Deletion of Tenby International School, Penang (2nd nomination)

Comment: per . Secondary schools are generally considered to be |notable if its existence is |verified through |reliable sources. This is the common |consensus
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES||WP:N||WP:V||WP:RS||WP:CONSENSUS)

Comment: This seems notable enough. Secondary schools should be ''presumed'' notable, as is custom, unless there is some real, very serious, reason to think they are not. Please review . They are practically snow-keeps. In almost every instance when a secondary school has been brought to AfD, sourcing has been found. I cannot recall a case when there was ever a successful AfD on a secondary school. I'm not saying it has never happened, I simply cannot recall the occasion. It has been this way for years, and this is why we have this consensus. I am a solid deletionist, but even I know when something is a waste of time for everybody. If you add up all the time it took for everyone to respond to this AfD, a whole article could have been written
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:OUTCOMES)

Comment: Fails to satisfy 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: The applicable policy is , which says, "Written rules do not themselves set accepted practice. Rather, they document already existing community consensus regarding what should be accepted and what should be rejected." The existing community consensus, per all deletion discussions for the last few years, is that articles on verifiable high schools should be kept. The fact that the proper documentation of this consensus has been prevented by a small group of editors, including
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:BURO)

Comment: the sources identified in this AfD are sufficient to meet 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ORG)

Comment: The sources cited above don't show notability for the subject.  http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=G0ouAAAAIBAJ&sjid=BnwFAAAAIBAJ&pg=4171,1544864&dq=tenby-international-school+penang&hl=en This source is in the Advertorial section as a paid advertisement, which is not a reliable source.  The others http://thestar.com.my/education/story.asp?file=/2006/11/12/education/20061111123944&sec=educationhttp://thestar.com.my/education/story.asp?file=/2006/12/17/education/16315728&sec=educationhttp://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/5/23/north/21336867&sec=northhttp://thestar.com.my/metro/story.asp?file=/2010/5/26/north/6327253&sec=north are |routine coverage by a local paper; noting that "registration is open at a school" and "a teacher won an award who happens to be associated with the school" does not contribute to the notability of a subject; I think 's advice would be prudent here: "Where coverage is only local in scope, consider adding a section on the organization to an article on the organization's local area instead.''"  Barring a possible language barrier, I'm not finding any reliable sources that show notability for the subject, and it appears to fail 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ROUTINE||WP:NGO||WP:ORG)