Deletion of Saint David's School (New York City)

Comment: If I  had seen the CSD I  would have declined it  too  as the article certainly makes claims to  notability. It  has come a very  long  way  since it  was created as a tiny  stub in  2009 and many  editors have contributed to  making  it  a clean school page. The school  appears to  be far more worthy  of mention  than a great  many  primary  school articles (although  of course,  a converse  rationale  is inadmissible). Most  of the  referenced sources however, appear to  be mainly  concerned with  alumni and do  not  support notability  for  the school as their personal  notability  cannot  be inherited. One of the http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F50915FA3C5A117A93C5A9178DD85F478585F9  reliable sources  that may  have more in depth  coverage is behind a pay-wall, while the other http://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/24/style/chronicle-404791.html NYT article lends more weight to  arguments for notability.  My  only serious reserve is that  it  reads a tad promotional, but  this can be rectified - I  might  even have a go  at  it  myself if it  is kept. So  my  overall  opinion  is 'keep
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFF)