*Oppose I see only two possibilities that would warrant taking the community through a new WP:RM: [1] an IRL change, and/or [2] a change to WP policy (of course: in both cases a significant change that would be relevant in favour of a name change). Rehashing available existing evidence (whether proponents of the inclusion of the maiden name chose to use it at the last WP:RM or not) is not a sufficient reason for a new RM, and it is way too early for a WP:CCC. 
 :Here's a suggestion: work towards stability of the article content first (through reasonable discussion), so that the article doesn't need to be protected every few days or weeks: that at least sets the climate that imho is indispensable for a new RM.