Deletion of The Joe Rogan Experience

Comment: I was just going to give this a NAC close as Keep, but as it stands all the Keep statements are some combination of "there are sources out there", " and . It clearly is popular, but actually citing a couple of the best sources seems the logical thing to do
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ILIKEIT||WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS)

Comment: with the https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/how-joe-rogan-went-from-ufc-announcer-to-21st-century-timothy-leary-182319/ Rolling Stone article and the https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/04/joe-rogan-podcast-free-speech-zone-non-mainstream-thought/ this National Review, there is finally sufficient sourcing (that doesn't crash my computer) actually stated to give a clear keep under , which seems most appropriate for podcasts
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)

Comment: I think with the incidental coverage re. Conor McGregor, https://www.indianapolismonthly.com/arts-culture/joe-rogan-preview/ this Indianapolis Monthly article, plus the Washington Examiner, Rolling Stone and National Review articles, notability has finally been reasonably established. Now to ping {{u|Natg 19}} for a possible early close. I also propose we trout all the  !voters
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:MUSTBESOURCES)

Comment: https://www.google.com/search?tbm=nws&q=%22The+Joe+Rogan+Experience%22+-wikipedia 9500 news mentions would certainly imply notability. His podcast is frequently reported on both in MMA press and mainstream press as a significant platform. And while I'm sympathetic to  and  not being sufficient on their own, there's also no particularly strong rationale presented for deletion beyond  and a pretty clear consensus that nobody monitoring AFD wants this page deleted
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ILIKEIT||WP:MUSTBESOURCES||WP:JDL)