Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Topher (rapper)


 * 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 no consensus. Weak Keep/Weak Delete opinions leave me at No Consensus. Liz Read! Talk! 07:23, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Topher (rapper)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Extent of notability unclear. Most of the sources in the article mention him briefly as a conservative TikTok star. An article in the Washington Post covers him in depth, a track of his charted at #1 on the iTunes Rap Digital Song Sales, and he performed at the Jan. 6 MAGA rally. Is this enough to establish notability? Mooonswimmer 17:24, 28 October 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:32, 4 November 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Arbitrarily0   ( talk ) 04:21, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Mississippi. Shellwood (talk) 18:17, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete having a song charting on apple isn't considered notable, I'd call the MAGA event questionably notable. On the whole, not enough for an article here. Interesting historical tidbit perhaps. Oaktree b (talk) 19:14, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * the Washington Post article is about the best one, the wired one mentions him briefly, the rest are smaller than that. I don't think we have enough sources for an article. Oaktree b (talk) 19:16, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - This one is an admittedly close call and I won't fight it, but the rapper has some reliable media coverage, mostly because being a MAGA rapper is crazy enough to get noticed. The article already has sources for a (brief) interview at Fox News and his (brief) profile in Washington Post. Under his real name Christopher Townsend he also has some coverage of his social media bans, such as a (brief) mention in Wired and fuller/semi-reliable magazine-style coverage here:, , . Once again, most of those are brief and/or marginally reliable, but put all the pieces together and he might have enough for a basic stub article. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 20:34, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak delete -- The Washington Post article is in-depth, significant coverage, and probably more could be extracted from it than is in the article; but nothing else seems to be. It's a tough call because this guy falls in between media beats: not primarily a pundit/influencer so not covered in the media along those lines, but also not the kind of musician the mainstream music press is going to touch. Gnomingstuff (talk) 01:10, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Moderate Keep -- Subject has an in depth article in the Washington Post, and a local newspaper article from the Associated Press, he was interviewed for a CNN segment, however it didn't seem to be focusing on Topher himself, it briefly touched on him and his music, rather it focused on his use of TikTok. In addition to those sources, he has charted on Billboard. He also made a song for a major motion picture released by Sony and Columbia Pictures, directed by Denzel Washington. He meets multiple points in WP:MUS. I agree it could go either way with news coverage, he has maybe 3 articles that meet Wikipedia standards, but in terms of notability it seems like he meets other points in the guideline. HungryHighway (talk) 11:16, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Moderate Keep - The Washington Post article is strong and the same goes for the Associated Press article from the Clarion Ledger. So 2 GNG sources, plus the magazine coverage brought up by which contributes to WP:MUS, plus the Billboard charting (which is arguably the weakest, but still), I think inclusion is reasonable to deletion. — Sirdog (talk) 05:10, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Subject has some coverage in reliable sources, especially in-depth coverage in the Washington Post article. It meets WP:GNG --Assyrtiko (talk) 11:33, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per Assyrtiko Lilsusanalex (talk) 15:41, 13 November 2022 (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.