More Wikipedia weirdness

I was looking at the Wikipedia entry for Michelangelo's David today and I'm baffled. There's a part about an attack on the sculpture:

in 1991 a postmodern artist attacked the statue with a hammer in an act of art intervention^[6], in the process damaging the toes of the left foot before being restrained.

Then the footnote says:

^ "a man the police described as deranged broke part of a toe with a hammer, saying a 16th-century Venetian painter's model ordered him to do so." Cowell, Alan. "Michelangelo's David Is Damaged". New York Times, 1991-09-15. Retrieved on 2008-05-23.

The Times says the person who mutilated the statue was "deranged" and says he did it because someone who has been dead for four hundred years told him to do it. So we have a few choices. The man was deranged as the article states. He was possessed by the spirit of the long dead model. He was psychic and had a weak will and carried out the orders of the deranged or jealous long dead model.

Nowhere in that list of possibilities do we have an "art intervention." Why then does the Wikipedia entry say that's what it was? I don't get it.