Deletion of Gina Ortiz Jones (2nd nomination)

Comment: to the election page or delete.  only creates a ''presumption'' an article is suitable. Unelected candidates do not have a notability guarantee. I agree this article has better sourcing than most articles for most candidates, but all of the articles talk about how she ''could'' make history - this doesn't pass the ten-year test per . Therefore, I think it's best to redirect. If something else notable happens during the election, or she wins, we can reinstate it easily. Also, there are several keep votes above which suggest we should revisit the article if she loses - these should be struck as failures of , as notability is not temporary
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:RECENT||WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of 'significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article'."   requires significant coverage independent of the subject. It does NOT require that publications taking an interest in the subject should not mention, as a primary hook, that the person is running for elective office
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL)

Comment: I've improved her article with more citations. The subject appears to have received enough significant coverage to satisfy  even if you don't include typical campaign coverage. She received plenty of local and national discussion that included significant discussion about her uniqueness as a candidate before she even won the nomination.https://www.sacurrent.com/the-daily/archives/2018/05/09/keeping-up-with-gina-ortiz-jones-who-wants-to-unseat-congressman-will-hurdhttps://www.expressnews.com/news/local/politics/article/West-Side-native-Gina-Ortiz-Jones-wants-to-create-12905866.phphttps://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/04/more-women-than-ever-are-running-for-office-this-year-7-first-time-house-candidates-explain-why-theyre-running.html If you look her up in Google News, you can see she's receiving far more coverage than is typical for a candidate.https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Gina+Ortiz+Jones%22&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS724US724&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiYtLvO6Z_bAhXiGDQIHcFLAx4Q_AUICigB&biw=1440&bih=780 For example, there are many detailed profiles about her and how her candidacy is unique because if she won she would be the be the first female, first openly gay, first Iraq veteran, and first Flipino-American to take the seat if she wins.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5769083/Lesbian-Filipina-American-Iraq-vet-make-Texan-history-4-times-wins-political-seat.htmlhttps://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gina-ortiz-jones-congress-texas_us_5b043424e4b003dc7e46b984https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/23/primary-results-women-make-history-in-georgia-texas-kentucky-elections.htmlhttps://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/transition/2018/05/23/this-iraq-veteran-could-make-history-in-more-ways-than-one
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: to the election. Candidates do not get into Wikipedia just for being candidates — she has to ''win'' the election and thereby ''hold'' the office, not just run in the election, to be considered notable as a politician, and otherwise is notable only if she already had enough preexisting notability for other reasons to qualify for an article ''independently'' of her candidacy. And the existence of some campaign-related coverage does not give a candidate a free GNG pass that exempts them from having to pass NPOL, either — the volume and depth and range of coverage shown here can ''always'' be shown by ''every'' candidate in ''every'' election ''everywhere'', so if this were all it took then NPOL would ''never'' be applicable ''at all'', because no candidate for any office anywhere would ever ''fail'' to be able to show as much campaign coverage as this. The article can absolutely be recreated in November if she wins the seat, because her notability equation will have changed to a straight NPOL #1 pass that guarantees a Wikipedia article — but nothing here is a good reason, or good enough sourcing, to already get her a Wikipedia article today. The notability test for Wikipedia articles is not |temporary newsiness — it is |will people still be looking for this article ten years from now. Officeholders pass that test, but candidates do not
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS||WP:10YT)