SPUI writes:

"What if "keep all schools" is the reason the person is voting to keep?"

Then the editor making that claim (or indeed the mirror claim "delete, there is nothing notable about a box with students") should have convincing arguments to support his ambitious thesis. Since the propositions are not widely accepted on Wikipedia it's a somewhat weak reason for keeping any particular school. Surely it would be more sensible to address the reason why *this* particular school article should be kept, or to point out that since school deletion debates almost invariably end in the article being kept (currently 87%) the proposition that schools are *not* notable seems to be gathering such a lot of counter-evidence that those proposing to delete a school article had probably better have a good reason to support their request in the case of this school--that they might argue that perhaps the school is a pre-school in a country where such institutions are not regulated, or information about the school is extremely difficult to verify .

I don't want to start an argument about schools here, and I've moved on from the schools debate after five months intensive involvement, so I won't post any more on the subject. I simply want to address SPUI's point about wanting to keep a whole class of article on principle, and how one should as a good Wikipedian seek to convince one's fellow editors that there is some merit to one's views.