Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Amsterdam Spirits

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was delete. clear consensus DGG ( talk ) 05:50, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New Amsterdam Spirits[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NOTADVERTISING, lack of reliable sources JMHamo (talk) 15:11, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR (talk) 15:31, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. -- 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR (talk) 15:31, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:32, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:32, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now as it's locally notable at best and although I found links here and there with News, browser and highbeam, we can wait for better coverage. SwisterTwister talk 22:16, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for reasons stated by nominator. There's almost nothing here except advertising material. NewYorkActuary (talk) 18:12, 11 September 2015 (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.