Deletion of Sacred Gin

Comment: per  and .  While I can accept on good faith that there may be articles on the subject of this article in the pipeline, until they're actually published we won't know how credible and substantial they are.  The sources already in the article that are from reliable sources (such as the Guardian one), do not appear to cover this distillery in detail, or at all in some cases.  If this business becomes successful and the drink becomes notable, then the article should of course be recreated.  But they're not there just yet
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: Very interesting to see the article like that.  It seems to me that in fact it does therefore meet the requirements of , and should certainly be given more time, as there is obviously a lot happening.  Notability would seem to be established, as this meets the requirements quite clearly. It is not about what seems sufficient to you, it is about Wikipedia's rules.  —Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)