Deletion of Maya Forstater

Comment: If Forstater were a retail worker suing Tesco for wrongful dismissal, her role in said litigation would not establish notability. Her role in a Twitter controversy does not establish notability. . Centre for Global Development lists 4 other visiting fellows: 3 notable women (a former president of Malawi, the director of the WTO, the deputy director of the IMF) and one man (a law expert, CEO, former UN commissioner, former UK special envoy, and former director of DFID) who is apparently not notable. While this comparison may not be strong evidence of non-notability, I believe it does help to establish that this is not someone who had simply been overlooked until now because of her gender. Beware of recentism. Will need improvement if kept, but o amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWSPAPER||WP:N)

Comment: From  "If the event is highly significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article is generally appropriate." The court case is at the heart of a highly significant controversy in the UK, drawing in many people. Nobody has a larger role in it than Forstater.  Moreover, the court case is more than a single event: there was the original case, the controversy over JK Rowling's tweet, and the recent hearing
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: Passes  and I think that this is more than 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:BLP1E)

Comment: per nom - clear  and not notable independent of the legal case. See also: 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:CFORK)