National University station: Source 2 is also deprecated generally unreliable per WP:AOPLACES .  I could not find other sources online.  Please redirect this page to Line 1, Ho Chi Minh City Metro .  Toadspike ( talk ) 10:18, 3 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply  ] 1. A reminder that train stations are not presumed notable simply because they exist (see WP:NTRAINSTATION  ) 2. This is, in fact, a different station from Vietnam National University station in Hanoi.  Toadspike ( talk ) 10:19, 3 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Vietnam .  Shellwood ( talk ) 10:35, 3 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] It is Listed as Generaly Unreliable not Depracated.  😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 ( talk ) 13:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] You are correct, my apologies.  I didn't find out exactly which one the red symbol meant before publishing that comment.  Toadspike ( talk ) 08:05, 6 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 15:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  21:13, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  09:57, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep' the station has been built, will soft open in July with full service in Q4 2024.   I've added a link to support that.  @ Crcolas added a number of links to Vietnam news sites before me.  With greater than two significant sources, should be an easy pass for GNG.  Oblivy ( talk ) 12:36, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Thank you for pointing out the addition of more sources.  However, I stand by my nomination.  The only source with significant coverage is this one.  [57] The rest simply name the station once among a list of all stations on the line, which is not significant coverage, and simply reinforces the point that this should be redirected to the metro line's article.  Toadspike [Talk] 10:51, 19 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] My understanding is that there is no fixed number of sources required for GNG, and there's nothing in WP:GEOLAND that overrides that.  Your deletion rationale was no sources, but now we have an article that is WP:SIGCOV .  Is that not enough?  Oblivy ( talk ) 11:39, 19 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] You conveniently left off the second part of the sentence at WP:N , which states but multiple sources are generally expected.  Trainsandotherthings ( talk ) 12:27, 19 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I was responding to the suggestion that one wasn't sufficient, no intention to mislead.   Note that there are more sources, but only one talks significantly about the subject and the rest are about the train line as a whole.  Oblivy ( talk ) 13:49, 19 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The GNG says " significant coverage in reliable sources ", not "a reliable source".  You acknowledge that only one source has sigcov.  To me that makes it very clear that this subject is not notable.  Toadspike [Talk] 12:12, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Also, GEOLAND only applies to populated places.  Farther down that page is NTRAINSTATION , which clarifies that stations have no inherent notability and the GNG applies.  (Or another SNG, but none apply to this station.)  Toadspike [Talk] 12:15, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: no consensus