Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam and Nia
To respond to the article creator's point about creating or contributing to articles to which they are connected, have a look at . It is, at best, generally a bad idea, and usually held to be a good idea if you indicate your connection to the subject somewhere early on in the piece. Commonsense would also dictate similarly, I should have hoped. My rationale for the weak delete is that the vast majority of the sources here are YouTube videos themselves and the like. Happy to revise this opinion if the non-social-media material is shown to be sufficiently reliably-sourced. Claims of "starting a trend" are always difficult to support in this day and age, but if they can be, then there's a point in their favour. -related arguments to keep are neither here nor there, ''particularly'' when YouTubers and other such famous-for-being-famous people are involved
— User:BigHaz, 00:52, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:COI||WP:OTHERSTUFF (Wikipedia:Conflict of interest)