Deletion of 2006 Nebraska's 3rd congressional district election

Comment: In furtherance of my merge!vote, allow me to point out . These elections are held every two years, as required by law. And as ROUTINE says, "Wikipedia:Run-of-the-mill|Run-of-the-mill events—common, everyday, ordinary items that do not stand out—are probably not notable." Of course, these elections do not happen every day, but the fact that they are held every two years without fail also points to a common, ordinary occurrence. It's why we automatically have articles on special elections, because they do NOT fall into a ROUTINE sort of standard when it comes to the regular election cycle
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ROUTINE)

Comment: there is zero explanation in the nom for how this fails GNG; there is plainly significant coverage in the article itself that requires no OR to extract the content from the sources. There is also opportunity for expansion, as the race had a lasting impact (see, e.g., https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17448689.2020.1717151 this for a description of its impact on Keystone XL activism and https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/emlj57&div=36&id=&page= this commentary on the legal ramifications of the robocalls -- although these don't establish notability IMO, they do indicate a need for a separate article). The delete and merge arguments are unconvincing; that the parent article is "allowed" to have prose isn't a reason to delete this one, a misreading of  is not a reason to delete (a misreading because passing GNG obviously means that it is not trivial, "run-of-the-mill", "exempt from newsworthiness"—much less entirely based around "planned coverage", since the robocalls etc were not planned coverage...), and that there could be more articles is obviously not a reason to delete this one. And even if the fact that the results were "typical for the average Nebraska's 3rd district election" is a reason to delete (it's not), they were not typical. And that the article could use work is not a reason to delete
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ROUTINE)

Comment: An "average" election for an idividual seat in a national legislature is definitely notable and is deserving of a standalone WP article. There are sufficient sources in the article already to pass . The issues that the nom complains about require article expansion and improvement, not deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)