Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maia Weinstock
The major-media attention for her Lego judges would clearly and obviously be enough for , except only for the facts that it's |recent and |only a single event. But I think there's enough attention for her past works as well (examples: http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/10/11/brown_wikipedia_edit_a_thon_reaches_out_to_woman_wiki_editors_raises_awareness.html an edit-a-thon in Slate; http://www.mystatesman.com/weblogs/austin-scoop/2014/sep/15/tuesdays-pick-go-ahead-and-do-it/ an art exhibit that she curated in the Austin American-Statesman) to avoid those issues and keep the article. As for some of the earlier comments: it's very difficult to treat as unbiased the opinion of an editor who characterizes Obama's election as an instance of tokenism (there's a different -ism that I think clearly applies to that comment) and we have the usual "it's about an editor of Wikipedia so therefore it's automatically not notable" reactions that, while understandable as a mechanism for preventing us from focusing on our own navels, are not based in policy
— User:David, 00:20, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:NOTNEWS||WP:BIO1E (Wikipedia:Notability)