Deletion of Koto Okubo (2nd nomination)

Comment: A few edits before this one, an editor completed a on-admin closure of this AFD.  It was contested.  Regardless of the merits of the close (or lack thereof), when an editor in good standing contests a non-admin closure, it means that the non-admin closure is ''in and of itself'' contentious and the discussion should remain open until an admin closes it.  Unless this discussion qualifies for a "speedy close" now or in the future, it is unlikely that any admin will close it before the normal 7-day discussion period ends
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: Mrs. Okubo was the world's oldest woman for a period of time and was recognised as such by Guinness World Records, among others. Her name was revealed in September 2012 by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare and, as a consequence, reports about her, including biographical information, began to emerge/surface immediately - as evidenced by  these reports, http://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXNASDG13069_U2A910C1CC0000/ and http://www.sankeibiz.jp/econome/news/120914/ecc1209141455001-n2.htm, from September 2012 - as such, they prove that more biographical information is readily available and also augment her notability. On top of that, if making it to the status of World's Oldest Woman, backed up by a GOVERNMENT agency as a source, is not notable enough in itself, then this does not bode well for other WOM/WOW/WOP candidates - whereas the notability they have received in worldwide media press coverage has surely deserved them a notable status. My point is: the feat of reaching an old age can, in itself, be considered as deserving of notability, with a Jeanne Calment being the posterchild example, of course. For Koto Okubo, as well, her name will always remain in the record books - and thus will always carry some sense of notability, albeit that biographical information on her might be more difficult to find as Wikipedia is a WESTERN-oriented organisation with most of its members not fluent in Japanese. Last of all, it is disappointing to read that members of the WOP group in this encyclopedia are stereotyped as "fancruft" or pinned in a corner with remarks as "who gives a shit?" To me, this comes across as downright condescending as well as serious POV-pushing and is thus in violation with . As far as I am concerned, the decision in this AfD nomination should be made on the basis of objectivity - "fancruft" and "who gives a shit?" don't point towards that
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)