Deletion of Jan Allen

Comment: I have struggled with this nomination. The article itself is factual, NPOV etc, and all statements are supported by independent, reliable sources. What is missing is two in-depth profiles in a major publication that would make it obvious that the subject meets the GNG. I agree that the subject doesn't meet the GNG. Should the article be deleted then? I'm neither comfortable with the rigid application of rules (Wikipedia:5P|Wikipedia has no firm rules,   remember?) nor with the inconsistent application of IAR, where we make exceptions just because, well, we can. I actually like having the article, because it is about someone who is a figure in a the art world where I participate as well, and it helps me put her contributions in context. It is a good thing to have. It adds to "the sum of all human knowledge". It doesn't violate anything in Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not, including Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information and Wikipedia is not a directory. I think Allen meets an aspect of : The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors. Another criterion that can apply is that she has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work, if we can agree that curating is a form of creative work, which I think it is. In aggregate, the sheer number of (yes) mentions show that Allen has been both a subject and participant in the discourse about Canadian art for a very long time. I think that should be enough. Updated  in response to DGG's points below. Ceterum censeo,  must be rewritten
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CREATIVE||WP:CREATIVE)