Deletion of Good Shepherd English School

Comment: This is a secondary school. It didn't used to meet , since it had no references and thus was not |verified, but I have added a couple of sources and it is now verified. It is unfortunate that this debate was linked to from a discussion elsewhere about SCHOOLOUTCOMES, so that since the reopening of the discussion multiple people who dislike the guideline have come here to !vote "delete" as a protest against the guideline, rather than an actual evaluation of the school. (In effect this was a kind of canvassing; what would the response be if this discussion was highlighted at WikiProject Schools instead?) This discussion has become an argument about the guideline rather than a fair evaluation of the school itself, which like virtually all secondary schools IS notable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES||WP:V)

Comment: An |essay with pseudostatistical generalizations about past events is not a prescription for future decisions such that we bypass all of the other policies and guidelines. If there's really a long-standing consensus to keep them all no matter what the circumstances, it needs to be in an SNG. Long-standing consensus is ''not'' that schools get a free pass; it's that most schools have received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject sufficient to satisfy our |notability criteria. There is, however, long-standing ''practice'' of citing  at AfD as though it were an SNG, essentially resting arguments on "other stuff exists" (an "other stuff exists" argument that continuously feeds itself). As this does not appear to have been subject to that coverage, it should not be kept just because it's a school.  Happy to change my !vote if someone has more luck with sources. &mdash
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:OUTCOMES||WP:N||WP:OUTCOMES)

Comment: as a secondary school per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES)

Comment: Personally in have never agreed with, or supported, the nearly automatic grant of notability to schools that is associated with . I recall when this was being applied to elementary (primary) schools as well, before the tide retreated. I can cite AfDs from some years ago where such schools were kept largely on the argument that "all schools are notable", and which were later deleted when the fashion had changed a bit. I think this sort of categorical notability does Wikipedia a disservice, and is not very logical. I would change any consensus that  may represent
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES||WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES)

Comment: SCHOOLOUTCOMES has never been an automatic keep. Each kept school has to pass  (i.e., have RS proof it exists and is a secondary or higher school). I have !voted delete (and the school get deleted) when a school fails 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)

Comment: Per the long-established consensus at . I have also conducted a cleanup
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES)