblely for so long. 20 years updating something that doesn't exist in anyway. as they run wild, voices for the truth face alot of difficulty.
it would be a highlight if we put this image on Mr.Jackson's article were it comes to tabloids and vandalism. peace :-)-- X7000matrix ( talk) 18:39, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
i agree with showing this pic. however, i think there should somehow be at least 2 or 3 more examples like this using different pictures. i kno the "haters" would probably claimed the example was photoshopped (as they did when MJ appeared on ebony in 12/07), so showing consistency in his looks could possibly quell them. MaJic ( talk) 00:22, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Should we put that Michael Jackson has recorded a song with Akon called "Hold My Hand", and it's scheduled to appear on akon's fourthcoming Album, "Freedom" due out in November 25th? If we do decide, it should be put in the "2008" events section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.212.169.90 ( talk) 20:49, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Find a source that claims that Michael has sold 750 million copies worldwide, thats hard to believe. That means he has sold more then the beatles. The Beatles are the best-selling band in history as far as i've understood. -- Be Black Hole Sun ( talk) 10:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
This section of the info box was recently changed from 1967 (when the Jackson 5 signed to their first label) to 1966 (when they were still entering talent contests). Surely when they say "years active", they are talking in professional terms? Thus it should go back to 1967? Anyone know? — Realist 2 09:36, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
I have reverted some vandalism to the page- I don't know how to report vandalism. Can you take care of that Realist? Thanks. Marnifrances ( talk) 11:15, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Here are some sites that claim that heading, realist 2 have a look through them maybe you will add some of these if you find them reliable.
http://famous--people.blogspot.com/
I will try adding more.
In 2005, Jackson attracted attention from the Anti-Defamation League after it was discovered he had recently referred to Jews as "leeches" and their actions as "a conspiracy". [4] [5]
Should this talk page be semi protected? It has been in the past. Looking at the history of the talk page vandalism far out ways and legitimate dialogue on the article content itself. Since the article is featured there technically isn't/shouldn't be much to discuss. Until something important happens in his life, say for example a new album or a new allegation, this article should stay rather stagnant. Thus would it be appropriate to semi protect the talk page until something of importance develops in his life that needs actual discussion? — Realist 2 12:02, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Its rumored that Michael Jackson will have a World Tour being March 2009, including 10 shows at the O2 arena expected sell out all of them, here is the site that is selling the tickets. Just wanted to infrom you guys of this.-- rafichamp ( talk) 20:51, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
http://www.viewlondon.co.uk/whatson/michael-jackson-tickets-article-7095.html
Who knows, Michael Jackson has certainly lost a lot of fans in America, possibly all, but his international stardom still exists, I think he will do this, imagine the biggest selling pop star coming back.-- rafichamp ( talk) 01:11, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey guys look whos in at number 1 on the billboards heres the link.-- rafichamp ( talk) 04:44, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/charts/chart_display.jsp?g=Albums&f=Top+Pop+Catalog
Michael Jackson is nominated for "Worlds Best Pop Artsit", of the year at the WMA(World Music Awards) which is tomorrow, found it at mjjr.net, this is real so it shouldnt be too hard to find a source on google, ill leave that job up to realist 2.-- rafichamp ( talk) 00:58, 9 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafichamp ( talk • contribs) 00:39, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Guys I found it, go to worldmusicawards.com and go to nominees 2008, scroll down and you will see Michael Jackson. As for who hes competitors, lol it looks like hes going to win, look at the artists your self, you will laugh.-- rafichamp ( talk) 00:58, 9 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafichamp ( talk • contribs) 00:46, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Also guys michael jacksons new album called king of pop(its a greatest hits album), is biggest selling album of the year(2008) in some country, just go to worldmusicawards.com and go to album sales.-- rafichamp ( talk) 00:58, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
If Michael Jackson wins this WMA from a remix album, with-out a doubt hes releasing a new album in march 09 for sure.
There is currently a dispute regarding the inclusion of this info in the Themes and genres sub section
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |accessdate=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
Firstly it is poorly written. Secondly it's not written in a neutral manner. Thirdly some of it is mentioned elsewhere. Take a look at the audio clip of "Black or White" where some of this info is already mentioned. Fourthly there is clearly too much info on the Dangerous album already. As seen by the following;
Can I remind editors that the article is pushing the upper guideline on word count and there is still lot's going on in MJ's life, the article will grow further and we can't go into every detail.
Please explain why this info is needed and how we can go about writing it correctly. If this is reinserted without discussion action can be taken. Third party comment would be helpful here. I have added a notice here to inform the editor in question. Further disruption needs to be dealt with, the editor has been warned before. — Realist 2 00:48, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
In any event, I'd say this granularity of detail doesn't belong in this article but more so in the articles about the tracks themselves; there is already a plethora of material to be considered, and this seems to me to be unnecessary. My 2p. worth. -- Rodhull andemu 01:50, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
In the book "Michael Jackson: The King of Pop" ( http://books.google.com/books?id=BVC9zltjf-EC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ViewAPI#PPP1,M1 pg 104)it claims that Michael Jackson's star on the Walk of Fame is registered as "Michael J. Jackson" because another radio broadcaster named Michael Jackson was already there, and you can't have the same name twice. The picture on the wikipedia page just says "Michael Jackson" so I think it might actually be the radio broadcaster's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.180.137.136 ( talk) 18:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Should the image right when someone clicks on the page really be from 1984? I mean, he's not dead or anything, he's still alive and making music, so naturally there must be a picture from at least 2000. Tezkag72 ( talk) 01:44, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Is Known for his Awkward noises he is able to produce —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.2.212.12 ( talk) 20:06, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
It’s examples like this that really underline how ridiculous the policy of using free media over fair use media is. Yeah, let’s take a crummy and wholly inappropriate free image just because it’s free. Jesus. — NRen2k5( TALK), 12:29, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
You know, i never understood this fair image business anyway. What exactly IS a free image? Could you at least use one from the plethora of MJ fan galleries out there? MaJic ( talk) 18:08, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
His associated acts only lists The Jackson 5/Jacksons era. However he also had notable collaboration with R. Kelly (You Are Not Alone, Cry, and One More Chance), Lionel Richie (We are the world), Diana Ross (Ease on Down the Road), Slash (Black or White, Give in to Me, DS, Privacy), Janet Jackson (Scream), Stevie Wonder (Just Good Friends, I Can't Help It) and Paul McCartney (The Girl is Mine, Say Say Say, The Man). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.235.226.98 ( talk) 04:21, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Mj is being sued guys you can read further information on this; heres the link. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7733608.stm-- rafichamp ( talk) 02:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
I have removed the following text;
Jackson has been taken to court nearly one hundred times in his life. I agree this could become notable, but currently it's just another court case. It is not notable to Jackson's life at this stage, he eats a meal as often as he is accused of something. Until the court reaches a verdict and a possible settlement is reached there is nothing about this particular lawsuit that deserves a mention over the lawsuits he had in the 80's. Clear case of recentism at this stage. — Realist 2 21:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Jackson is to make an appearance in the High Court, according to this article, so it's possibly more noticeable than some of the other lawsuits. But it may be worth waiting until he actually shows up before adding it: As Realist 2 says, we're not a breaking news service.-- Pawnkingthree ( talk) 20:12, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
![]() | 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 15 | ← | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | → | Archive 25 |
The Times (long time MJ bashers) have used this article in a recent career overview of Jackson. It's almost done in the exact same wording and everything, although they has spun a few things to make them slightly more anti Jackson. See here. — Realist 2 20:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
The Times made an article over-viewing Michael Jackson's career which they released on August 15, 2008 Seen here. It is quite clearly plagiarism of the Jackson article, take a look at the August 14, 2008 version of the article. That article took me a long time to get to featured states, it appears that they did not acknowledge me or more importantly Wikipedia in their publication. I might add that The Times's (long time Jackson bashers) version was not as neutral as mine. I'm unhappy with the way they presented the information on vitiligo, the label dispute of 2000-2002, the critical reception of the Invincible album and the commercial reception of Thriller 25 (they only mentioned the "moderate hit singles", but not the successful album itself). I apologize to offended readers and the article subject, I do not endorse the manner in which the publication cherry picked information from the article to meet their own ends. In some respects it is probably best that they did not name us as their source. I only hope that the publication will learn from it's mistake and continue to produce neutral material. — Realist 2 00:25, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
I know I dont have proof yet, but isint Michael Jackson the biggest selling music artist that is "alive"; he might not be first in history, but isint he first in people who are alive?
If u you think differently please do fight back, if you think this is true please find some proof, this would be a great addition to the main article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafichamp ( talk • contribs) 18:31, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I am just talking about the solo careers, im not looking at band sales, mostly because those sales are made as a band so it should not count as one artist's sales. As for Elivs, we dont even know his official record sales, so Michael Jackson is the biggest selling solo artist alive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafichamp ( talk • contribs) 00:56, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
I am sorry if I seemed like a person who doesnt add sources, someone please tell me how you add sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafichamp ( talk • contribs) 03:20, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
The following sources were added to the lead of the article to say that MJ was the biggest solo artist since elvis. The sources were [1] [2] [3]. Personally i don't think they pass WP:RS for a featured article like this, thoughts. — Realist 2 07:15, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
I have added a source by bbc.com saying that michael jackson is the most successful entertainer of all time and one of the biggest selling music artists.--
rafichamp (
talk)
22:56, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
The placing of this statement may give the misleading impression that Michael's abusive father was a Jehovah's Witness. It appears after Joseph's employment details and before his reported vile behaviour towards his son.
I feel clarification of this point is further necessitated by the later sentence about Michael appearing in a Christmas recital when he was five.
May I suggest a straight replacement:
'Katherine became a Jehovah's Witness when Michael was seven years old and thereafter raised her children in the faith.' Norm Eagle ( talk) 10:29, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
We should add a new section about his money, mostly because ive heard a lot of people reportedly calling him broke, I know that it is impossible for him to be broke, we need to add some of his business deals and etc he has made and estimates of the never-land ranch also him signing the biggest recording contract ever in 1992 with sony. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafichamp ( talk • contribs) 22:53, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Where does those scenes from movies that Michael Jackson always lose his nose and did he really change his gender? i think those should be in there to satisfy curious minds... Pirateer011 ( talk)
It seems that the article glossed over these points Myportal ( talk) 15:01, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
According to its date, the picture is 20 years old. Maybe a more recent picture can be provided 99.226.179.220 ( talk) 17:34, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
As there was no opposition, I changed it. Dalejenkins | 13:17, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
This photo is terrible. It's unprofessional; just a holiday happy snap. I thought the old picture was him wearing one of his crazy suits at the White House. An encyclopaedia article should have a photo of him from the peak of his career. Why does it have to be recent? Are you going to get pictures of skeletons for dead people? Huey45 ( talk) 09:33, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Can people look out for some sources regarding the extent/degree of Jackson's fame. There is a pool right now on tiscali and Jackson is currently in first position by some margin for the most famous person dead or alive. It would be nice to see if there is a reliable source that cites him as the worlds most famous human being. — Realist 2 02:55, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
I heard that some corperation had went out to do a survey to find the most famous person dead or alive in history, the first survey was in 1997, number 1 was michael jackson with 97.5% of the world knowing him. They toke the survey again in 2006, michael jackson came in at number one with 95.4% of the world knowing him. So with-out the doubt in this article someone should say that he is the most famous human being at this point. Rafichamp ( talk) 04:37, 15 August 2008 (UTC) 12:37, 15 August 2008
As if Michael Jackson is the most famous person ever. I've heard about this thing before and I there was a top 10 list. Jesus Christ and Confucius were there, but I can't remember any others. There are so many extremely famous people that the single most famous person ever couldn't be accurately determined anyway (unless you surveyed almost everyone in the world, which is just ridiculous)
Huey45 (
talk)
09:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
I've found information via Forbes magazine that says and I quote; 'Jackson, too, could pay millions for his defense despite his heavy debts: The entertainer is a partner with Sony in a music publishing business, which owns more than 300,000 songs and generates as much as $75 million a year in income for him.'
So this suggests that Jackson earns $75 million in royalties alone - maybe best adding this to the page regarding finances, as everyone would rather be of the opinion that he's broke. Here's the link; http://www.forbes.com/2005/06/14/jackson-celebrity-trial-cx_da_0614topnews.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.132.209.207 ( talk) 23:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for adding it. It is strange though how Jackson hasn't appeared on any Forbes rich lists for quite some time. The majority of his money was probably raked in by around 1998, after which he quietened down his career. At least adding this information shows that he has a means to support his lavish lifestyle. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8149929/
Who supports holding a one minute silence for the deleted main picture. I do.
Can people help find some updated sales figures for Off the Wall which we currently have at 15 million copies (it's closer to 20 million) and Bad which we have at 25 million (closer to 28 million). Cheers. — Realist 2 16:24, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Man I have looked every where but all of them are biographys about Michael Jackson and they all list Off the Wall as 19million and 7million in the US, can someone please look for sales figures of Off The Wall.-- rafichamp ( talk) 17:45, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Realist 2 I have found a site that lists Off The Wall as 20million here is the link http://www.contactmusic.com/new/artist.nsf/artistnames/michael%20jackson could you check if this is good enough.-- rafichamp ( talk) 17:51, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I don't know if my statement is relevant, but I don't see how it's possible for Dangerous to have out-sold Bad. For starters, the single releases from Bad were more successful than those from Dangerous. The Bad Tour played to 1 million more fans than the Dangerous tour did. It was on the market 4 years longer and has sold 1.8 million copies more in the combined U.S & U.K markets. Anyway, I have found sources which claim that Off The Wall has sold 20 million; http://www.allmichaeljackson.com/era/off-the-wall/index.html and that Bad has sold 32 million; http://www.allmichaeljackson.com/era/bad/ - although I doubt the reliability of this as it's a fan site.-- filthyralph ( talk) 19:44, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
"Black or white" is also a rock song
-- Alexanderfriend ( talk) 17:28, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
It clearly has a rock guitar part in it... Marnifrances ( talk) 02:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
So you actually need an article that says the word "rock" for Black or White. I am sure i can find one. :) Marnifrances ( talk) 02:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
SONY actually says the song is hard rock-
Incorporating more elements of hip-hop (guests like Heavy D on "Jam") and hard rock (Slash on "Black Or White"), Michael once again updated his sound to appeal to current pop sensibilities while maintaining his incredible songwriting and socially conscious lyrics.
http://www.sonybmg.com.au/cd/releaseDetails.do?catalogueNo=5044242000 Marnifrances ( talk) 02:32, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Allmusic's Stephen Erlewine states that Dangerous presents Jackson as a stark paradoxal individual.[149] He comments the album is more diverse than his previous Bad, as it appeals to an urban audience while also attracting the middle class with anthems like "Heal the World".[149] The first half of the record is dedicated to new jack swing, including songs like "Jam" and "Remember the Time".[150] The album is Jackson's first where social ills become a primary theme; "Why You Wanna Trip on Me", for example, protests against world hunger, AIDS, homelessness and drugs.[150] Dangerous contains sexually charged efforts like "In the Closet", a love song about desire and denial, risk and repression, solitude and connection, privacy and revelation.[150] The title track continues the theme of the predatory lover and compulsive desire.[150] The second half includes introspective, pop-gospel anthems such as "Will You Be There", "Heal the World" and "Keep the Faith"; these songs show Jackson finally opening up about various personal struggles and worries.[150] In the ballad "Gone Too Soon", Jackson gives tribute to his friend Ryan White and the plight of those with AIDS.[73] The album also contained one of his first power ballads, "Give In to Me".[150]
No more info on the dangerous album, we have enough. Take it to the album. — Realist 2 02:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
I have updated the link to the old MGM Grand Casino in Vegas, as that was the one, not the current one, that Jackson met Lisa Marie Presley at in 1975. Bh02306069 ( talk) 23:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I suppose I'll make this an open question. Has anyone read 'Michael Jackson: The Magic & The Madness' by J. Randy Taraborelli? If so, there a deal he mentions in the book, regarding ATV. In 1993, amidst the original child abuse scandal, Jackson signed an agreement with EMI; $150 million to administer the songs from his ATV catalogue. Upon signing the contract, $70 million was deposited into Jackson's bank account. Although I've read other sources which put the agreement figure at $200 million. I thought this was worth mentioning as it isn't mentioned in his finances. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Filthyralph ( talk • contribs) 23:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Hehe, I know this is probably inappropriate but I must say, despite everything that has happened, good and bad. Michael Jackson truly deserves respect for the music and charity work he has done. As a fan it is truly disappointing to see the tabloid press talk about his plastic surgery over his many achievements on this special day. You would think on this one day they would give it a rest, but obviously not. Stay strong, don't let the crap get to you, your millions of fan's still respect you greatly. Happy Birthday Mr. Jackson. — Realist 2 00:30, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Could it be? & Surely not. — Realist 2 02:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Michael Jackson is a nominee for best act ever in the 2008 EMA awards, http://ema.mtv.tv/vote/ go to that link to vote for Michael Jackson, also the Jackson 5 were honored in the BMA awards this week-end http://www.bmi.com/ go on that site the Jackson 5 are on the front page. If you know anymore awards that Michael Jackson has won or is a nominee in the year 2008 please add them and the source.-- rafichamp ( talk) 17:39, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Yes but the Jackson 5 has been honored already in the BMA's so could you please add that to the Jackson 5 section of the main article?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDt_fS63MVE watch this video and also read the video description to view all the awards he has won in the video and realist 2 please add those records to the main article and please dont erase what I have just wrote, its all in the video just watch it or you can just modify my writting I did on the main article.-- rafichamp ( talk) 17:52, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
In the main article, cant we atleast say that he is one of the biggest selling music artists ever, like common.-- rafichamp ( talk) 22:16, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
I added that Jackson is a business person to the lead of the article. Now I know this will shock those who only read the tabloids, and it's certainly not in the media talking points when discussing Mr. Jackson. However, the article clearly establishes that Jackson is a businessperson. Since he hasn't released a studio album in 7 years or performed in 7 years, it could be argued that his business career has come to the forefront today. Objections? — Realist 2 23:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Well he hasent sent out a album in 7 years now soon to be 8, (i hope not), but he still owns never-land, and the mortgage there is about 20million per month, so he has to be doing something to be bringing in those large amounts of money, so i agree with you and think that it should be put up.-- rafichamp ( talk) 22:37, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Another thing is that I am finding that people arnt discussing about this article as much anymore, anyone think im wrong?-- rafichamp ( talk) 22:37, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Can somebody please post a link to see the top 100 most viewed wikipedia articles?-- rafichamp ( talk) 20:36, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone think we need to expand the info on the 2005 trial a little? — Realist 2 23:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
excuse me, it has nothing to do with 2005 trial but i didn't see the article "Was Michael Jackson Framed?" by Mary A. Fisher GQ magazine 1994 in the source list. wasn't it used as a source about 1993 child sexual abuse accusations? -- X7000matrix ( talk) 15:29, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
the article tells the story of 1993 allegations from the very beginning (Jackson's troubles began when his van broke down on Wilshire Boulevard in Los Angeles in May 1992. Stranded in the middle of the heavily trafficked street,...)in a very smooth way. I suppose it was published recently too.--
X7000matrix (
talk)
17:34, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
sorry, I don't have access to Tarabarelli's book.-- X7000matrix ( talk) 19:49, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't know how it doesn't- it's simply the article from GQ 1994 by Mary Fischer- it's an article, and I could easily look up the issue number etc for you. Tarraborelli's book even used this article. Tarraborelli's book is not neutral at all, but I won't push it further. All you need to do is look at his "sources" in the back of the book ;) Marnifrances ( talk) 08:07, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
check it out everybody....
http://i38.tinypic.com/2nq6tr8.jpg
don't you think we better consider it?-- X7000matrix ( talk) 19:32, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
yes, it is very interesting to show his appearance hasn't changed. media is talking about it like it is happening constantly (MJ nose-drop stuff, gossip, fake photos, tabloids). making news that at least be labeled by his name this way. it hurts his public image and of course is cheaper than talking about his efforts and style. you know, people will find it so ridiculous if they realise that all this stuff tabloids try to build up (and make it the first) on the way of the true MJ to public mind, actualy belongs to 20 years ago (20 YEARS AGO MAN!!!!:-0 tabloid's BIG MJ-to-cash secret).though it is also a personal case.
well, showing it can be a possitive point against this vandalism.:-) -- X7000matrix ( talk) 16:49, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
The stuff that really changed his structure??? if we take a look at the Jacksons face structure we can find his face structure elements --apart from the nose and the chin-- in the others too. take a look. just like the contrast between what tabloids put in and the case that was previously mentioned. y'know...actualy, if this image wasn't here, bringing up the issue would rise controversy. it wouldn't be that easy to make it clear for every one that the tabloids are vandalizing irresponsiblely for so long. 20 years updating something that doesn't exist in anyway. as they run wild, voices for the truth face alot of difficulty.
it would be a highlight if we put this image on Mr.Jackson's article were it comes to tabloids and vandalism. peace :-)-- X7000matrix ( talk) 18:39, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
i agree with showing this pic. however, i think there should somehow be at least 2 or 3 more examples like this using different pictures. i kno the "haters" would probably claimed the example was photoshopped (as they did when MJ appeared on ebony in 12/07), so showing consistency in his looks could possibly quell them. MaJic ( talk) 00:22, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Should we put that Michael Jackson has recorded a song with Akon called "Hold My Hand", and it's scheduled to appear on akon's fourthcoming Album, "Freedom" due out in November 25th? If we do decide, it should be put in the "2008" events section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.212.169.90 ( talk) 20:49, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Find a source that claims that Michael has sold 750 million copies worldwide, thats hard to believe. That means he has sold more then the beatles. The Beatles are the best-selling band in history as far as i've understood. -- Be Black Hole Sun ( talk) 10:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
This section of the info box was recently changed from 1967 (when the Jackson 5 signed to their first label) to 1966 (when they were still entering talent contests). Surely when they say "years active", they are talking in professional terms? Thus it should go back to 1967? Anyone know? — Realist 2 09:36, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
I have reverted some vandalism to the page- I don't know how to report vandalism. Can you take care of that Realist? Thanks. Marnifrances ( talk) 11:15, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Here are some sites that claim that heading, realist 2 have a look through them maybe you will add some of these if you find them reliable.
http://famous--people.blogspot.com/
I will try adding more.
In 2005, Jackson attracted attention from the Anti-Defamation League after it was discovered he had recently referred to Jews as "leeches" and their actions as "a conspiracy". [4] [5]
Should this talk page be semi protected? It has been in the past. Looking at the history of the talk page vandalism far out ways and legitimate dialogue on the article content itself. Since the article is featured there technically isn't/shouldn't be much to discuss. Until something important happens in his life, say for example a new album or a new allegation, this article should stay rather stagnant. Thus would it be appropriate to semi protect the talk page until something of importance develops in his life that needs actual discussion? — Realist 2 12:02, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Its rumored that Michael Jackson will have a World Tour being March 2009, including 10 shows at the O2 arena expected sell out all of them, here is the site that is selling the tickets. Just wanted to infrom you guys of this.-- rafichamp ( talk) 20:51, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
http://www.viewlondon.co.uk/whatson/michael-jackson-tickets-article-7095.html
Who knows, Michael Jackson has certainly lost a lot of fans in America, possibly all, but his international stardom still exists, I think he will do this, imagine the biggest selling pop star coming back.-- rafichamp ( talk) 01:11, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey guys look whos in at number 1 on the billboards heres the link.-- rafichamp ( talk) 04:44, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/charts/chart_display.jsp?g=Albums&f=Top+Pop+Catalog
Michael Jackson is nominated for "Worlds Best Pop Artsit", of the year at the WMA(World Music Awards) which is tomorrow, found it at mjjr.net, this is real so it shouldnt be too hard to find a source on google, ill leave that job up to realist 2.-- rafichamp ( talk) 00:58, 9 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafichamp ( talk • contribs) 00:39, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Guys I found it, go to worldmusicawards.com and go to nominees 2008, scroll down and you will see Michael Jackson. As for who hes competitors, lol it looks like hes going to win, look at the artists your self, you will laugh.-- rafichamp ( talk) 00:58, 9 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafichamp ( talk • contribs) 00:46, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Also guys michael jacksons new album called king of pop(its a greatest hits album), is biggest selling album of the year(2008) in some country, just go to worldmusicawards.com and go to album sales.-- rafichamp ( talk) 00:58, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
If Michael Jackson wins this WMA from a remix album, with-out a doubt hes releasing a new album in march 09 for sure.
There is currently a dispute regarding the inclusion of this info in the Themes and genres sub section
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |accessdate=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
Firstly it is poorly written. Secondly it's not written in a neutral manner. Thirdly some of it is mentioned elsewhere. Take a look at the audio clip of "Black or White" where some of this info is already mentioned. Fourthly there is clearly too much info on the Dangerous album already. As seen by the following;
Can I remind editors that the article is pushing the upper guideline on word count and there is still lot's going on in MJ's life, the article will grow further and we can't go into every detail.
Please explain why this info is needed and how we can go about writing it correctly. If this is reinserted without discussion action can be taken. Third party comment would be helpful here. I have added a notice here to inform the editor in question. Further disruption needs to be dealt with, the editor has been warned before. — Realist 2 00:48, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
In any event, I'd say this granularity of detail doesn't belong in this article but more so in the articles about the tracks themselves; there is already a plethora of material to be considered, and this seems to me to be unnecessary. My 2p. worth. -- Rodhull andemu 01:50, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
In the book "Michael Jackson: The King of Pop" ( http://books.google.com/books?id=BVC9zltjf-EC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ViewAPI#PPP1,M1 pg 104)it claims that Michael Jackson's star on the Walk of Fame is registered as "Michael J. Jackson" because another radio broadcaster named Michael Jackson was already there, and you can't have the same name twice. The picture on the wikipedia page just says "Michael Jackson" so I think it might actually be the radio broadcaster's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.180.137.136 ( talk) 18:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Should the image right when someone clicks on the page really be from 1984? I mean, he's not dead or anything, he's still alive and making music, so naturally there must be a picture from at least 2000. Tezkag72 ( talk) 01:44, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Is Known for his Awkward noises he is able to produce —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.2.212.12 ( talk) 20:06, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
It’s examples like this that really underline how ridiculous the policy of using free media over fair use media is. Yeah, let’s take a crummy and wholly inappropriate free image just because it’s free. Jesus. — NRen2k5( TALK), 12:29, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
You know, i never understood this fair image business anyway. What exactly IS a free image? Could you at least use one from the plethora of MJ fan galleries out there? MaJic ( talk) 18:08, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
His associated acts only lists The Jackson 5/Jacksons era. However he also had notable collaboration with R. Kelly (You Are Not Alone, Cry, and One More Chance), Lionel Richie (We are the world), Diana Ross (Ease on Down the Road), Slash (Black or White, Give in to Me, DS, Privacy), Janet Jackson (Scream), Stevie Wonder (Just Good Friends, I Can't Help It) and Paul McCartney (The Girl is Mine, Say Say Say, The Man). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.235.226.98 ( talk) 04:21, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Mj is being sued guys you can read further information on this; heres the link. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7733608.stm-- rafichamp ( talk) 02:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
I have removed the following text;
Jackson has been taken to court nearly one hundred times in his life. I agree this could become notable, but currently it's just another court case. It is not notable to Jackson's life at this stage, he eats a meal as often as he is accused of something. Until the court reaches a verdict and a possible settlement is reached there is nothing about this particular lawsuit that deserves a mention over the lawsuits he had in the 80's. Clear case of recentism at this stage. — Realist 2 21:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Jackson is to make an appearance in the High Court, according to this article, so it's possibly more noticeable than some of the other lawsuits. But it may be worth waiting until he actually shows up before adding it: As Realist 2 says, we're not a breaking news service.-- Pawnkingthree ( talk) 20:12, 20 November 2008 (UTC)