Talk:Cayman Islands

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Caribbean / Cayman Islands (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the countries of the Caribbean on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Cayman Islands work group (marked as Top-importance).

This article has comments here.

WikiProject Islands (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.

This article has comments here.

WikiProject United Kingdom (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Version 0.5      (Rated C-Class)
Peer review This Geography article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated C-Class on the assessment scale (comments).
This article has an assessment summary page.


I would like to announce the establishment of the Wikipedia:Caribbean Wikipedians' notice board. Anyone with an interest in the Caribbean is welcome to join in. Guettarda 1 July 2005 13:37 (UTC)

Administrative Districts[edit]

There appears to be a disconnect between the text description of the administrative districts, and the provided map. Someone with the knowledge to correct the ambiguities ought to take a look at it. Booklegger 17:22, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


Is there a special reason why this article uses {{Infobox Countries mk. II}} and not {{Infobox Country}}? We're currently standardizing all country articles to use the latter, but I want to clarify first whether there's a special reason for the anomaly. Cheers! Flag of Europe and Austria.svg ナイトスタリオン 09:49, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Proposed WikiProject[edit]

There is now a proposed WikiProject for the Caribbean area, including the Cayman Islands, at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Caribbean. Interested parties should add their names there so we can determine if there is enough interest to start such a project in earnest. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Exchange Rate[edit]

Im fairly certain that the exchange rate is 1 cayman dollar = 1.25 USD —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:40, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Exchange rate is $1.00 US = $0.80 CI —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:51, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Why don't we use the latest rate according to a currency exchange Web site such as ? At the moment none of the rates written are correct. (talk) 02:45, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

US$ 1.25 = CI$ 1 is the rate most retail establishments will give you in Cayman, but it isn't the real rate. As stated on the exchange rate is really CI$0.83 = US$1 or CI$1 = US$1.2. Adampennin (talk) 01:56, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Financial services[edit]

The financial services section needs to talk about the negative aspects and views toward the Cayman Islands role in offshore banking. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Roadrunner (talkcontribs) 22:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC).

  • snip*

Someone made an unsigned comment stating that this section was "propaganda". Who was it? I can assure that I, as the author of what you call the "propaganda", have no stake in the Cayman Islands. I found all these quotes in trying to research if Cayman Islands was a safe place for privacy in banking/investing. There is something from every point of view that I could find. I was hoping more people would discuss and bring about truth. If there is anything that you would consider *slant*, it is that I would rather bring forth conspiracy theories when there is nothing to worry about, than not bring anything out when there is something to worry about. You may suggest that the 'financial services' section does not sound traditionally encyclopedic, but I disagree. When the truth is not known, as many of available sources and clues speak the truth so much more so than one person's review. The only way to clean up, is to resolve the issue by finding a truth that all parties will accept.

My own experience and opinion: Cayman National no longer has autonomy (never had autonomy?) in serving its clients. They are under the control of the British government, the IMF, the World Bank, etc. They seek as much information as possible from individuals applying in the tradition of "know your client". Someone out there is building a very big database of information about individuals. A distopia in the making. Guard your privacy. Do everything you can to avoid revealing information about yourself. Someday it could come back to haunt you.--Campoftheamericas (talk) 05:33, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


The second half of the paragraph dealing with the Eurobank collapse needs cleaning up.

"The only mole known at the time was allowed to leave the country, never to answer for what he (or the United Kingdom) had done."

What had he done? Why is the UK accused? Why "never"? Why should someone not be allowed to leave the island? This sentence is a little "tabloid".

"This infuriated the elected members of the legislative assembly as they maintained that the governor and the United Kingdom had put into question Cayman's reputation as a tightly regulated offshore jurisdiction. Some saw this as the United Kingdom meddling in the territory's affairs to benefit itself (and the EU), at the expense of the islands' economy."

Which members of the legislative assembly? What were their arguments? What happened to the governor? Who says this is the UK meddling? Unless these remarks are properly attributed, this part of the article fails to maintain a NPOV.

Richardhearnden 14:43, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


What's this about the islands serving as a base for Belieze? Ace-o-aces 05:54, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Too complicated to even begin to mention here. It was easy a few years ago. Essentially the Cayman/Belieze/Switzerland tri-fecta is used to hide every possible identifier of a chosen asset.

Cayman Islands acts as the R/O for a lot of companies. This doesn't hide the companies whereabouts, or anything. These companies just don't need to pay tax on income. Belize and Switz are where the money is being actually screwed with. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:57, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Eye care on the Cayman Islands[edit]

This statement here:

"There remains an urgent need for retinal surgery on the islands. Currently, residents with severe diabetic eye conditions or retinal detachments become blind, unless they have the financial means to seek prompt care on the mainland."

is a matter of opinion, and, as such, does not belong in an encyclopedia. However, it could be tied to statistical reports or news stories about this issue in the Cayman Islands, and inserted in this, or possibly more properly an article on the need for expanding medical services to residents of the Cayman Islands. Thanks. KP Botany 21:55, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Seven Mile Beach 2006.jpg[edit]

Is there any way we could replace this image with something more professional looking? This panorama has obvious stitching errors and differences in exposure that make it look like a holiday snap rather than something that belongs in an encyclopedia. 23:30, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Article tone; financial services industry[edit]

Why has offshore financial centre been replaced with tax haven across the article? Why is there a sentence claiming the local population lives in poverty? Offshore financial centre is the correct term in common use and includes things such as hedge funds and company and ship registries that have nothing whatsoever to do with being a "tax haven." At best if that word is to be included here it should be in the context of "some have said the Cayman Islands are a tax haven" and should be counterpointed. Where offshore financial centre was previously used it was in the context of saying we were one such leading centre with a neutral or positive feel (there are others, and we are among the best, so it is fair to say so) but tax haven shifts the article to a distinctly political mainland view; I would not be surprised if an Obama campaign staffer wrote it. I will admit to a bias of my own here but all I ask is to have a balanced view on here. Put a reasonable selection of criticism and response and while we're at it, the long list of onshore regulators, inter and non-governmental organisations and international bodies that have said we are equally diligent or better than OECD countries. Travisritch (talk) 09:49, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Aha! I just noticed your entry. I agree with your points, but what do you want to do with all the information about the Cayman Islands as a supposed Tax Haven? Ignore it or use it? If you want to counterpoint CI as a tax haven, then provide some facts and references! Please, I'd love it! By the way, I'm very ignorant when it comes to Obama. How's that for your ignorance? <-joke --Campoftheamericas (talk) 06:10, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Offshore financial centre is a little too neutral for what is happening there, although technically the term is not wrong. The purpose is to get your assetts away from the taxman. This leaves the population from where the money comes from shortchanged. You could say that the tax havens suck out money from economies. When you wrote that, the financial crisis had not hit yet but since then we have learned. We have learned even more in the last couple of days, through the Libor issue.

What this set-up has done is that the companies park their money there, so it does not become available for the military, social purposes, science and research etc. All these burdens are now on the average tax payer. This is a skewed situation and the populations get screwed. Conclusion of 2012. For this reason, the more emotionally charged term tax haven is justified. Tradition, great, but the longer it goes on, the bigger the damage from the skewed and screwed situation will be.

Her Majesty would be well advised to call the situation as it has developed now an 'abberation that was not intended' and act accordingly if that is within her scope. (talk) 06:30, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Regarding laws and homosexuality[edit]

The following passage has been re-added several times, despite explanations that parts of it violate WP:NPOV and are false, when compared to the source used for the article:

Gay and Lesbian tourists should avoid the Cayman Islands because of both the local culture and the fact that certain laws and customs are still in effect from British Colonial rule. Homosexuality is illegal in the Cayman Islands, and gay men and lesbians will be jailed and expelled from the Cayman Islands if caught.

The cite, however, makes clear that homosexuality is not illegal in the Caymans, though there is a tradition of homophobia and a documented incident of an American tourist briefly detained for a public show of affection [1]. The cited source makes no mention of likelihood of imprisonment or expulsion. Nor is the exhortation to avoid the Caymans acceptable in an encyclopedia. Further reversions and addition of spurious information may be considered vandalism, and will merit administrators' attention. (talk) 01:02, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

And they have such attention now. Such language as is quoted above is in no way acceptable in wikipedia. I have this page on my watch list now and will ensure that this article, which is now at a high level, will not be damaged by the addition of such prejudicial, dubiously sourced remarks. John Carter (talk) 23:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Homosexual acts between men are illegal in the Cayman Islands. However, one of the benefits of colonial rule is that London has issued an Order in Council stipulating that there be no prosecutions section 144 of the Penal Code ("Unnatural Offences"). Therefore, de facto, homosexuality is permissible, although prejudice on the island is high. Richardhearnden (talk) 08:59, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
I have reverted further POV changes to this passage. There was a detainment, not an arrest. If the passage merits a heading, then it is under that of 'Tourism', and not as a separate and larger topic. A user appears to have an axe to grind, but Wikipedia is not the place. A correct reference to the news source tells the story, no embellishment needed. JNW (talk) 05:19, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
I found another source which says he was "arrested" and not detained. I think sources outside of the islands themselves might be best in this situation as a local newspaper would obvious use softer language to protect the tourist industry. Cayman Islands Police Arrest Massachusetts Man for Gay Kiss MiltonP Ottawa (talk) 07:38, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Financial Services Section[edit]

I have re-written the financial services section, as it was previously mostly a cut-and-paste job. I think it is quite an improvement, but I'm not experienced with this Wikipedia editing lark! Let me know if there is anything that needs adding/changing. Cheers, Ucayman (talk) 17:42, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Below what was before your edit. It contains all information I could find on the topic, plus edits by other wikipedians. It represents many facts and differing points of view, while what you have written is your interpretation and has much less information: --Campoftheamericas (talk) 06:44, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

The Cayman Islands financial services industry encompasses banking, mutual funds, captive insurance, reinsurance, vessel registration, companies and partnerships, trusts, structured finance and the Cayman Islands Stock Exchange. As of December 2005, just over 70,000 companies were incorporated on the Cayman Islands including 430 banking and trust companies, 720 captive insurance firms and more than 7,000 funds. The government distinguishes between local (or "ordinary" companies), doing business primarily with the local population, and "exempted" companies conducting business primarily with overseas entities.

Cayman Islands coin

There has been a trend of financial institutions reincorporating in first world countries with better regulation.

A recent report released by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) assessing supervision and regulation in the Cayman Islands' banking, insurance and securities industries, as well as its anti-money laundering regime, recognised the jurisdiction's comprehensive regulatory and compliance frameworks. "An extensive program of legislative, rule and guideline development has introduced an increasingly effective system of regulation, both formalising earlier practices and introducing enhanced procedures," noted IMF assessors. The report further stated that "the supervisory system benefits from a well-developed banking infrastructure with an internationally experienced and qualified workforce as well as experienced lawyers, accountants and auditors," adding that, "the overall compliance culture within Cayman is very strong, including the compliance culture related to AML (anti-money laundering) obligations...". The Cayman Islands had previously (briefly) appeared on the FATF Blacklist in 2000, although its listing was thought to be harsh, and was criticised at the time.[1]


"In May 2000, the Cayman Islands avoided the OECD's infamous blacklist by "committing" itself to a string of reforms to improve transparency, remove discriminatory practices, and begin to exchange information with OECD member states about their citizens.

However, cooperation between Cayman and the OECD lost momentum. In May 2001, after the U.S. Treasury Department announced that it would not support the OECD initiative, other than pursuing tax exchange agreements, the OECD turned its attention to another initiative, the EU Tax Savings Directive."

"While the... (tax information exchange agreements (TIEA))... somewhat bolster the U.S. government's ability to prosecute corporations and individuals engaging in tax evasion, the agreements are limited, and in most cases do not allow the IRS to investigate suspected corporations or individuals unless there is a court order or strong evidence of criminal activity." As one Cayman official stated, "Despite excellent fishing in the Cayman waters, no fishing expeditions are allowed."

Another obstacle hampering the IRS investigations of tax fraud by U.S. citizens in the Cayman Islands is Cayman's Confidential Relationships Preservations Law (CRPL), which requires banking confidentiality unless there is evidence of criminal activity. While the Cayman government has gone a long way towards enforcing due diligence and the sharing of information with the U.S. government, Cayman's banking privacy laws remain intact. David McConney, CEO of Cayman National Bank, says, "Financial privacy is fundamental to traditional banker/customer relationships. If you have not committed a criminal act, no Cayman financial institution may release any information to any third party without your express approval."

If the IRS wants to investigate potential wrongdoing by a U.S. corporation or individual, it must request information from Cayman's chief justice on a case-by-case basis. Unfortunately, this painstaking process is inadequate to deal with the numerous cases of tax fraud perpetrated by U.S. citizens and corporations. Furthermore, the IRS does not have sufficient resources to pursue investigations of wrongdoing on a case-by-case basis."

From :

"On 27 November 2001, the Cayman Islands, concluded a tax information exchange agreement with the U.S. The agreement provides for exchange of information, upon request, for criminal tax evasion, civil and administrative tax matters relating to U.S. federal income tax. It provides for confidential treatment of information exchanged, and, in accordance with U.S. law, any such information may not be disclosed to any third party. It applies to criminal tax evasion for taxable periods commencing 1 January 2004, and to all other tax matters for taxable periods commencing 1 January 2006."

From :

"OECD commitment

In May 2000 the Cayman Islands gave a letter of commitment to the OECD relating to alleged harmful tax competition. Under the letter of commitment, the Cayman Islands Government will implement a plan to share bank account information with foreign Governments that are conducting criminal tax evasion investigations for the first tax year after 31 December 2003, and on civil and administrative tax matters for the first tax year after 31 December 2005.

Tax information exchange agreement

On 27 November 2001 the Cayman Islands entered into a tax information exchange agreement with the US. The agreement is structured to conform with the Cayman Islands’ OECD commitment of May 2000. The implementation procedure will require that information be provided only in response to a specific request which is relevant to a tax examination or investigation conducted in accordance with the laws of the requesting state. Requests will be submitted by foreign tax authorities to a competent authority in the Cayman Islands who will act in a capacity similar to that in which the Cayman Islands Chief Justice has acted pursuant to other international information exchange agreements. Confidentiality provisions will ensure that information that has been exchanged is adequately protected from unauthorised disclosure.

It is likely that there will be further bilateral tax information exchange agreements. However, the Cayman Islands Government has made it clear that it will not enter into any agreements with countries that have legislation discriminating against the Cayman Islands.

EU Savings Directive

What has become known as the Savings Directive is part of a package of measures by the European Commission to tackle "harmful tax competition" in the European Union. It is designed to address the ability of "residents of Member States …. to avoid any form of taxation in their Member State of residence on interest they receive in another Member State".

The current form of the Savings Directive is a compromise solution following the failure of Member States to agree on the original proposal for the imposition of withholding tax on interest payments (which would have had a serious effect on the Eurobond market in London). In implementation of the requirement that Member States "promote the adoption of the same measures" in their dependent or associated territories, the UK Government has committed its Caribbean dependent territories, including the Cayman Islands, to their adoption and has threatened to "legislate" for them.

The Savings Directive requires the reporting of certain information relating to interest payments (including dividend payments by certain investment vehicles whose investments in debt instruments exceeds a certain percentage) to individuals resident in Member States. That information is to be provided by the paying agent (essentially, the last intermediary in a chain of intermediaries), who is also responsible for determining the residence of the payee.

The Cayman Islands Government is concerned that any application of the Savings Directive to the Islands, without equivalent application to their competitors, will result in little benefit to the European Union at a disproportionate cost to the Islands. The UK Government is aware from its own regulatory impact assessment that implementation of the Savings Directive will result in significant additional costs to both the public and private sectors in the UK, and the same will undoubtedly be true in the Cayman Islands.

The Cayman Islands has declined to commit to the implementation of the measures in the Savings Directive, and is now bringing legal proceedings to challenge the legality of certain aspects of the Savings Directive."


"If you read the press releases from the offshore jurisdictions that signed TIEAs, you’ll come away believing that they may be invoked only in the event of probable cause of tax fraud by a particular taxpayer. But that’s not what most of the treaties actually say. Instead, most TIEAs state that any information “foreseeably relevant or material to United States federal tax administration and enforcement with respect to the person identified” for investigation must be turned over to the IRS.

Not “probable cause” of a criminal or even civil tax offense. Not even “reasonable suspicion.” Merely “foreseeably relevant.” U.S. courts have interpreted this authority as permitting TIEA information requests “even if the United States has no tax interest and no claim for U.S. taxes are potentially due and owing.” In other words, fishing expeditions into offshore accounts are explicitly permitted. The potential for abuse is obvious."


"The Cayman Islands are one of the premier offshore financial centres, but have something of a reputation as a stereotypical 'tax haven' in Europe, although they have been attempting to guard against money laundering practices. It has to be said, however, that in the absence of proven wrongdoing, the emphasis is still firmly on preserving confidentiality. (Although this was dealt a blow by the judgment awarded in 2002 to the US Internal revenue Service in Miami, allowing them access to American Express and MasterCard records covering US citizens with offshore assets in the Caymans.)"


"Advantages of a Cayman Islands Bank Account: No capital gains tax, Corporation Tax, withholding tax..."

Yet withholding tax is specifically stated in the "Official Guide To Investing In The Cayman Islands" :

"Banks adhere to the ‘know your client’ rule. These rules have been approved by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, enabling institutions in the Cayman Islands to become qualified intermediaries under the U.S. Withholding Tax Rules introduced on 1 January 2001."


"Cayman Islands Bank Fails to Block IRS Discovery of Documents (Posted: 09 Nov 2006 at 7:23am) Cayman National Bank fails to quash an IRS summons seeking documents relating to a judgment obtained by the bank against a U.S. citizen. The court, in Cayman National Bank Ltd. v. United States[2] , rejects arguments that discovery is barred by the attorney-client privilege, that IRS should have obtained discovery under the Tax Information Exchange Agreement between the United States and the United Kingdom, and that production would violate Cayman Islands law. Greg Cook, EA, CPA"

On the phone with Cayman National Bank officer: "We will disclose your information if there is any court order to do so in the U.S."

Press release for TIEA between U.S. and Cayman Islands, except document is missing:
One location of same TIEA: --Campoftheamericas (talk) 06:44, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, even though Cayman is a British Overseas Territory, British citizens are considered expatriates. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:46, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Recent Edit, is it suitable? In 2000 Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (FATF) put The Cayman Islands on its “black list” of Non-Cooperative Countries and Territories (NCCTs). Specifically, FATF noted in its annual report released in June 2000 that “The Cayman Islands does not have any legal requirements for customer identification and record keeping. Even if in the absence of a mandatory requirement, financial institutions were to identify their customers, supervisory authorities cannot, as a matter of law, readily access information regarding the identity of customers. Moreover, the supervisory authority places too much reliance on home country supervisors’ assessment of management of bank branches” [ANNEX A, paragraph 20, p.4 of the report,].

It has some key parts in bold, possibly someone trying to make CI financial services regulation appear lacking. However this is 9 years out of date, and I believe is largely irrelevant. With the increased scrutiny that this section may obtain in light of the current efforts by G20 and OECD to crack down on offshore finance, is it right to have this on there? Let me know your thoughts on removing it...Ucayman (talk) 22:41, 16 March 2009 (UTC)


"In order to work in the Cayman Islands as a non-citizen, a work permit is required."

Hi there, I was wondering, who qualifies as a citizen? Would British citizens be considered expatriates? Thanks. (talk) 10:04, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Try —Preceding unsigned comment added by User F203 (talkcontribs) 21:58, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

External Links[edit]

I believe that the following external links would be beneficial to this page:

1) 2) 3)

As they are the online editions to the printed directories which people in our country use. Unfortunately I have someone constantly removing any link I add. Furthermore this person has now removed:

1) 2)

The first website is government run and helps people prepare for any hurricanes coming our way, and given that we're now in the middle of hurricane season would seem rather 'important'. The second website is the governments financial services department which seems relevant given the reliance of the financial service industry to our islands.

Debbiegreen623 (talk) 21:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)Debbiegreen623

Please read the Wikipedia:External links page carefully? It makes clear that "Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum" and that "a lack of external links, or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links". Wikipedia is not a place to advertise services as per point 5 of Wikipedia:External_links#Links_normally_to_be_avoided:
  • - Search local businesses and yellow pages
  • - Cayman islands business directory
  • - Cayman islands phone directory
As for hurricane preparation and investment promotion, I am sorry to sound harsh but that is not our job. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia - period. There is already one link to a government website, we do not need any more. If you wish to promote them, you can try adding your websites to the Open Directory project, which you will note is in the External links section of the article. Green Giant (talk) 22:38, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Cardiac unit, retinal surgery, etc.[edit]

Let's discuss the difference between a political issue and a medical one.

I have an aversion to paper cuts and want a "paper cut clinic" locally. The authorities decline for whatever reason. They have the medical capability but lack the political will, for some peculiar reason of their own. This is a political problem for me. (If I call 911 often enough, it may become a different problem!)

The beach filtering machine occasionally picks up sleeping vagrants and chops them up into small pieces. A machine that puts people back together is needed locally. When I complain, the authorities say that they would be glad to have such a machine if I can put a name to it. I cannot. This is a "medical problem" since there is no known method of putting people back together again once chopped up.

The paragraph reads:

"Currently the islands lack facilities for cardiac catheterisation, though many feel the population is large enough to support the procedure. Various attempts to establish a cath lab in George Town Hospital have stalled. There remains an urgent need for retinal surgery on the islands. Currently, residents with severe diabetic eye conditions or retinal detachments become blind, unless they have the financial means to seek prompt care on the mainland."

"currently" is vague. Since what date or as of what date is necessary.

None of this has any citation BTW another good reason to delete it after several years.

"many feel" - how many is many? Who are these faceless people. This sounds very WP:POV and possibly WP:OR.

A decision that is based on peoples "feelings" as opposed to facts, tends nearly always to be political.

"Various attempts" - what attempts? Vague. appears WP:OR

"remains an urgent need" = when none has been established here by statement nor by WP:RELY WP:FOOT.

"become blind" - this is certain in every case? BTW most places of your size do NOT have a retinal clinic. Why are Cayman Islanders more susceptible to retinal problems per thousand than everyone else? If a reference can be found, this difference might be quite interesting.

This is all quite WP:POV, emotionally overstated, not cited, and very much political. Since there is no footnote, readers do not know whether it is true or completely made up. Student7 (talk) 22:37, 26 December 2009 (UTC)


For national level only, there is a higher standard for politicians and athletes (and maybe others). The politician must have done something beyond the national borders, head of the Security Council, president of the Caribbean Organisation, something extraordinary that lifts them beyond the national stage. Every country has a premier and legislators. They are not notable at the national level. Okay at Island level or town, or whatever. Same for athletes. They must have won something. They can't just "represent" Caymans at the Olympics for football/soccer. That happens every four years and is not notable per se.

I wish we had something similar for others. Student7 (talk) 14:18, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

nn films[edit]

The nn films have imdb rating of 3.4 and 2.2. This is fairly hard to achieve! In an area where almost no film is below a 6 or 7! Also, IMDB is not considered a WP:RS because there is no edit oversight. The ratings may not be too far off though! Student7 (talk) 20:33, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

It's my understanding that imdb is considered a poor source in regard to certain items within, but as far as whether or not a movie exists, not so much an issue. The film exists, it was made at the Driftwood Bar and Grill on the North Side of Grand Cayman, it's a zombie film that had a director, writer, cast, and budget and imdb confirms this. The other film? Same deal. Made in the Caymans, released, exists. Can't see how imdb would be a poor source for any of that. Imdb's process for checking specifics about a film has to meet the standards of their editorial board before a movie is listed. Bios, synopses, etc. - those things are added by regular schmoes like you and me. The factual, important stuff is fact-checked first. In that fashion, imdb is an acceptible resource for Wikipedia reference purposes. Lhb1239 (talk) 01:17, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
It tends to be considered trivia. A bit different if it is a) a significant film featuring Cayman venues or b) THE story of the Caymans. Like "Gone with the Wind" to the Southern United States or the even more fictional Hamlet to (say) Denmark. Student7 (talk) 13:37, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
What specifically are you referring to that "tends to be considered trivia"? Zombie Driftwood may not be an important film to most, it may not be an important film to me and you, but it was important to the Caymanian resident who wrote the screenplay and allowed it to be filmed at his establishment, "Driftwood Bar & Grill" on the North Side. It was likely important to those from Grand Cayman who were extras in it, as well. The film was produced and directed by a Sundance Film Festival award winner and an Emmy winner, respectively. It was a feature film shown in regular theaters throughout the UK and has been released on DVD. Yes, it was panned by critics and audiences alike, but it's still a feature film. As far as Cayman Went, it was also a feature film that has been released on DVD. So - what's the problem with listing either of them in the article? Further, looking at WP:NF, it seems that both films meet enough criteria to be included in this article. To have their own articles? Maybe not. IN this article, yes. Lhb1239 (talk) 16:48, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Damage from Ivan[edit]

The supplied reference supporting the claim that "95% of structures were damaged" by Ivan is not in the supplied link. I've marked it as failing verification. This reference needs to be replaced with a link that works -- it presently redirects to a search page at the target site. The section overall needs more references to support the statistics and claims it makes. -- Mikeblas (talk) 07:41, 6 November 2011 (UTC)


How can this be?

The "demographics" section of this article lists two total population figures for the Cayman Islands, each roughly 55,000 and dated 2009 and 2010, with the 2010 figure being about 1,000 lower than the 2009 figure. This suggests that the Caymans are becoming depopulated.

The separate page Demographics of the Cayman Islands lists a 1999 population figure that is roughly 10,000 lower than the 2009-2010 numbers. This suggests a robust population growth.

Within the "demographics" section of the general article, populations for political subdivisions of the Cayman Islands are reported, which total over 62,000 -- about 7,000 above the stated 2009 and 2010 totals. These numbers are undated, although the context suggests that they are from 2009 or 2010.

While all this may possibly be acccurate -- particularly if the populations for the political subdivisions are more recent, say March 2012, and reflect very rapid growth since 2010 -- is does seem implausible. Did the population really grow rapidly from 1999 to 2009, then shrink between 2009 and 2010, then grow explosively after 2010? Or is there a typographical error in here somewhere?

At the very least, these numbers deserve some explanation, and a date attached to the provincial population figures. Paul (talk) 21:47, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

  1. ^ The FATF's 2000 report itself acknowledged that "the Cayman Islands has been a leader in developing anti-money laundering programmes throughout the Caribbean region. It has served as president of the CFATF, and it has provided substantial assistance to neighbouring states in the region. It has demonstrated co-operation on criminal law enforcement matters, and uncovered several serious cases of fraud and money laundering otherwise unknown to authorities in FATF member states." Inferences were drawn that the list had been drawn up as an attack on tax havens, and that the inclusion of a leading offshore financial centre was necessary for political purposes.
  2. ^