Deletion of Nundah railway station, New South Wales

Comment: a few points to note: 1. We usually keep railway station articles, except where they are halts with no established platform or station or there's a complete lack of reliable sources or history. 2. The claim that it has now closed does not mean it isn't notable. 3. As a general proposition it's untrue that places like this don't have sources - there are https://search.sl.nsw.gov.au/primo-explore/fulldisplay?docid=SLNSW_ALMA21146290990002626&context=L&vid=SLNSW&lang=en_US&search_scope=E&adaptor=Local%20Search%20Engine&tab=default_tab&query=any,contains,stations%20and%20tracks books like John Forsyth's that give detailed histories of New South Wales railway stations including opening dates and history about what happened; additionally, state railway historical societies (e.g. https://arhsnsw.com.au/ ARHSNSW usually publish books about the history of railway lines which include the history of their stations). I don't know what's out there on Nundah, but the point I make is that most of the sources are likely to be offline and the claim there's no coverage by external sources and an automatic fail of GNG is not something that can be disproved easily (the overlap with Nundah railway station|a similarly named railway station in Brisbane means it is even harder to find sources). 4. Even despite all the above, there's a clear and appropriate redirect here for Main North railway line, New South Wales, the line on which the station stands, and that |must be considered prior to deletion. If sources can't be found that is clearly the appropriate way to fix this
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:ATD)

Comment: I note per  railway stations that aren't notable are generally redirected to the line or system they are on. I'm happy to add some sourcing to the Main North Line article if that is the outcome (as it should be
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:RAILOUTCOMES)

Comment: Was going to suggest a merge to Nundah, New South Wales as often is the case with smaller railway stations in NSW, but is no such article and seemingly no such place exists. As the article is entirely reliant on a , then delete with no prejudice it being created in the future if properly sourced
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:SPS)

Comment: re|Deus et lex}} For all of the talk and your attacking editors who disagree with you, not one attempt has been made to improve the article itself. Redirecting an uncited article isn't the solution, what it needs is to be cited with  and expanded to be considered |notable, all it states at the moment is its opening and closing years. The AfD has been running for a week, without a clear consensus, so will probably remain open for another week. So there is ample time for it to be expanded if cites exist that will enhance its chance of survival
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:GNG)

Comment: re|Vusutonary}}, |AfD is not cleanup and it isn't assessed on the state of the article - the question is whether the page it is notable. I have been trying to show that it is is and have put forward sources that show that. I'd be grateful if you could take that into account rather than just telling me to clean up the page
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTCLEANUP)