Then you need to provide a credible source which provides an explanation why FR was a revolution and other is not, not a Stalin's article from 1918 you provided which is not about that at all. Left-leaning historians often define (a real) revolution as a change in ruling class, based on that definition both FR and OR were the very real revolutions (one was about passing power to bourgeois class, another about passing power to the working class), but if you are using other definitions, please provide them.

If direct speech of executors of coup are not credible source for you, then what I need to provide to convince you? Wikipedia article?

First hand evidence is enough for any court in the world.

I dunno, if the direct speech of say bank robbers claims that it was "account rebalancing" not robbery, is that sufficient?

That is, I don't think history is obliged to take the claims of historical actors at face value.

You are being disingenuously pedantic by making a distinction between synonymous words. From the linked document:

"Уже с конца сентября ЦК партии большевиков решил мобилизовать все силы партии для организации успешного восстания. В этих целях ЦК решил организовать Военно-революционный комитет в Питере"

Which translates to:

"From the end of September, the central committee of the bolshevik party decided to mobilize all party forces for the organization of a successful uprising. To these ends, the central committee decided to organize a Military-revolutionary committee in St. Petersburg"

Also note the reference to the counter-revolutionary plot. For Stalin, the October coup was clearly the continuation of the February revolution.

No, I don't. You need to understand that whole process, started in February 1917, was named "Russian revolution", while October episode was just part of it. They were separated in to two "revolutions" much later.

See [1] for more details.

[1]: https://pikabu.ru/story/ot_revolyutsii_k_perevorotu_i_obratn...

Did you even bother to read the article you linked to? The citations make it quite clear that the terms were synonymous, and it was multiple groups (not just the Bolsheviks) who referred to the October Bolshevik takeover as a revolution.

Yes, I read it. But I taken into account only claims backed by historical sources.