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 keep. Per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) Sam Sailor ^Talk! 11:15, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Musical clock[edit]

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

Absolutely no references at all. Contains virtually entirely original research and I don't think this is a notable topic for its own article - some of this could be moved to Striking clock but the rest needs to go. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 18:40, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. By the title, The Musical Clock: Musical & Automation Clocks and Watches is an entire book about the topic. Unfortunately, I have no way of accessing the book, but the existence of an entire book on the topic should prove notability. I am trying to verify the rest of the article; the parts that remain unsourced can be trimmed. Altamel (talk) 16:57, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The fact that there are no references is not a reason to delete; it's a reason to add references, which, as Altamel points out, do exist (here's another musical clock book; who would've thought?). As for the WP:OR aspect, the article could always be gutted or revised to the last good version, since there is a way to write this one without using original research. Colonel Wilhelm Klink (^Complaints|_Mistakes) 17:20, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep there are sources presented in this AfD and on the page which establish notability. However, the article did only contain almost all original research, and that should not remain here. I deleted almost every part of the version at the time of deletion nomination. Now that this content is gone, whatever is left can be judged for compliance with notability criteria. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:58, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:BEFORE and WP:HEY. Lots of potential here! Bearian (talk) 18:12, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It took me five seconds to find an image right here at English Wikipedia. Please! Bearian (talk) 18:16, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:26, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:26, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Could be an excellent article on a fascinating subject. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:34, 24 July 2016 (UTC).[reply]
Keep: it won't necessarily be easy to track down sources for expanding this article as some of these books are out of print, but there are certainly sources out there – apart from the two books already mentioned there are also [1], [2] and [3], the last of which includes musical clocks among other musical items, and was produced by the Museum Speelklok in the Netherlands ("speelklok" being Dutch for "musical clock") where you can see their collection of musical clocks. Richard3120 (talk) 21:19, 24 July 2016 (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.