Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FusionOne
I think some of the arguments forwarded above are flawed, at least as they are phrased--otability|notability is not temporary and therefore neither the lack of new details nor the company being acquired as an asset and ceasing to operate as a recognizable independent entity are argument for deletion, if notability and other standards are initially achieved.  However, there is some question in my mind as to whether the content presently int he article is substantial enough that it will benefit any future readers even to the most minimal extent necessary to justify its existence.  New sourcing might remedy this issue if the company were still in operation and being covered by tech industry press, but this is not the case, and perhaps this is what the previous editors commenting here meant to address
— User:Snow, 05:58, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:N (Wikipedia:Notability)