Deletion of Liz Watson (politician)

Comment: per nom, at least for now, per  and . Skimming United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_Indiana,_2018, similarly-situated otherwise-non-notable primary contenders don't have their own articles, either. If she wins, an article about a Congressman obviously passes  but an otherwise-non-notable person doesn't become so by virtue of contending in or even winning a House primary.- Simon Dodd
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON||WP:NTEMP||WP:GNG)

Comment: per nom and per . "Candidates who ran but never were elected for a national legislature or other national office are not viewed as having inherent notability and are often deleted or merged into lists of campaign hopefuls, such as Ontario New Democratic Party candidates, 1995 Ontario provincial election, or into articles detailing the specific race in question, such as United States Senate election in Nevada, 2010
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:POLOUTCOMES)

Comment: Although she has only won the primary so far, she's received a significant amount of discussion and coverage, including at the national level, and the sourcing of the article passes  for significant discussion in secondary sources
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Her primary election victory has received a LOT of media coverage, from national news sources as well as local.  I think she may just pass 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL)

Comment: and/or '''redirect''' to the election article. People get Wikipedia articles by ''winning'' the ''general'' election and thereby ''holding'' office, not just for being candidates — and the amount of |reliable source coverage being shown here is ''not'' enough to deem her candidacy a special case, because every candidate in all 435 electoral districts across the entire United States (and every candidate in every statehouse district, and every candidate in Canadian elections, and on and so forth) could ''always'' show every bit as much coverage as this. No prejudice against recreation in November if she wins the seat, but nothing here is enough to already deem her encyclopedically notable as of today
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: to article on this House race. Editors who wish to do so can try to change the  guidelines so that major party candidates for the November U.S. House elections get an automatic pass.  However, we do have rules.  And I am not seeing extraordinary coverage of her candidacy, nor am I seeing any notable accomplishment before she ran for Congress, or anything else in terms of her bio or the press coverage that gets her past WP:GNG
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL)

Comment: to United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_Indiana,_2018, per standard practice.  The coverage of her victory in the primary appears mostly local and about the race rather than her, i.e. .  There's no claim of notability other than this run, she does not appear to have held any other elected office
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Run-of-the-mill (WP:MILL)

Comment: not independently notable from her campaign. The question I ask in these instances is, in ten years, if unelected, would she still be notable based on the political coverage received, in order to satisfy the "significant press coverage" prong? At this point, I don't think so per . No problems with the redirect
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: The presence of national coverage of the campaign, which includes biographical details, satisfies me that this is one of those rare cases of a politician who has never held elected office (and whose claim to notability stems entirely from being a candidate for elected office) clearing 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)