Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tony Defries


 * 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   keep. postdlf (talk) 19:57, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Tony Defries

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The subject has requested deletion at OTRS ( for those who have access). The subject appears to be a very minor figure in the music business and of limited notability. The article is poorly sourced and has been a hotbed for badly sourced material in breach of BLP so we should accede to the subject's request to delete. ukexpat (talk) 17:24, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment Very minor figure? Surely not. Guardian 2013, Guardian 2013, Observer 2011, Guardian 2011, Guardian 2010, Guardian 2001. And that is from one search. See also Google Books. AllyD (talk) 18:46, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 09:11, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 09:11, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 09:11, 30 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Notable career. That he was involved in tax evasion also adds to his notability. I don't think it's polict to scrub the encyclopedia when subjects are engaged in improper activity. Candleabracadabra (talk) 21:04, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. The subject is obviously a very major figure in the music business, as a glance at the Google Books results linked above demonstrates. The problem with the article is that it contains far too little about the successes of the 1970s to counterbalance the negative content about events that happened a long time after Defries's notable period. I would also point out that the article was originally created as a promotional puff piece, so claims of non-notability now that it has been made a bit more neutral ring rather hollow. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:20, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable career, per sources like this, this, this, etc..  Article needs major expansion, but no reason to delete.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:17, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep warpozio (talk) 19:26, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Snow keep per discussion above. Boogerpatrol (talk) 17:31, 5 September 2013 (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.