Deletion of Sir William Stanier School

Comment: Schools are not inherently notable. They need to pass GNG and {{u|Priyanjali singh}} such articles often get unnoticed, and "they do not pass notability". You should try  regarding such schools, and if you find |significant coverage, then source the article - otherwise get them AfDed. Wikipedia is not a directory.  says it clearly that "At one time, secondary schools were assumed notable unless sources could not be found to prove existence, but following a February 2017 RFC, secondary schools are not presumed to be notable simply because they exist, and are still subject to WP:N and WP:ORG.". Now that's 3 years before. A school, "secondary school" failing GNG doesn't deserve a place here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE||WP:SIGCOV||WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES)

Comment: Actually #3 confirms that Secondary schools are no longer assumed as notable without refs, as per any WP:ORG. I would argue that the Chronicle article is WP:Basic enough to show notability of the schools origins - there is plenty more news stories, especially about poor attainment and being in requiring improvement since 2016 - WP:Before - I therefore would say '''Keep''' with work
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES)

Comment: Fails  and . Created in 2007 by a , the article lacks  demonstrating any widespread or lasting notability. Has only routine,  coverage
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NORG||WP:SPA||WP:SIGCOV||WP:RUNOFTHEMILL)

Comment: secondary schools aren't presumed to be notable and this one lacks the significant in-depth coverage in multiple reliable sources required by  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NORG)