Submission declined on 20 November 2023 by MaxnaCarta (talk).
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not 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.
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.
Please note that if the issues are not fixed, the draft will be declined again.
Submission declined on 16 April 2023 by Bearcat (talk).
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Submission declined on 12 February 2023 by Bearcat (talk).
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Comment: I'm not seeing sufficient coverage, especially given the number of times the community has dealt with this subject — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:47, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment: You haven't added anything that makes a difference compared to last time. This is still based primarily on sources that are not support for notability, such as interviews in which he's doing the speaking and sources that merely quote him as a provider of soundbite. People do not pass WP:GNG, or get Wikipedia articles, by doing the speaking about other things, people get past GNG by being the subject of analytical coverage being spoken or written by other people — but the only sources present here which actually meet that standard are still all covering him in the context of a single incident that just makes him a WP:BLP1E, and you've still failed to show any evidence that he has notability-building coverage about him in other contexts besides that single incident. Bearcat (talk) 13:49, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Comment: Notability is not established simply by "verifying" facts, it is established by showing that the person has been the subject of third-party reliable source coverage and analysis about the facts. For example, you cannot stake a person's notability on sources in which he's speaking about other things (such as interviews in which he's answering questions in Q&A format, transcripts of his own speeches, pieces of his own writing, etc.) -- notability requires him to be the subject that other people are speaking or writing about. But the only two sources here that meet that standard at all (Montreal Gazette #4 and Toronto Star #5) are both covering him solely in the context of a single incident which just makes him a WP:BLP1E and does not rise to the level of enduring permanent significance all by itself. Bearcat (talk) 15:01, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
Comment: Clearly notable, unlike the other 3 attempts this one is reasonably well-sourced and independent of McCullough himself. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 19:09, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Comment: You will need independent reporting about McCullough in order to satisfy notability requirements. All of your current sources appear to be primary sources where McCullough is expressing his own views. — jmcgnh(talk)(contribs) 03:46, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Canadian YouTuber (born 1984)
Note to editors: There will be one hell of a mountain to climb if this article will ever see the light of Wikipedia mainspace - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/J.J. McCullough (3rd nomination) for criticism over article recreation. This individual is also alleged to have created his own autobiography at one stage and has taken it upon himself to criticise Wikipedia in his latest video (see here for more information on that front), which will likely draw more attention to this article from editors wishing to push an agenda one way or another. —QueenofBithynia (talk) 21:32, 22 September 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 23:27, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
McCullough grew up in Vancouver, British Columbia. He is openly gay, and frequently identifies as a middle-class conservative.[11] McCullough graduated from Simon Fraser University where he had been opinion editor for campus paper The Peak and a staff cartoonist at Douglas College student newspaper The Other Press.[12][13] While attending SFU, McCullough, acting as CEO for the Independent Electoral Commission appointed by the Simon Fraser Student Society, oversaw a successful 2008 referendum whereby 67% of SFU students voted to leave the Canadian Federation of Students.[14][15] The CFS contested the referendum’s legitimacy, but ultimately settled out of court and Simon Fraser University’s student union officially left in 2012.[16] After finishing school, he was editorial cartoonist for the Western Standard and the Tri-City News.
McCullough began commentating professionally at Sun News Network, until its abrupt closure in 2015.[8] He also provided on-air political commentary for CTV. After Sun News closed, McCullough purchased a camcorder from Best Buy and began recording videos in his home.
McCullough has over 932,000 subscribers on his YouTube channel, producing videos on a range of subjects, including both Canadian and global politics, as well as history and culture.[17] During a visit to UBC, McCullough asked commentator Ben Shapiro about Native American reservations.[18]
In June 2022, McCullough testified before Canada's Heritage Committee in opposition of Bill C-11.[24] After the bill was enacted, McCullough criticised the decision.[3][2]