Submission declined on 19 February 2026 by Avgeekamfot (talk). This draft lacks inline citations. Wikipedia's verifiability policy requires that all content be supported by reliable sources. We require inline citations (footnotes) to show which source supports which specific statement. You must place an inline citation directly after: quotations; any material whose verifiability is likely to be challenged or is contentious; any material about living people. Please edit your draft to support your statements with inline citations. Learn how to create inline citations in the: Source Editor: Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup. VisualEditor: Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor. This draft's references do not show that the person meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion for people. The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that: provide significant coverage: discuss the person in detail, not brief mentions or interviews lacking independent analysis; are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight; are independent: not connected to the person, such as interviews, press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content. Please add references that meet all three of these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia. If you would like to continue working on the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window. If you have not resolved the issues listed above, your draft will be declined again and potentially deleted. If you need extra help, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. Please do not remove reviewer comments or this notice until the submission is accepted. Where to get help If you need help editing or submitting your draft, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. These venues are only for help with editing and the submission process, not to get reviews. If you need feedback on your draft, or if the review is taking a lot of time, you can try asking for help on the talk page of a relevant WikiProject. Some WikiProjects are more active than others so a speedy reply is not guaranteed. How to improve a draft Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia – a basic overview on how to edit Wikipedia. Help:Wikitext – how to use the markup Help:Referencing for beginners – how to include references Wikipedia:Article development – how to develop your article Wikipedia:Writing better articles – how to improve your article Wikipedia:Verifiability – make sure your article includes reliable third-party sources You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Add tags to your draft Editor resources Easy tools: Citation bot (help) | Advanced: Fix bare URLs Declined by Avgeekamfot 5 months ago. Last edited by Avgeekamfot 5 months ago. Reviewer: Inform author. Resubmit Please note that if the issues are not fixed, the draft will be declined again.

Submission declined on 18 February 2026 by Hoary (talk). This draft is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Wikipedia's verifiability policy requires that all content be supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources include: reputable newspapers, magazines, academic journals, and books from respected publishers. Unacceptable sources include: personal blogs, social media, predatory publishers, most tabloids, and websites where anyone can contribute. Replace any unreliable sources with high-quality sources. If you cannot find a reliable source for the material, it should be removed. Declined by Hoary 5 months ago.

• Comment: Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Hoary (talk) 07:25, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Daniel Jason Nides is an American attorney and competitive athlete. He has competed in collegiate lacrosse, powerlifting, and CrossFit, and later expanded into endurance events. In 2025, he received wider public attention due to online discussion connected to Love Is Blind (Season 8), in which he was referenced as a key off-screen figure in a major storyline despite not appearing on the series.

Nides played collegiate lacrosse for the University of Minnesota (Minnesota Golden Gophers)..^[1]

Professional lacrosse

Nides was on the practice team for the 2010 Minnesota Swarm.^[2]

Nides competed in powerlifting and holds all Minnesota state records^[3] and national powerlifting records^[4] in his age, weight, and drug tested division. He has participated in competitions affiliated with the American Powerlifting Organization.

Nides has competed in CrossFit for more than a decade.^[5] He has reported:

• multiple CrossFit Quarterfinals qualifications
• podium finishes at various local and regional competitions
• participation as a qualified individual athlete at the Granite Games and French Throwdown
• international competition, including placing first in the Masters Division of the Italian Showdown

In 2025, Love Is Blind (Season 8)^[6] generated substantial online discussion about an unnamed former partner referenced in the season’s relationship storyline.^[7] Viewers circulated screenshots and social media posts attempting to identify him, prompting several entertainment outlets to publish explainers about his identity and background.^[8][9] He did not appear on the show.

Mainstream outlets including Business Insider, People, Today, Cosmopolitan, Elite Daily, Yahoo Entertainment, The Tab and Vulture summarized the speculation and public responses surrounding the storyline.^{[10][11][12][13][14][15]} Several publications noted the scale of cross-platform discussion, including podcast commentary and social media amplification, as an example of how reality television narratives can extend beyond on-screen participants.

The storyline was also discussed on widely followed reality-television and relationship podcasts, including The Viall Files,^[16] U Up?,^[17] and the Reality Steve Podcast, which featured an interview with O’Brien discussing the season and its aftermath.^[18]

Social media fixated on his physique, profession, and the speculation cycle.^[19][20] The visibility quickly translated into tangible upside: brand partnerships^[21][22] and endorsements^[23]

In an interview with Playgirl, Nides addressed the controversy and stated that he had explored potential legal action related to reputational harm and privacy concerns stemming from the storyline and subsequent online attention.^[24] The article described the situation as an example of how off-screen individuals can experience significant public exposure as a result of reality television narratives, and noted that the heightened visibility led to additional media coverage beyond the scope of the original program.

Nides has publicly characterized the attention as including both positive interest^[25][26] (in his fitness background and training) and negative attention, including harassment and doxxing attempts. He has also stated that he explored legal options related to reputational and privacy impacts arising from the public amplification of the storyline, while not disclosing the status or outcomes of any legal discussions.^[27]