Deletion of Catholic University Law Review

Comment: The clause you cite speaks specifically of high schools (and I know many people disagree with that notion, but that is not the subject here). How does this apply to the CULR? The Catholic University Law School would be inherently notable, but as far as I can see, that would not apply for a journal published by it. Almost any scientific journal has some connection or another with a University, still, if not shown notable, they get deleted. Mind you, I'm at your side (I'm a member of ikiProject Academic Journals and as long as any person who has been on a football field for more than a split second is deemed notable, I cannot see the problem with articles on lesser notable journals - although of course the obvious solution to this would be to tighten the  guidelines). OK, I'm digressing on my pet peeve. In any case, for this journal article to be kept, you'll need some indication of notability. Arguments that have been used in past deletion debates include: how often is it cited (one citation really is nothing here, we're talking hundreds/year), how many libraries world wide carry the journal, or, best of all, are there independent |reliable sources available that discuss the journal
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Help:Watchlist (WP:W||WP:ATHLETE||WP:RS)

Comment: Appears to be a significant journal in its field.  is nonsense -- "Other stuff exists" can indeed be a reasonable argument for keeping, particularly if similar articles have existed for a long time and been exposed to a large group of editors. That's called "precedent". Of course no two articles are exactly alike, but it is a useful comparison to see how well or poorly similar articles have been accepted by the community
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OSE)