Deletion of Jo Rae Perkins

Comment: per , without prejudice against recreation in the future if circumstances change. As always, candidates are not automatically entitled to keep Wikipedia articles just for standing as candidates — and the test that makes one particular candidate more special than other candidates is not just the ability to show that extralocal coverage has ''started'' to exist, it is that the extralocal coverage has ''exploded'' to the point that she already passes the |ten year test for ''enduring'' significance.Basically, the way to demonstrate that a candidate is a special case who deserves an article just for being a candidate is to perform the following thought experiment: assume that she loses the election, and then dies the very next day so that she never has any chance to accomplish anything more notable than running for office and losing. Then ask yourself the question, "given those assumptions, has her candidacy ''already'' made her ''so'' highly famous that she will ''still'' be a household name in ''2030''?" If you can't convincingly answer "yes" to that question, then what you have is not a candidate who has become permanently notable, but a temporarily newsy 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS||WP:10YT||WP:BLP1E)

Comment: to 2020 United States Senate election in Oregon, there is significant coverage not in local media, but that coverage mostly just seems to be a brief flurry around her being an insane conspiracy theorist, meaning that she fails . There is no indication that it will be lasting. If she continues to get coverage to the same degree she has recently, the article can always be recreated. Also, the nominating statement is incorrect, she did not walk back her comments and is still clearly a QAnon cultist
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: Passes . If she was only a political candidate or unsuccessful primary candidate, I would vote delete. As her party's nominee for a major election, she is notable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BASIC)

Comment: Seems enough to me to pass 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Seems to pass  with https://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/2013/11/jo_rae_perkins_us_senate_candi.html local coverage on an old arrest published in 2013, a few hundred words on her by AP News regarding her https://apnews.com/aaf137036f6b416bb5410deb0d3fff8e 2018 senate run,  https://kqennewsradio.com/2020/01/22/jo-rae-perkins-enters-race-for-u-s-senate/ local coverage in January of her entry into the race, and national/international coverage more recently in a slew of articles on her winning the primary
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BASIC)

Comment: passes GNG . As per policy, ''additional'' NPOL considerations not applicable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BASIC)

Comment: to the senate race article - if she loses, she's not notable, which violates our theory of notability and 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)