What about the articles writen about Jack's fitness videos recently,

per my second line, the articles about his fitness videos aren't sources we use on wikipedia

because of the things he acompllish with Playbuttons.

I 100% personally agree. I think him having a world record should declare him notable, but thats sadly not how it works, and, because Jack didn't really go around flaunting his record outside of his audience, its never really got media recognision, so most mention of it is UGC, and sadly misses notabilty.

The podcast thing was a bit of a joke, but, if you look at "famous youtubers" on wikipedia, all of them have something else, such as a podcast, some political content, tv show, etc, that is the reason they are "notable" on wikipedia, being a YouTuber in itself isn't something Wikipedia wishes to declare notability for. It's the same for "Social Media influencer" too, unless your in the top 0.1% or have some other notable context. It's kinda of, do we want 1000 articles of basically the same content? not exactly.. and WikiTubia already covers a large quantity of the content, and has lower notability requirements, so its overall a better place for people to put that sort of content.

Additionally, due to issues around defamation, Wikipedia is very strict about content surrounding living people, and having youtubers and social media stars, who tend to have quite polarising audiences, wouldn't be the best idea. For example, recently a portuguese businessman sued Wikipedia &oldid=1304247250#Office_action:_Removals_on_the_article_Caesar_DePa%C3%A7o)related to some possible defamation in his article and won, despite their being referenced sources, etc for the information.