JAY JG said:
We are at the stage where people are indeed adding masses of trivial one-line articles about schools,
I see no evidence of this.
which the school inclusionists immediately describe as a "good stub with potential for organic growth".
This is a reasoned response to the few perfectly good stubs that I've seen listed for deletion, mostly only a few weeks after creation. In general the consensus seems to be against deletion of such stubs, even the tiny and almost useless ones like Mahajana school, about which little of value is known.
It seems from the quotes you have made that Jimbo was saying that we probably shouldn't go around deleting perfectly good stubs about schools. I know of nobody who is suggesting that we accommodate a bot-runner mechanically inserting large numbers of unwanted stubs of any kinds into Wikipedia.
And on a side note, I'm rather suprised to find myself--long classed by some as a ruthless deletionist, described here as an extreme inclusionist.
Described where as "an extreme inclusionist"?
I may have misread your intent in the phrase "it seemed to be explicitly excluding the extremes Tony (and various school inclusionists) are suggesting." My apologies if that is so.