Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jimmy Spice Curry


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. —Tom Morris (talk) 10:42, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Jimmy Spice Curry

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Is something fishy going on here? Says all sorts of fancy things but fails to back them up with any solid evidence. Tonnes of name dropping but notability is not inherited. The first reference is supposedly a "List of Jimmy Spice Curry's entertainment background" but links to an empty IMDB page. His working with Lenny Karvitz is supported by a dodgy, cheap video with a soundbite from Kravitz and is otherwise unrelated to him. The claim of working with Grammy winner Preston Vismale is supported by an advert for a low budget, low production value film which doesn't mention Vismale. Claims he made the "first Bahamian movie " is at odds with the above advert which says it's the first Bahamian gangster comedy, not movie in general. Claims of "his minor crew role in the movie short "The Saint of the Zuiderzee"." is supported by what is claimed to be "Claremont McKenna College alum discusses the movie: "Saint of the Zuiderzee"" but is not that and does not mention Curry. First external link is a press release "Honors given to Curry at event." Who's the release from? What honours? Who gave them? What event? Reading the press release it sounds like he may have talked to some school children. It claims he is a living legend but if thats true why is it so difficult to find any credible mentions of him. If his film "Filthy Rich Gangster" is so historical why is there a lack of good mentions of it out there. It doesn't even rate a mention in IMDB. He's worked with all these top pros but still fills his youtube clips with spam links trying to get work. This article is a mess of deception, lack of verified claims, puffery and name dropping. Due to this and the lack of coverage in independent reliable sources this article should be deleted. duffbeerforme (talk) 02:06, 8 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete Puff Piece, and deceptive. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 21:39, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

1. The link that was dead is no indication of a purposeful error. 2. The purpose of Wikipedia editors is not to decide whether the quality of a movie or song is up to their standard. Jimmy Spice Curry is an independent, socially-conscious producer/director, who sometimes works with much smaller budgets than his "purely commercially-motivated" counterparts. 3. The first Bahamian movie is a legitimate venture. It seems that some of you are basing your opinions more on the "size, nationality" of the production of the movie, rather than the historic nature of such an accomplishment. 4. You conveniently ignored the other aspects of Jimmy Spice Curry's article that didn't have missing URL links, etc and focused purely on the issues that could be used to push for the deletion of the article. 5. Interesting that none of you noted that there are "no copyright violations" in the entire article. Not one product (audio, visual) mentioned is in violation of any copyright laws, or other intellectual property laws (trademarks, patents, etc) because the products are often lower-budgets, but totally legal. Further, regarding the Preston Vismale reference and link, that issue was merely an incorrect URL/Link. 6. Deletion based on some videos links also including wording giving viewers info on products by him that are for sale, is no indication that the initial products are not valid, but merely use of a marketing tool, as you'd also find on many other Wikipedia links where in the primary webpage link, there is also some information/links guiding readers/views to items by the band, producer, artist, that are for sale. Even major corporations often include some promotional information at the beginning of their movies, or at the back of albums, this is not a violation of Wikipedia but merely an attempt to vilify the article, writers and Jimmy Spice Curry. Further, the Wikipedia editors claiming that there is not much credible information on Jimmy Spice Curry in existence, clearly ignored a simple search engine result, that would list (in the case of Google.com) several hundred, some of which are promotional, but many others purely academic in nature. 7. The project "Lenny Kravitz The Real Bahama Jamma" was written, produced, directed by Jimmy Spice Curry, and authorized by Virgin Records, and the government of the Bahamas. Jimmy Spice Curry, as is the case with most production deals, is not the promoter nor responsible for the local or global promotion of such a venture, and the limited promotion of the venture is no indication that it does not exist. 8) "Saint of the Zuiderzee" was a production by a College, and Jimmy Spice Curry did play a minor role, as the original article indicated. Nowhere in the Jimmy Spice Curry original article is there the claim that he is rich, or powerful, but merely that he is a socially-conscious producer, writer, artist, director.  Further, the claim that "name dropping" is being used in the original article, is probably simply the response of the Wikipedia "delete" suggestion editors who do not know the mentioned celebrities personally.   Many Wikipedia articles are written, and the colleagues, and celebrity relationships between the person the article is written about is not questioned.
 * No delete The fishy smell is actually your suggestion, which seems very "personal". The delete response sounds worded more like an attack than constructively written response. (How is it that the Delete editor could only find negative when there is lots of positive both in the article and the links, which were totally ignored (100% ignored).  Yes, while some of the issues you raise are valid from a technical standpoint (broken or incorrect links) and some of the formatting of the article are not in exactly Wikipedia perfection, the claims the the article, and Jimmy Spice Curry, are not valid from an intellectual property, historic, and creative nature are without merit.

It seems as though there is a double standard inherent the deletion request; while major corporations and more well-known producers/artists can have certain promotional info in their videos, etc, for less known producers/artists like Jimmy Spice Curry, who actually need the promotional opportunities more, the initial Deletion page creators are holding this article re Jimmy Spice Curry to a higher standard.

In a world where most artists, producers are only focused on money, don't you think it may be good to support articles written about people like Jimmy Spice Curry, and possibly suggest ways to improve the links, etc as opposed to working together to eliminate Jimmy Spice Curry, from Wikipedia? Wikipedia is not supposed to be an elitist site, but a site for anyone and any topic that is relevant to human intellect, history, etc. I apologize if the formatting of this response does not meet exactly with the Wikipedia guidelines, and trust that you all won't use this also against the original Jimmy Spice Curry article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.76.12 (talk) 07:32, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) The page linked to is a section were imdb allows user submitted info but is still blank. There is no credits associated with the link. Add those the multiple issues, something fishy. 2) No but we do look at notability. Low budget jobs are less likely to be notable. Less press is given to backyard movies. 3) If it's so historic why is there a lack of good mentions of it out there? Why didn't your advert say it was the first Bahamian film? 4) I adressed the parts with missing references in my second sentance. "but fails to back them up with any solid evidence." Where is the verification? 5) Straw man. 6) It's an indication of what the internet is being used for, promotion, just like what looks like happening here. Google hits are not an indication of notability. When I looked at the search results I saw a lot of unusable sources. 7) Good for him. He got a soundbite from Kravitz. That does not make him notable. 8) A minor crew part on a College production does not make somone notable. The deceptive sourcing was just another problem with this puff piece. not numbered) So you're saying the name dropping is there to establish notability by association. If the celebrity connection is a large part of the basis of the article then it is questioned.
 * Not holding it to a higher standard. Notability, verifyability and reliable sources apply to everyone.
 * Projects with are budget are more likely to attract attention in independent reliable sources. Wikipedia document subjects that have had significant coverage in independent reliable source. Wikipedia is not trying to redress any perceived double standards. Wikipedia is not here to give free publicity to the little man, to hold him up against the elitist media.
 * Would you happen to be User:Worldpeacenow and User:Dailyliterature? duffbeerforme (talk) 12:07, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:54, 14 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran  talk to me! 09:27, 15 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. The subject might have some notability, but unfortunately the sources used in this article are not enough to establish that. Most of them are either press releases or YouTube videos, neither of which is generally considered a reliable source. If reliable independent sources are found which describe the subject's career, the article can be re-created later. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 21:00, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:GNG, references are dead end - no editorial discussion, sustained or otherwise.--Nixie9 (talk) 04:25, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - Being a puff piece if fixable with sourcing. However, there is no coverage that I could find in reliable sources. -- Whpq (talk) 17:47, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.