Knowledge talk:WikiProject Philately/Archive 7

1293:

the copyrights. -- In any event if the USPS was as concerned and as rigid in their thinking as the guardians of WP 'fair-use' policy are it seems they would have made some sort of mention of the subject of size and res'. Not even a cursory reference is made by the USPS to the idea. That and the idea that no private or commercial copyright holders would be compromised if these images were somewhat larger and clearer when used in the philatelic pages at WP is what I will appeal to WP with. I am still doing a bit of research and doing 'test runs' with this idea. I hope to have a draft of the appeal written up in a day or so, and when I do I will run it by here so you guys can take one more swipe at it, or perhaps so you can add something that might also help with wording the appeal. This is not to say that your criticisms and doubts do not help, as they indeed have.

815:. As indicated in these examples, it is accepted that fair use should include using a copyright stamp in a Knowledge article about the stamp itself or in an article discussing the stamps of a country. At the other end of the spectrum is using a stamp purely as illustration of its subject, such as Elvis, which is not acceptable. In between these uses, it is not always clear cut. For example, using a stamp to illustrate a statement in a non-philatelic article that "Elvis's image has appeared on postage stamps" is probably not appropriate (as the image is not required to follow the point), but it might be if the stamp itself is discussed in the article and the image is needed to understand the discussion, e.g., "Elvis appeared on a stamp of the Netherlands with a peculiar lurid look which resulted in the stamp being withdrawn." 1173:

they do at all) as no one is being compromised as might someone whose 'media picture' or some such is being displayed clearly here at WP. Stan pointed out if they allow one sort of image to be larger than other types of iamges, others might complain, however, in the other cases, as far as I know, all involve private/commercial images, unlike those of the USPS. And unlike other images, those of the USPS are produced with tax dollars, and seems that they ought to be allowed in the public domain in the same manner as the other US stamp images to begin with. This would seem to be the definitive difference between US stamp images and other images. As I said, just an exercise. It's unfortunate that more than 30 years of US government stamp issues are restricted in such a manner.

1349:-- In the interest of improved access, esp to those with impaired eyesight, perhaps the appeal can also make reference to this idea (larger print/image), as stamp images in particular are small and often have many details in the design that can not be discerned without magnification, as is the case with the Viking Mission issue. Almost all of the details of the design can not be discerned, making reference to them in the article sort of futile. If it were not for the extending soil sampler, the Mars probe would barely be recognizable. Also, the print along the lower side of the image is barely readable. As it is, the blurred image of the Viking probe almost looks as if someone heaped a load of junk onto the structure. 1021:

avoid paying postage (a lot of time and effort to save a few cents), I don't see why WP would be concerned there. Unlike the copyright holders of box covers, etc, the USPS has given permission to use such images for educational purposes without any restrictions on size and resolution. It is on that premise I would base my appeal. However, I am slowly resigning to the reality that my concerns here are just one more among the many others. I was hoping that some sort of appeal could be submitted in the case of images of USPS issues, as such restrictions are indeed an impediment to those who wish to author philatelic references that are complete. Oh well, thank you once again for your time and effort here.

1113:

be compromised by relaxing such limits on size and res'. It would seem this is the definitive distinction that separates stamp images from most of the other types. ie.paintings, celeb' photos, album covers, media box covers etc. Also, as the USPS is a branch of the federal government, anything that it issues is, once again, distinctly in a class apart from those other commercially and privately owned images. As Ww2censor mentioned, and at this point I have no reason to doubt this, it probably won't be successful, but it would be interesting to see their reasoning for any opposition regarding these points outlined nonetheless.

3707:. The redundant Lincoln category was perhaps created by a sloppy user who might be lazy or ignorant enough not to check the existing topical stamp categories. Re "hundreds(!!) of categories for philately", I don't see a big problem here. Yes, some of them may be redundant, but as soon as this is detected, such categories are merged, as is the case of two Lincoln categories we were just witnesses of. However, we have a robust overall categorization system for philately on Commons. And I believe by-year categories are a must on Commons, since this concept is widely used for other topics, just look at 1006:

hundreds of thousands of non-free images, WP is a handy target for any disgruntled copyright holder that wants to sue it out of existence, and there are thousands of uploaders who want non-free images on WP, no matter whether it's legal or moral, and no matter what the cost. So they spoil it for everybody, and if we make an exception for one case, then all the others howl about they should have an exception too, and we're back to chaos again. (I worked on fair-use cleanup a couple years ago, and so my own talk page archives have some examples of how nasty people can get about it.)

1308:

concoct scenarios of massive RIAA-style lawsuits, bankruptcy of the foundation, and the shutdown of WP. Also note that it's not actually in the interest of copyright holders to be clear about what they will go along with as fair use - no lawyer would advise you to preannounce that you will do nothing if the egregious violation is only 299px instead of 300px across. Also thinking like a lawyer, copyright violations can make handy leverage for what one really wants - for instance, to try to get unflattering content removed from the USPS article. Paranoiacs worry about that too. :-)

4220: 947:

replaced by any other non stamp image of Viking. As long as the stamp is discussed in relation to the image, the image is again justified. The image size is approximately 293k because of the size of the image, not because of its resolution, which is low. To my surprise, the image came out quite clear regardless, so apparently, ultra high res' is not required to obtain a good image of a stamp, unless of course you want to zoom in and examine the paper fiber. So thar' she blows! The image is up on the

987:

other uses, without such self-defeating restrictions in the first place. Are the restrictions set in stone, or would a (united) effort to allow clearer images be in vain? Seems to me that stamp images would be the definitive exception to the resolution / size restrictions, esp since the image size is inherently small to begin with. Also, by main space article, do you mean that the image can only be used in its own article, not in a section of an article such as the one in question? The article

784:'replaceability =' Also, if the 1978 Viking Mission postage stamp is uploaded in this 'fair use' capacity it can only be used in a specific article (which must be specified in fair use rationale beforehand). Am not sure whether or not the stamp may be discussed in a topographical capacity. Apparently the Viking issue can be used as an example about the subject of 'space exploration on stamps' in general, but can not be used as an illustration for a discussion of the Viking satellite itself. 1581:

themselves are not proper names. ie.post office, constitution, president, postage, but in the former examples they are. Before changing the title back using a capital I thought I would confer with you to inform you of my reason. Also I am doing so because I would like not to have the 'redirect' note appear under the title when the page is accessed, as this page is linked up to a fair number of pages with the link/title spelled with a capital 'P'. Thanks for looking out.

1205:

an issue to take up with the copyright office so I may as well howl at the moon on that note. Still I hope an appeal can be made to WP on the basis that the USPS is not concerned with size limitations and that no private or commercial copyright holder would be compromised by WP offering clear images of these stamps in its philatelic pages. Call me naive and overly optimistic, but it still wouldn't hurt to try. After all, changes have been made before.

31: 4286: 2413:

I have split feelings about including commercial addresses altogether as it would allow an unscrupulous vendor to upload images, with the commercial sources/link, rendering the file in effect a form of advertising and solicitation. -- On the other hand, if we bar commercial sources altogether, we cut ourselves off from a vast source of stamp/cover images that would seldomly or never be found in other places. --

845:

have good photos of Viking already? But if one looks closer, there are lots of spheres in the sky reminiscent of McCall's work (was he the designer?), and the arm is positioned for extreme perspective - is the depth to punch up the image, or to emphasize the collection aspect of the mission, or what? In a way, *in*accurate aspects of a stamp image are more likely to be good justifications for its inclusion.

1569: 860:

section or a "Viking Mission in popular culture" to a general article about the program. . You might say something like "The US government issued postage stamps to promote the program. One stamp, issued in 1978, depicts an impossibly huge Viking lander on a tiny Mars. The stamp was beautifully engraved and printed in many colors, including an inaccurate (in space) blue sky."

5016: 3120:"...a member of the International Internet Preservation Consortium, an on-demand archiving system for webreferences (cited webpages and websites, or other kinds of Internet-accessible digital objects), which can be used by authors, editors, and publishers of scholarly papers and books, to ensure that cited webmaterial will remain available to readers in the future." 3125:

available. By using WebCite in addition to the original link, the source will never be lost. This is particularly relevant I think to contentious matters and ephemeral pages like philatelic ones that are created by hobbyists on free space before disappearing without notice when the collector changes his ISP, GeoCities for example where many pages were lost.

534:

Wiki' I would be interested in approaching them with the issue and request to include/use such images. If you know of any preferable way/person to approach them with this I would certainly be interested and most appreciative. By not allowing images after 1978, they are blocking more than 30 years of postage images from their archives!

1513:

topic to keep. If we start adding one country's stamp/postal history link, why should we not add another few, or a dozen, or maybe even all of them? It could be the start of a very slippery slope and as GWillHickers has said "No one was saying that 'everything' in philately should be added". Where do we start and where do we stop?

3489:. The phrase "this is a survey" does not seem to be encyclopedic and sounds too trivial for an English Knowledge article (though it could be OK on Simple English Knowledge). Contrary to that, summarizing the key points is what we should seek to write in the lead, since a distinct definition line would be impossible to compose for 2461:). This is because every Commons page has the File history section with the Date/Time field meaning that on this date and at this time the file was uploaded from a source (i.e. eBay in our case) and, of course, was available there at the time of uploading, if even now it disappeared. The latter concept is somewhat similar to the 513:

stricter than strictly necessary, but even with the restrictions, there are thousands of dubious uploads every single day, including entireties of movies, records, etc, enough to get WP shut down if they're not dealt with. The legal status of currency, as with stamps, is all over the place, I don't know much about that.

3680:, come to be created in the first place? While I have always acknowledged inaccuracies and outright mistakes in using Knowledge's redundant and disorganized category structure please be reminded that the greater and far more serious mess here is obviously one that was the result of various editors who have created the 1820:"If we start adding one country's stamp/postal history link, why should we not add another few, or a dozen, or maybe even all of them? It could be the start of a very slippery slope and as GWillHickers has said "No one was saying that 'everything' in philately should be added". Where do we start and where do we stop?" 830:

isn't being used to illustrate the Viking like some photo that could replace it could, it is being displayed to show the accurate depiction. Would this arrangement fly? Also, the article is about space exploration history on stamps. Would the image be allowable on that premise alone? (almost) at wit's end.

4065: 3322:

This format is awkward, especially given the lengthy titles for these articles. The self-referrential aspect isn't consistent with other encyclopedic articles. It's also unncessary as it's obvious from the title of the article what the nature of the article is. But perhaps most compelling, this is

3124:

Its free and quick and no registration is required. To capture a page just insert the url and an email address (any email address) in the online form. Even in my short Knowledge career it is surprising how many of the external web pages I have linked to or used as references in articles are no longer

2324:

Here's an interesting development. I attempted to use an Ebay address in a link, above, just now, but when I attempted to save the message I received a WP warning about using an Ebay address, which is blacklisted. Another important consideration. When listing a commercial address in the source info'

1833:

page, would not only bring more exposure to these pages but would also help to promote the study and invite more people into the fold with perhaps any contributions they may have. If there is common consensus would adding a section with a list or central index of the various Postal history pages here

1051:

John I don't want to seem mean or over-critical but it seems you just don't like wikipedia's fair-use policy and instead of working with it or trying to understand it, you would prefer to change it which might be nice. You also don't seem to understand that wikipedia policy does not allow educational

844:

In the case of the Memin Pinguin stamp for instance, no textual description can do justice to what is (to the USian eye) an extreme stereotype, so it's easy to justify. By comparison, the Viking stamp initially seems kind of uninteresting - if the image is accurate, then what use is it to WP when we

829:

In the case of the Viking Mission 1978 issue, would it be 'Wiki-Legal' to give general back ground info' of the Viking mission and 'then', to justify using the stamp image simply say.. 'In 1978 the US Post office issued a stamp with an accurate depiction of the Viking Satellite.' Mind you, the stamp

3421:

I invented the "this is a survey" phrasing, at least partly because I wanted to follow the then-recommendation of always repeating the title in the lede, but have never liked it. I agree that the three key phrases should have links, but if anybody has a more elegant phrasing, I'd be glad of it. (I

2882:

Can I restate my opposition to changing the UK stamps on Wikimedia to by year. They work well by reign and in fact there are only a handful of stamps in each of these categories. Also most QEII stamps are still under copyright so this would result in a large number of empty categories in the last 50

2821:

I will think about that. Regarding Wikimedia categories for British stamps I have to point out that UK collectors always think in terms of the reigns of monarchs, which is how it is currently organised and I think I renamed some of them to make that more consistent a while ago. These reigns could be

2412:

This raises more questions. What about other commercial addresses? It would seem that in a matter of time these addresses would become obsolete also. On that basis should all commercial sources be barred? It would be interesting to see how may stamp images in commons come from commercial sources. --

1112:

I am sure policy has changed numerous times throughout Knowledge's history when it was merited. Just for the exercise, I will submit an 'appeal' of sorts that addresses the subject of size limitations regarding images of 1978+ US postage, esp since there are no copyright holders out there who would

1082:

Am sorry I gave you the impression that I want to dodge policy. Yes, you are correct in that I am obviously not pleased with the 'fair-use' policy regarding stamp images. Was just trying to find out if the points I brought up would amount to something that someone could approach policy makers with,

1020:

I can understand the concern of copyright holders worrying that people might 'capture' images at WP and not purchase them. But in the case of stamp images, they are no longer available at the P.O.. Even if they were, unless the party in question is going to use the image in a counterfeit capacity to

551:

is pretty much set in stone. The thought experiment is "can I print the image on a t-shirt and sell it?". You can do this with any commons image, but not with recent USPS images - in fact one of the motivations for the USPS-related provision in the 1977 act was so that they did own the artwork they

283:

Likewise. "Niassa Company" seems like an anachronism constructed from the modern name of the province, which dates from long after the company's dissolution. Don't use modern online Britannica as a reference! They've been quietly borrowing from WP; it's been a little bit of a shock to see some of

4400:

with much common ground. The latter is the more developed article but it covers more than just postage stamps so I think it should have the title of the former; and the former should be merged into it. Is there any good reason why there should be two articles: e.g., has this been discussed before

3513:

Yes, it would be nice to have a better standard developed for the placement of categories. As most of my uploads are US stamp images with a historical theme and while in the process of fixing source and license information I am trying to get the categories in line with some sort of standard indeed.

3036:

I think even the UK stamps should have by-year subcategories, and the by-monarch idea seems good too. Even though the number of stamp issues in some years may be small, we're starting to see multiple copies of particular stamps, to illustrate variations, postmarks, etc. There have also been a few

1512:

has been placing more "see also" links in several articles to pages he has recently created which could easily be interpreted as promotion of his own wikiwork. While some of these links may be appropriate, the ones added to "postal history" were in my opinion, not closely enough associated with the

1292:

Careful.. I said that "I don't quite understand how these images could not be considered government issues per US copyright office claim", ...esp since they are paid for with tax dollars. ie.If they are not works of the gov, then whose works are they? I don't doubt for a minute that the USPS holds

1204:

Obviously this topic can not so easily be put into one box. If the USPS is a gov agency, headed by a cabinet secretary, and its images are produced with tax dollars, I don't quite understand how these images could not be considered government issues per US copyright office claim. But that would be

1097:

I agree that our fair use policy seems overly restrictive for stamps, and let's be honest, there is no postal organization in the world that would actually insist that WP take down some non-free stamp image. But the current compromise was so hard-won, after years of internal fighting, that it would

986:

At the present resolution, the image details, which are referred to in the article are not discernable. Doesn't 'fair-use' allow for a resolution / size which permits the image to be seen clearly? Don't quite understand the rigid restrictions, esp since the USPS allows the image for educational and

859:

There is no reason why a stamp design cannot be discussed on a "non-philatelic" page and a fair use image be included to supplement the discussion. As Stan points out, you would need some discussion of the stamp's design or appearance. Just as an example, you might add a "Viking Mission on stamps"

655:

but even this English language wiki's fair use criteria goes beyond that accepted in law because unfortunately this encyclopaedia does not allow educational only use because part of the foundations mission is to: "develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain." Any use of

512:

Many countries don't have a legal concept of fair use, Germany for instance. So the idea is that as a global resource, commons should only have images that are allowed in all countries (yes, there are flaws in the idea, as there is no obstacle to Germans looking at en: images :-) ). WP is perhaps

443:

encounter such images at the Smithsonian Postal Museum, Ebay and other places. -- After a little investigating and to my surprise I discovered that permission is not required if these images are used for educational purposes or in such a fashion that is used to display them at places like Ebay. --

248:

I don't think it's different in Portuguese to English, as on a 1921 issue the name of the company is give as "Companhia do Nyassa". Possibly the confusion arises because the province in Northern Mozambique was Niassa? It could be that it's a local / foreign issue, rather than a Portuguese / English

3885:

I changed the auto-archiving from 250 days to 120 days; 8 months just seem way too long to keep any discussions live. I don't recall when or who set this up and if there was any agreement on this topic but if an issue have not been addressed in 4 months I doubt they will ever be discussed further.

2630:

On "unscrupulous" commercial vendors, keep in mind that they are making irrevocable donations of images, so it seems like a fair trade, like PBS sponsors getting their names and slogans mentioned at the beginning of the program. If donations turn out to be profitable due to people following links

1828:

A good question. If there were that many pages on postal history with respect to various individual countries this might be a concern, however, perhaps I'm mistaken, there are not that many. If it got to a point where the 'See also' section became flooded with such links, then, at that point some

1307:

Look up references to "copyright paranoia", which should give you some insight into what drives the decisionmaking. It's very rare that any copyright holder ever objects to an image on WP, but we have hundreds of thousands that *could* be objected to. So left to themselves, people's imaginations

1172:

they occur, however, I don't think the size of the image would amount to anything in the way of such a violation. Yes, I know there is a 'one-size-fits-all' restriction on all 'fair-use' images, however as I indicated I would still like to see how they rationalize it regarding gov stamp images (if

302:

I would go with Nyassa because when I do a google books search "Nyassa Company" and "Niassa Company" limited to full and preview books I see that Nyassa comes up more often (373 compared to 13 actual results of modern publications) and I presume that early 20th century official publications can be

3628:

and alike. Ideally, this upper category should not contain stamps with historical persons depicted on them. It should be used for stamps showing certain events in the history of the United States but not portraits of single persons. Also, I would exclude stamps depicting Christopher Columbus from

2735:

While we don't have loads of UK stamps uploaded to the commons, if we follow the US or Canadian models, stamps should be in the year sub-categories and not in the parent category unless they just don't fit. The categorising of the UK stamps could well do with reorganising perhaps in an individual

1580:

Hi Michael, I noticed you removed one of Caps' in the title 'U.S. Presidents on U.S. postage stamps'. in particular, the 'P' in Postage, per proper names. My thinking is that as 'U.S. President', U.S. Post Office, or U.S. Constitution are proper names so too is 'U.S. Postage'. The words taken by

493:

Hi Stan, Thanks for the sobering clarification. Here it is more than ten days later and no one has elected to remove the Viking mission issue yet, not that I doubt some one will eventually. What is the concern about having 'fair-use' images in Commons?? It seems there ought to be some exceptions

442:

Up until now it was my understanding that only images of U.S. Postage issued before Jan.1, 1978, and hence in the Public Domain, were permitted to be displayed here at Knowledge, and that those issued after this time were not without special permission from the USPS. Yet from time to time I would

5001:

Hi all. I found this on my talk page and have responded accordingly at the deletion page. As it directly concerns a WP:PHIL article, please consider the nomination and decide if you wish to comment. You need to bear in mind that the eventual decision may create a precedent re other philatelic

2754:

is in and that is not even a proper stamp (or an essay for that matter). I have my doubts about that list however as it seems to be developing into an alternative catalogue that is 1) not really viable and 2) more suitable for WikiBooks? Has anyone the nerve to change it to Notable Stamps of the

1005:

Stamps make up a microscopic percentage of the fair-use images on WP; most of the non-free images are going to be media box covers, paintings, celebrity head shots, etc; the resolution needs to be low enough that people won't forego buying the copyrighted image in favor of copying from WP. With

533:

it was in on the page. -- If using images of postage issued after 1978 is ok with the USPS (so long as such use is educational) I don't quite understand why 'Commons would restrict them, esp since they already allow pre 1978 images there. If this is just a matter of appealing to policy makers at

478:

is our small collection of fair-use US stamps; basically you have to write a rationale, and the article has to talk about the stamp's design or appearance in some way. Even then, hardcore free-image editors will still find excuses to delete fair-use images, so it's not something you can count on

1267:

If you want to pursue this, that's great, but you might benefit from the following. First, you say you don't understand how images "produced with tax dollars" can possibly be copyright. The answer is that Congress, pursuant to Article I, Section 8, Clause 8, of the Constitution, enacted a law

3917:

I set up the archiving bot just yesterday. I picked a long period for a first pass, intended to clear out everything from before this year, and figured to reset it today for a shorter period. Which you've already done. You might want to start a new archive page for 2010; if so, just change the

946:

After heeding the valuable advice obtained here at the project and after scouting around I think (and hope) I hit on the right approach, which seems, after all, rather simple and straightforward. It is now my understanding that the image is justified because it is a stamp image, and can not be

783:

I was checking out the upload requirements for 1978+ postage images and found out that a "fair use" rationale form or template must be completed on the upload page. -- Am a bit in the dark here. Am not sure what to enter after the equal sign ie. 'low resolution =' and am not quite clear about

752:

on Commons; it's hosted on Knowledge only and only for use as fair use in that article. If you're confused as to where an image is hosted, click on it, and you will go to a page with the image and text. If the image is on Commons, it will state "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. The

3089:

Per Stan's suggestion categorising by year and by reign seems like a good idea. However, some reasonable editors will look at what categories are used on similar images, through some users adding a stamp still won't add both, so periodical cleanup will be inevitable as is the case even now.

382:

I've expanded the article and I think, from reading up on these things, it qualifies to be a Do You Know candidate, so I think I've added it there correctly. I've also, with some help, managed to upload some scans to the commons site. Any tinkering anyone wants to do to the article would be

3684:, some of which are obviously redundant and unnecessary. Many dozens of these categories only contain one image. For Canada stamps (and other countries) it looks like someone is trying to make a category for each and every year: Stamps of Canada, 1926, '1927, '1928, '1929, '1930, '1931... 1347:"In the USA, the United Kingdom, and several other countries, it is legal to produce alternate versions (for example, in large print or braille) of a copyrighted work to provide improved access to a work for blind and visually impaired persons without permission from the copyright holder." 951:

page. -- If there is other info that can be included in that section which helps to further justify the use of the stamp, please include it on the page, or at least bring it to my attention here. Thank you for all your help and esp your patience for this tenderfoot editor. -- John -- aka

585:

depends on the context the image (or other media) is used in. That is, something that can be used on one page as fair use would be a copyright violation on another page. Also, fair use does not allow for the storage of material on a general media database such as Commons. This means that

312: 308: 304: 4117:

I got this undeleted and found a number of stamps that could be included, now listed under external links. I'm not really interested in it, though, I was just fixing the inconsistency in deletions that happened. So if you want this article to stay around, now's the time to make sure.

753:

description on its description page there is shown below." You can go from that page to Commons. If the image is not on Commons, there will be no such statement. If it is a fair use image only, an explanation justifying fair use should be on that (Knowledge) page. Hope this helps.

1083:

and as I am indeed a new-comer to editing thought also that if I first 'contested' policy before a few seasoned editors I could get an idea of whether or not such an undertaking would be practical. Please understand that the last thing I want to do is go against rules and policy.

1787:

On another note, yes, when I add links to the pages I create I am indeed trying to promote 'my page', as I am sort of proud of them, even though they are relatively simple works, but foremost I am trying to promote philately here at WP, hopefully in a way that is not obtrusive.

4085:

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as

284:

my WP photos show up in their articles (properly credited, that's not an issue). The citation of the map in Hewitt's book is misleading, since the *text* of the book uses "Nyassa Company", and the one inconsistent reference on a map somehow managed to get by the proofreaders.

1517:

states the situation well and covers other points I fully endorse. Categories are there to contain pages of more general related links. If we accept the links GWillHickers added, I can also see there being suggestions that links are US-centric and don't take a worldview.

1133:

is a "branch" of the goverment (actually, it's an independent agency) is irrelevant; it can claim the same copyright protection as anyone else. Nor are you going to get anywhere on the size of images; that limitation applies across the board to all fair use images.

901:. What does that mean? Essentially some of Ecphora's prose would not be considered as "contextually significant" because it only tells us that the stamp was issued and adds some production and design related details so such a non-free stamp images will most likely fail 2915:

But there is no problem to be solved. Have you actually checked how many images are involved here? Apart from Victoria the highest is 7. And unless each monarch conveniently died on 31 December you will have major confusion for each year when there are two monarchs.

747:

Commons and Knowledge are different "places" and have different rules, which are discussed above. As explained above, Commons does not recognize fair use; everything on Commons must be freely useable by anyone for any purpose. The image of the Alice Paul stamp is

3828:

I agree. I had thought to move in that direction but for now I'm seeing what we have and what we lack. For example, there is no country survey of France yet unless it's under another category somewhere. Michael, thank you for your kind words. :-) Regards.

2468:

concept on WP. Hope you understand what I am talking about. In conclusion, I just want to assure you that there is no fear in providing a web link to the files you upload, including eBay, as long as you honestly indicate the appropriate sources for your files.

1272:. Second, you state that USPS "is not concerned with size limitations". That might be true, or it might not. The USPS permission page doesn't expressly state that. It doesn't discuss size of images at all and it has that troubling "generally" in " 606:), however, goes beyond fair use and I think amounts to a world-wide free license for its post 1977 stamps. That license, however, is limited to specific uses and has restrictions. For this reason, it is still unacceptible on Commons as stated in 3783:

First of all, I would like to welcome BlackJack who is back on the project pages. Hope you, BlackJack, will help us in resolving few problems we currently experience in the articles created and edited within the framework of WikiProject Philately.

2607:

in the Source field of your uploaded file Information template (where 1234567890 could be a number of a particular eBay listing), I hope you can easily avoid indicating a direct web link to an eBay page on Commons. For example, you want to upload

2046:

I feel a little silly now. I had no idea there were so many postal history pages. Don't know why I didn't notice the collapsed menu-bar before. Btw, here's a 'philatelic salute' to the party or parties who put all of those pages on the 'map'.

2572: 2453: 4068:. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at 3066:

Well, not all users have now even a clear understanding of by-country, by-year and by-topic (not to mention others) categories. So, periodical cleanup would be necessary for UK stamps as some of us do now anyway for miscategorized stamps.

909:"critical commentary" about the stamp itself not about the subject of the stamp. However, Ecphora suggests some useful reasons that might be acceptable, such as mention of awards or design errors. The question you need to ask yourself is: 3382:

Suggested that I bold some of the ones I have done which I did but I think you may be right about the bolding Ecphora. It is also a little repetitious but that first sentence serves an important purpose in enabling a link to be made to

2602:

May I provide you with one more helpful little thing, if you are going to become a seasoned Commons and WP user? I found a very convenient Commons template for eBay uploads, though so far it has been in a minor use. If you insert a tag

803:. One of the requirements is that the image be at low resolution. On the "Low resolution=" you should enter "yes" and images of 20-40kb seem to be acceptable. More information on fair use criteria for postage stamps is found on the 3743:

with the project. RAPID has nothing at all to do with mail delivery - the only people able to locate a property via its RAPID id are emergency services. I don't want to remove another project's tag without consultation, so here I am.

2527:. This template was specifically designed for Knowledge. You should understand that Commons and Knowledge ARE different resources and websites, and they have different guidelines and policies. Please read what is said about Knowledge 967:

John, fair use images are generally smaller than 300px on the longest size and this one is far bigger than permitted, so needs to be reduced. Also, non-free images may only be used in mainspace articles and nowhere else per

2370:

Ebay address, both were rejected by WP's system when I attempted to include/save them in a talk-page message. I also tried to add Ebay's general address in the source info' of an image file and it also was rejected with a

408:

Excellet. I hope you can attempt the same with other African philately articles, even if you know little about them the research can be done. In fact I may get around to stubbing the red links in the africa template in due

2930:

The number of images can be expended in the future. If you don't like the idea of year-by-reign category tree, why cannot we assign single stamps to both year and reign subcategories? And then, the most upper category

122:

it says that for Nyassa a main article is needed. I know about Nyassa's stamps, and am happy to write an article, but where should it be? What should the title be? And are there any other pages that should link to it?

4561:

As far as I can see from the above and the talk page discussion there was consensus to have one article; Jack, Michael and I were all for the idea or merging rather than separate articles with nobody complaining.

3199:

of two KGV stamps, from Ebay. I merged the two image-files together as one file. Since this file was made from two other image files, I retrieved the two Ebay item numbers (after back tracking through my browser

2329:

commercial addresses go, before that address is no longer a valid address either. Also, what is to stop an unscrupulous vendor who uploads images just to get his/her commercial web address into the archives??

3688:

has 68 different year categories. -- Its good to see experienced editors making strides in correcting the greater problem also. It seems that much more than moving a category for Lincoln needs to be done here.

2712:

OK, that makes sense, sure. I think we should keep on maintaining the same approach in categorizing stamp and other images for postal/philatelic articles. By the way, maybe, it would be a good idea to add the

3645:

are linked to any categories associated with the history of the United States. Currently, many stamps you uploaded on Commons are examples of a mess in categorization and description, sorry. See for instance

2456:

for these files. You can easily identify a good number of stamps, postcards, etc. retrieved from eBay listings. The eBay links are provided for these items, and there is no problem if they are obsolete (see

2901:

I would suggest a compromise here. All year-style subcategories may be sorted into upper categories for separate periods of the reigns of monarchs. I think it's a reasonable solution to the problem. --

894:'s suggestion of a justification for the use of non-free stamp images in non-philatelic articles. You can of course discuss the existence of a stamp in any article but use of a non-free stamp image 234:

uses the other spelling. Did they change their name or is it different in English than Portuguese? Philatelically we use Nyassa so I personally would use that spelling for the philatelic article.

905:

because the stamp is unnecessary to understand the prose. Many such images have been deleted in the last few years where similar prose was/is used in the article because what is required is some

227: 4165:

I see there is a Userbox section on the project page which has a couple of varieties, but I wonder why there isn't one that actually says "Member of WikiProject Philately"-? Is this on purpose?

2274:

And where images are categorised in a sub-category, they are not also placed in the parent category; that is what the sub-categories are for. However, some countries have so few stamps, such as

5041:

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

2030:

five others and as they usually display collapsed should be pretty obvious to all in the "see also" section without being too obtrusive. Is that acceptable to everyone? If not please revert.

2305:

web address? Seems in a matter of days that address will no long work, as when the lot is sold or otherwise removed so will its address. With this in mind, should one just included Ebay's

1098:

be very difficult to get agreement on any sort of special exception for stamps. I've been here seven years, and done lots of copyright work, and I have no idea how one would pull it off.

3261:

Unfortunately, you did not follow my advice because I don't see any wording regarding your eBay upload. Just a bare eBay item number is not enough for wording. Please add that wording. --

2452:

field confirms that the site existed when you checked it for getting an info for your article. Now let's look at any file page on Commons that was created using eBay items. Here are the

2125:

To standardize categorization of stamp image uploads on Commons, I suggest a minimum of the following three category types to be added for a single stamp file, wherever it's possible:

2448:. This field witnesses that on a certain day a website you visit and refer to in your article was active and valid. And it does not matter if the site would become obsolete soon. The 351: 5035: 4050: 2612:

stamp from eBay. After uploading, you insert in the Source field an appropriate wording concerning the eBay upload and that little tag, which in the given situation would look like

647:

The USPS permission statement refers specifically to "Educational Use", "News Reporting" and "Philatelic Advertising Use" non of which comply with either Knowledge fair use or the

138:

Good idea. It hasn't been done because, strictly speaking, the Nyassa Company was not a country but there is definitely enough philately to justify an article. Click on this link:

1829:

sort of moderation might have to be employed. Perhaps a link which read 'List of other postal history pages'. It would seem that a few links to other postal history pages, on the

204:

On the name, it's a difficult one. The Portuguese name is Companhia do Nyassa, and and wherever used on stamps, including overprints, the name is "Nyassa"...why is the article at

2383:

the system accepted it and saved the page with the Ebay link/address -- which doesn't seem to help our case much, as such addresses will still not sit well in a file's summary.

4972: 1422:

I prefer with keeping with the WP tradition of talking about a page on the page's discussion page, but if you insist on cutting and pasting to and responding here be my guest.

2609: 1474:

Straw man. No one was saying that 'everything' in philately should be added to 'see also' in postal history, just various pages that are directly related to postal history.

913:

Use of non-free stamps has been an issue since at least 2006 and if you really want I can point you to several discussions and deletion nominations that suppport my points.

4968: 4935: 4536: 4415: 3337: 1276:, no prior permission is required for: Educational Use ..." If you claim that the USPS doesn't care about size of images, you will be asked to prove that. Good luck. 119: 4894: 4875:

The workbook: notes on reprints and forgeries of Colombian stamps. Part II, The sovereign states of Colombia, Antioquia, Bolivar, Boyacá, Cundinamarca, Tolima and Panamá

4732: 4714: 1627: 1623: 1834:

at WP be appropriate on the Postal history page? If there is I will gladly compose the list and add it as a section. 'Index of postal history pages' (with no caps'!).

1068:

though I doubt you will have any success. Working within the rules is the best option rather than complaining or trying to find a way to weave and dodge around policy.

3605: 4931: 2278:, that a parent category is all there is but for countries where year sub-categories exist they should be used. US stamps have sub-categories by decade year groups. 2165: 664:

guidelines. For quite a long time I have actively been nominating for deletion improperly used fair-use stamps though even some stamp article uses are questionable.

4741: 3252:

After uploading, you insert in the Source field an appropriate wording concerning the eBay upload and that little tag, which in the given situation would look like

151: 94: 1722:. But we should not forget and should follow the guidelines and policies established within WP regarding article writing, naming, formatting, illustrating, etc. -- 4705: 3455: 3128:

Supposedly its only for academic pages but in practice it seems to work for any page including eBay auctions. A few complex pages with lots of Java may not work.

2969:, do you mean that if the former is actually not necessary and can be transposed into a Wikibooks catalog, we can add and leave notable British postage stamps in 89: 84: 72: 67: 59: 3630: 3617: 3552:' gallery only contains 6. Those which I have uploaded did not receive any category for Lincoln from me originally though lately I have added a few. Since the 3531: 4927: 4723: 4540: 4467: 4449: 4431: 4427: 4393: 3788: 3283:

link as well as wording stating that the photo was obtained from Ebay. Also, the description in those files also identifies the stamp, denomination, year, etc.

1618: 1614: 988: 948: 528: 437: 2940: 3052:

I am not opposed to by year and by reign at the same time although by reign is much fewer categories and inevitably most users adding a stamp won't add both.

2251:

Sorry, GWillHickers, you misunderstood me. You should select a proper subcategory from an upper category. Please choose the appropriate year subcategory from

3647: 3013:), rare and other notable stamps in various countries. So far this approach has not been opposed. Maybe, something like that could be acceptable in EN-WP? -- 2936: 4893:

Thanks to all of you, especially Stan for doing the necessary. I've noticed that many of our articles have very rudimentary source and reference sections,

4615:, noting the postage stamp definition. Please embellish if possible. It seems like this might be an article itself if anyone is interested in starting it. 3465: 3460: 3450: 3037:

times where I've started from a year cat and drilled down looking for something, it was inconvenient to only have a few countries with by-year stamp cats.

1970:

article, and besides all those country articles we also have another 41 articles in the postal history category that are linked at the bottom of the page.

1573: 5028:. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Knowledge policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the 3336:

If the page title is descriptive it does not need to appear verbatim in the main text, and even if it does it should not be in boldface. So, for example,

147: 2540:

This template is used to cite sources in Knowledge. It is specifically for web sites which are not news sources. It provides lower case parameters only.

3799:. To fix this, I suggest removing ] from the article page. Accordingly, we may adopt this categorization approach for all country articles. Regards, -- 3446:

Here are some examples of articles that don't use the "survey" formula in the lead, but just summarize the key points, and, I believe, read just fine:

4697:. For the sake of consistency, the exceptions should be made to comply but, because of existing redirects, five of them cannot be moved. These are: 2542:

A general discussion of the use of templates for adding citation of open-source web content to Knowledge articles is available at citation templates.

1635:

As to 'U.S. Postage stamps', I do believe that it must be 'U.S. postage stamps'. 'postage' is not a proper name here, if even there is 'U.S.' to the

143: 3609: 3545: 3537: 1168:

page the USPS is indeed a branch of the US'gov headed by a Cabinet secretary, though this is not to say the USPS can't contest copyright violations

4226: 3324: 1762:

Well, I still think 'US Postage' is a proper name and when I used a capital 'P' that was my reasoning, however I will accept common consensus here.

3708: 807:

page. You can follow the links on that page to various individual stamps to get an idea of the fair use justifications. Here are two examples:

4418:

but no one even commented. As I said then, if there are to be two distinct articles with little or no overlapping coverage, then they should be

4786:

is an admin and can do it for us, otherwise I have some good relationships and can ask them directly as these will not be controversial moves.

1741: 1737: 1609: 1605: 3919: 1670:

Michael's correct. The subject here is "postage stamps", which is not a proper noun. "United States" is a proper noun used as an adjective.

682:, the stamp illustrated there was issued after 1978. Does the author know something I/we don't, or have I just painted a bull's on that page? 4543:? The current article is quite long and has two distinct major sections on history and stamps. Both could be easily separated, to my mind. -- 3760: 3740: 3196: 2932: 2658: 2662: 4911:

Wow! It will be an awesome day in the philately project when we have material from (and can cite) every work in the philatelic literature.

4585: 4046: 3621: 3523: 3515: 47: 17: 2840:, I guess that is a reasonable argument, but what do other editors think? If there is a consensus, we can go forward and make the changes 2348:

contains dozens of direct links to the website in question, and they do not seem to be blocked. Perhaps, the right place to ask would be

4358: 3792: 3704: 3625: 3613: 3557: 3549: 3527: 2398:

eBay auction listings disappear after about 90 days and should not be used for that reason. Other eBay pages may be more permanent.

475: 4690: 4686: 3681: 2698:

It was in both Stamps of the UK and Penny Blacks. I think there should not be anything in Stamps of the UK apart from sub-categories?

1993: 1960: 1453: 1399: 808: 3205: 3787:

As to the subject, I have a question. How shall we categorize all country survey articles? For example, do we need to have for the

3188: 2487: 2494:

template. I looked at several examples in the search results you provided but when I viewed the description pages I did not see a

1329: 941: 5047: 3306:

I've noticed that many of the philatelic country articles try to work the article's entire title (in bold) in the lead, such as

2551:

So, you cannot use this Knowledge template for indicating a file source on Commons. It doesn't make any sense. You did not see a

2154: 552:

commissioned and could license it for non-stamp products; basically fixing an oversight in the 1971 creation of the corporation.

5025: 4191: 3957: 3161:

Yes I also use Wayback Machine, the difference being that with WebCite you choose the time and date that the page is captured.

2084: 3576:

For the convenience of the other editors, may I ask you to provide 'blue' links for the above mentioned categories, please? --

2782: 1861: 4728: 4710: 4662:

as the two terms are quite different and the later is empty and a soft redirect to the other. You may want to comment on the

3795:. The latter is a subcategory of the former anyway. At the moment, we see both Malaysia category and Malaysia article on the 3642: 2992: 2962: 2718: 1940: 1243: 4694: 2778: 961: 3763:

tag on the article itself, weren't place by philatelic editors and appear to be clearly inappropriate. I'll remove them.

474:. Commons never allows fair-use images, so that Viking mission stamp is going to be deleted by whoever gets to it first. 108:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

5062:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

4747:

I don't have admin functionality and can't supersede the redirects. Can any of you help, please? Thanks very much. ----

3638: 3522:, where 'xxxx' is the year rounded off to the earliest decade. Stamps with Washington and Lincoln will get an additional ' 2349: 2216:

category. Please also check that the category you are adding actually exists. Also I think US stamps are by year. Thanks.

1950: 4663: 4111: 2275: 1718:

I greatly appreciate the contribution to WP articles on philately and postal history that is being made by our colleague

575:

As Stan has pointed out, fair use is a concept that applies in the United States but not in many other countries, and is

4737: 4232: 3850: 3009:

In RU-WP we have a 'List of legendary postage stamps', and it's defined in the lead as a list of extremely rare (German

1918: 1898: 1165: 1130: 2995:

and is described as a list of stamps notable in some way. It could even be renamed list of "important" postage stamps?

2129: 4897:

being a case in point. I've expanded that article's sources and included Ecphora's books as additional reading. ----

4701: 4123: 2616:

because the Item number for this listing is 300457841741. Hope you find this useful. Have a fun with your uploads. --

2502:

template seems to be in place correctly and the link to ebay appears in the source field along with the access date.

3183:

Michael, we were discussing what to enter in the source fields in commons uploads when you followed with info about

1656:

You mean to the left of it, don't you? In any event, the term is a proper name, used on US Postage for many years.

804: 431: 4719: 4528: 4419: 4397: 4095: 4079: 4070: 2256: 2146: 2139: 1929: 1908: 1857: 800: 471: 38: 1417: 5029: 4980: 4943: 4769: 4548: 4457: 4184: 4150: 4028: 4002: 3965: 3906: 3804: 3716: 3703:

Two Lincoln categories have been merged by a Commons admin, and we have now only one working and valid category:

3655: 3581: 3498: 3266: 3152: 3072: 3018: 2978: 2948: 2906: 2861: 2848:

lists is in EN:WP. For instance, in RU:WP such list titles are not welcome because there is always a question of

2810: 2726: 2670: 2621: 2588: 2474: 2357: 2264: 2252: 2173: 2134: 1881: 1869: 1753: 1727: 1644: 1541: 1465: 1413: 4532: 4495: 4423: 222:

I have just done a Google search for the company and found reliable sources using both spellings. Britannica at

4659: 4655: 3858: 2000:

is not sufficiently conspicuous when not unfolded, since its hundreds of links apparently went unnoticed. :-)

812: 3204:

for some time) and included them both in the source field for the image. I also provided the item number for

2458: 4620: 4329: 4252: 4170: 3980: 3351:

A dynamic loudspeaker driver's chief electrical characteristic is its electrical impedance versus frequency.

2801:

Actually, there are several 'red' page titles already suggested for United Kingdom stamps in Wikibooks (see

1956:? We also have the older, now superceeded by the above indicidfual continent templates, the single template 1853: 1449: 1052:

use only because that is not freely usable within the Knowledge's definition of "free" use. Please read the

388: 373: 254: 213: 128: 5053: 5009: 4984: 4962: 4947: 4920: 4904: 4886: 4841: 4817: 4795: 4773: 4754: 4675: 4643: 4624: 4601: 4571: 4552: 4521: 4509: 4481: 4461: 4443: 4408: 4373: 4333: 4275: 4203: 4174: 4154: 4127: 4105: 4032: 4006: 3984: 3969: 3933: 3910: 3895: 3875: 3836: 3823: 3808: 3772: 3753: 3720: 3698: 3659: 3599: 3585: 3570: 3502: 3479: 3432: 3400: 3367: 3293: 3270: 3221: 3170: 3156: 3137: 3099: 3076: 3061: 3046: 3022: 3004: 2982: 2952: 2925: 2910: 2896: 2865: 2831: 2814: 2794: 2769:

As I understand it we are not allowed to use the term notable in an article title and you will notice that

2764: 2745: 2730: 2707: 2693: 2674: 2640: 2625: 2592: 2511: 2478: 2422: 2407: 2393: 2361: 2339: 2318: 2287: 2268: 2239: 2225: 2203: 2177: 2110: 2096: 2056: 2039: 2009: 1979: 1885: 1843: 1797: 1757: 1731: 1713: 1679: 1665: 1648: 1545: 1527: 1483: 1469: 1431: 1358: 1317: 1302: 1285: 1239: 1214: 1199: 1182: 1143: 1122: 1107: 1092: 1077: 1030: 1015: 1000: 981: 922: 869: 854: 839: 824: 793: 762: 742: 717: 691: 673: 639: 561: 543: 522: 507: 488: 465: 421: 392: 377: 363: 345: 324: 293: 278: 258: 243: 217: 199: 175: 132: 5021: 4994: 4119: 3694: 3595: 3566: 3289: 3217: 2988: 2970: 2966: 2884: 2770: 2654: 2507: 2418: 2389: 2335: 2314: 2235: 2199: 2106: 2092: 2052: 1839: 1793: 1661: 1586: 1479: 1427: 1395: 1380: 1354: 1298: 1210: 1178: 1118: 1088: 1026: 996: 957: 835: 789: 738: 727: 697: 687: 679: 603: 539: 503: 461: 3327:

which states that such repetitive use is unnecessary and that, where done, it should not appear in bold:

4219: 2462: 2441: 3423:" articles just leap into the text, but I don't think the philatelic article works as well that way.) 2802: 5043: 4976: 4958: 4939: 4916: 4813: 4765: 4544: 4453: 4146: 4087: 4024: 3998: 3961: 3902: 3800: 3712: 3651: 3634: 3577: 3494: 3428: 3262: 3239:

concept with the File history section with the Date/Time field on Commons. I did not tell you to use

3209: 3148: 3068: 3042: 3014: 2974: 2944: 2902: 2857: 2806: 2751: 2722: 2666: 2636: 2617: 2584: 2528: 2470: 2366:-- As I mentioned above, when I attempted to include Ebay's general main page address, as well as an 2353: 2260: 2169: 2005: 1877: 1865: 1749: 1723: 1640: 1537: 1514: 1461: 1409: 1387: 1313: 1269: 1195: 1103: 1011: 850: 700:

article? The stamp is used under Knowledge's fair-use criteria, is well justified, and complies with

557: 548: 518: 484: 289: 3392: 3162: 3129: 3053: 2996: 2917: 2888: 2841: 2823: 2756: 2699: 2681: 2217: 1345:

Just finished reading 'copyright paranoia' (redirected) and came across this interesting passage: --

1064:

and if you still don't like it then I suggest you make a proposal to change it by making a proposal

723: 355: 337: 270: 235: 167: 4791: 4671: 4639: 4567: 4439: 4369: 4271: 4199: 4134: 3891: 3854: 3396: 3166: 3133: 3095: 3057: 3000: 2921: 2892: 2827: 2790: 2760: 2741: 2703: 2689: 2583:. It's Commons-specific, so please just use it for your Commons uploads, if you find it helpful. -- 2283: 2221: 2035: 1975: 1873: 1745: 1709: 1701: 1595: 1533: 1523: 1073: 977: 918: 713: 669: 595: 449: 359: 341: 320: 274: 239: 195: 171: 4057:(revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the 494:

where government issues and the like are concerned. Also, I have seen many images of contemporary

223: 4616: 4325: 4248: 4166: 3976: 3749: 2844:

suggests. On the other hand, I don't exactly know what the current policy on article titles like

1065: 498:

displayed in various pages. Now I'm wondering if they're P.D. or F.U. Will see what I can find.

384: 369: 250: 209: 124: 2887:

that could mop up the good ones from the other list and I see the VR Official is already in it.

3118:

by taking a permanent snap shot of a web page at a particular point in time. They say they are

2653:

As far as I understand, this is a postage stamp used as an official one. It's also included in

4882: 4761: 4597: 4102: 4082:. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th. 3868: 3819: 3768: 3690: 3591: 3562: 3475: 3391:

and the name of the country in the first line so I think it should stay, even if not in bold.

3363: 3285: 3213: 2503: 2414: 2403: 2385: 2331: 2310: 2231: 2195: 2102: 2088: 2048: 1835: 1789: 1719: 1697: 1675: 1657: 1582: 1509: 1475: 1423: 1391: 1350: 1294: 1281: 1206: 1174: 1139: 1114: 1084: 1022: 992: 953: 865: 831: 820: 785: 758: 734: 731: 683: 635: 599: 535: 499: 470:

Some Wikipedias, including English, allow fair-use images under restricted circumstances; see

457: 454: 2157:(since for Canada we have a more detailed and combined format of categorization - by country 3929: 495: 410: 3235:

on Knowledge, not on Commons. Do you know that Knowledge ≠ Commons? I just compared the WP

2836:

I agree to switch to an individual year style in re-categorizing the UK stamps. As for the

4954: 4912: 4809: 4783: 4285: 4020: 3424: 3038: 2632: 2001: 1852:

For this purpose, we don't need to use 'See also'. You may try to create a Postal History

1309: 1191: 1099: 1007: 846: 648: 553: 514: 480: 285: 333: 5004: 4899: 4836: 4787: 4749: 4667: 4635: 4563: 4516: 4504: 4476: 4435: 4403: 4365: 4299: 4293: 4267: 4195: 4078:

and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at

3994: 3887: 3831: 3388: 3379: 3091: 2786: 2737: 2685: 2279: 2031: 1997: 1971: 1967: 1830: 1705: 1519: 1505: 1457: 1456:, can you imagine the size of the section 'See also'? This is not what's prescribed in 1445: 1069: 1053: 973: 969: 914: 902: 897: 709: 705: 665: 657: 316: 205: 191: 155: 3745: 3384: 2563:-specific template, and nobody uses it for providing sources for the file uploads on 2230:

This is the exact same message that turned up on my user/discussion page in commons.

1061: 1057: 701: 661: 527:

Stan, at the prompting of Ww2censor I have removed the Viking mission image from the

183: 166:. I suggest that you use the later spelling which I think is the normal one. Thanks. 4808:

Done. (I wonder if there are publications on the postal history of Cundinamarca...)

1504:

See also links added to any article should be closely associated with the topic per

5038:

until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

4878: 4593: 4499: 4471: 4142: 3864: 3815: 3764: 3486: 3471: 3359: 3243:

on Commons. Re-read my post, please. Also, did you read what I told you concerning

2853: 2399: 1671: 1277: 1188: 1135: 906: 891: 861: 816: 754: 631: 615: 187: 139: 4075: 4023:. Again, all 50 by-country articles should be corrected as far as I understand. -- 142:

then on Nyassa and it will open an empty window for you to start. I recently did

4760:

If there is nobody with admin rights here in the project, you should follow the

4138: 3925: 3556:

phrase is used most often it would seem that Lincoln stamps should receive the '

2714: 2646: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

5015: 4693:

we have the same 249 articles and, apart from a few exceptions, all are called

4589: 3530:'. Also, those stamps with a decidingly historical theme should also get the ' 2822:

sub-categorised by year but as stated above there probably isn't the need yet.

2077:

Just posted an appeal of sorts to WP regarding Fair Use and size limitations.

150:

and you could look at those for roughly what is required. You need to link to

2852:

criteria that could be quite subjective unless the criteria are supported by

1129:

With due respect, I think these approaches are misguided. The fact that the

4244: 4058: 3685: 2579:

in the Commons files at all. What I was talking about below is another tag,

1872:) 17:49, 18 June 2010 (UTC) P.S. Sure, such a template should correspond to 4938:. Would you do me a great favor and process the requested move? Thanks. -- 3997:?! Then, this must be corrected in all 50 by-country articles, I guess. -- 4133:

I suggest contacting directly the editors who create articles like this:

652: 3115: 911:

does the reader really need to see the stamp to understand the article?

158:

articles. Incidentally, although the article for the company spells it

4527:

I thought we had been more inclining to have two separate articles on

726:

of 1978 can't be included in Commons, and used on a page, and why the

4049:

for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were

3544:

category. I checked both types of the categories for Lincoln. The '

3144: 4584:

An excellent source of printed references to add to articles is the

4416:

Talk:Postage stamps and postal history of Pakistan#Name and coverage

2750:

The VR stamp certainly deserves a place if anything does. I see the

4041:

Philately articles have been selected for the Knowledge 0.8 release

2498:

template. Perhaps I did not check enough examples. Regardless, the

1448:. If we begin adding everything that is currently available in the 4612: 4243:

which would point to this project page instead of the start-class

4094:

to extend the reach of Knowledge worldwide. Please help us, with

4045:

Version 0.8 is a collection of Knowledge articles selected by the

3944:

I found two acronyms on pages listing birds on stamps by country:

2194:

in with the categories. Should I do likewise for other countries?

607: 576: 231: 4470:

is the best solution. I'll do it according to the guidelines in

3676:

How does two categories for Lincoln, both of them using the word

3536:-- It should be mentioned here that there is also the redundant ' 722:

No problem at all. Glad to see it. Am still not clear why the ie.

4091: 2345: 450:

http://www.usps.com/rightsandpermissions/fair-use-exceptions.htm

2379:, when I made a test edit and included an Ebay address on a WP 2301:

When listing Ebay as a source for a stamp image do we need the

2083:

The latest development can be viewed at the 'Non Free Content'

1894:

Do we require another navigation box when we already have six:

651:

commons use. Their statement is essentially redundant because

224:

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/413785/Niassa-Company

4074:

with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's

3114:

Can I recommend WebCite at www.webcitation.org for preventing

2631:

from WP, we hope that it will encourage additional donations.

1818:

A quote from Ww2censor to Gwillhickers (taken from above): --

696:

What is the problem with the use of one non-free image in the

627: 25: 1379:

Other opinions are needed and welcomed on the Postal history

972:, so I have turned the image into a link which is permitted. 4430:

should be a dab page. However, I would support a merge into

3975:

I think that means "Normal" and "Air" mail. Great list btw!

2781:

page would fly for long. You could move the current page to

2665:

for the appropriate VR official image file. Any comments? --

2555:

template on the Commons file description pages just because

5024:, which you created or to which you contributed, should be 4194:

just above the userboxes or do you want a userbox version?

3325:

Knowledge:Manual of Style (lead section)#Descriptive titles

2883:

years. As for noteable stamps, there actually is a list at

427:

Displaying Images of U.S. Postage Issued after Jan. 1, 1978

3514:

For the categories of most US stamps they will have both '

3256:

because the Item number for this listing is 300457841741.

2208:

Hello, there's no need to add all stamps to the top level

3779:

Categorization for Postage stamps and postal history of X

3548:' category has 27 stamp images in its gallery while the ' 2785:

starting a new page as no one has done so yet. Good luck

2166:

commons:Category:George V of the United Kingdom on stamps

2149:(currently in question) could be categorized as follows: 1594:

Yesterday I renamed the following articles, according to

618:, that is, images and other media files that can be used 4364:

to your userboxes and if I have time I will improve it.

4324:

Beautiful! (And fast, too!) Thank you for doing that :)

4051:

selected based on their assessed importance and quality

3759:

No need to consult on this one; the tag, as well as the

3275:

All of those files last uploaded with that tag have for

656:

stamps under the fair use claim must comply with all 10

4877:, Colombian Philatelic Research Society, Bogota, 2007. 3796: 3228: 2774: 2190:

to my uploads. For US stamp images I am also including

1268:

authorizing USPS to claim copyright. I discussed this

352:

Postage stamps and postal history of the Nyassa Company

249:

issue. I would say plump for "Nyassa" for consistency.

5036:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Italian post in Saseno

2941:

commons:Category:Stamps of the United Kingdom by reign

2325:

for an image, it is usually only a matter of time, as

799:

The Knowledge general fair use policy is set forth in

4414:

I already posted on this topic about 5 months ago at

3648:

commons:File:Christopher Columbians Issue 1892-8c.jpg

2937:

commons:Category:Stamps of the United Kingdom by year

1408:

I think topics like that should be discussed here. --

303:

relied on to know the correct spelling, like these;

140:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Template:PostalhistoryAfrica

4973:

Talk:People's Commissariat for Posts and Telegraphs

4631: 2444:. If you look at it, you may notice a field called 4474:so that it's all right and proper. Regards. ---- 3338:Electrical characteristics of dynamic loudspeakers 3143:Thank you. That's a great resource in addition to 1240:"U.S Copyright Office Practices section 206.02(b)" 5020:A discussion has begun about whether the article 4969:Talk:People's Commissariat for Post and Telegraph 4895:Postage stamps and postal history of Cundinamarca 4733:Postage stamps and postal history of Tripolitania 4715:Postage stamps and postal history of Cundinamarca 4634:term rather than warranting a wikipedia article. 4354:It could do with some refining but just add this 4066:Philately articles and revisionIDs we have chosen 2344:Hm, I am really puzzled. The fact is the article 1628:Soviet space exploration history on Soviet stamps 1624:Soviet Space Exploration History on Soviet Stamps 476:Category:Fair use images of United States postage 430: 4611:I added an entry to the disambiguation page for 2755:United Kingdom and amputate 90% of the content? 2684:directly because he was the one who removed it? 2516:I don't understand what the point is to use the 313:Transvaal and Orange Free State Chamber of Mines 4926:Hi Stan, there is one more inconsistent title, 4858:1883 - The Typeset Provisionals of Cundinamarca 4742:Postage stamps and postal history of Heligoland 3709:commons:Category:Categories by year (flat list) 1532:Exactly. And in this respect, we should follow 152:Postage stamps and postal history of Mozambique 4932:People's Commissariat for Posts and Telegraphs 4706:Postage stamps and postal history of Antioquia 3456:Postage stamps and postal history of Hong Kong 4724:Postage stamps and postal history of Dalmatia 4541:Postage stamps and postal history of Pakistan 4468:Postage stamps and postal history of Pakistan 4450:Postage stamps and postal history of Pakistan 4432:Postage stamps and postal history of Pakistan 4428:Postage stamps and postal history of Pakistan 4394:Postage stamps and postal history of Pakistan 3195:template. Also, a few days ago I uploaded a 3187:. In any event I changed the template on the 2933:commons:Category:Stamps of the United Kingdom 2659:commons:Category:Stamps of the United Kingdom 1619:U.S. space exploration history on U.S. stamps 1615:U.S. Space Exploration History on U.S. Stamps 989:U.S. Space Exploration History on U.S. Stamps 949:U.S. Space Exploration History on U.S. Stamps 368:I will try to add to it when I get the time. 120:Compendium_of_postage_stamp_issuers_(Ni_–_Nz) 8: 4928:People's Commissariat for Post and Telegraph 3849:Comments appreciated regarding the merge of 2440:, there is a special template in use called 942:File:Viking Mission Mars2 1978 Issue-15c.jpg 3466:Postage stamps and postal history of Latvia 3461:Postage stamps and postal history of Mexico 3451:Postage stamps and postal history of Sweden 2571:, if you read my comments properly. And my 2255:and the appropriate topic subcategory from 1574:Talk:U.S. Presidents on U.S. Postage stamps 433:File:Viking Mission Mars 1978 Issue-15c.jpg 3491:the postage stamps and postal history of X 3314:the postage stamps and postal history of X 2805:). I guess they make sense, don't they? -- 445:See: USPS - Uses Not Requiring Permission 148:Postage stamps and postal history of Ghana 3958:List of birds on stamps of Spanish Sahara 2212:category. They should be in the relevant 590:concepts simply do not apply on Commons. 182:Good luck and please don't forget to add 144:Postage stamps and postal history of Togo 4502:. Please add your comments there. ---- 4494:. This discussion is continuing at the 3989:Thank you. And what catalog is meant as 3682:hundreds(!!) of categories for philately 3227:Sorry but you misunderstood me again. I 2486:I just uploaded a New Zealand KGV stamp 1862:Category:Navbox (navigational) templates 4064:We would like to ask you to review the 2155:commons:Category:Stamps of Canada, 1911 2101:Fair-use discussion has been archived. 1444:I completely and absolutely agree with 1231: 162:I think that is wrong and it should be 4695:Postage stamps and postal history of X 4190:what you are looking for? It is found 4101:For the Knowledge 1.0 editorial team, 3761:Category: Postal system of New Zealand 3631:History of the United States on stamps 3618:History of the United States on stamps 3532:History of the United States on stamps 3422:note that "History of <country: --> 2779:List of notable British postage stamps 2026:I have deleted that one and added the 1742:U.S. Presidents on U.S. postage stamps 1738:U.S. Presidents on U.S. Postage stamps 1610:U.S. Presidents on U.S. postage stamps 1606:U.S. Presidents on U.S. Postage stamps 628:the Commons discussion of Free content 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 4466:Hi guys. I agree that a merger into 3865:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 3741:Rural Address Property IDentification 3735:Rural Address Property IDentification 3643:commons:Category:Christopher Columbus 3542:'stamps depicting George Washington' 2783:b:World Stamp Catalogue/Great Britain 704:#3 (identification of the stamp) and 7: 4586:American Philatelic Research Library 4496:talk page of the destination article 4280: 4247:article. 03:35, 1 October 2010 (UTC) 4214: 1062:explanation of policy and guidelines 104:The following discussion is closed. 18:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Philately 4866:Manuscript Cancels of Cundinamarca, 4448:I support the idea of a merge into 4112:List of fish on stamps of Australia 3793:Category:Postage stamps of Malaysia 620:by anyone, anytime, for any purpose 4853:Por supuesto! And in English!! 4691:Category:Postal history by country 4687:Category:Postage stamps by country 4654:I've proposed moving the category 4161:Userbox for WikiProject Philately? 3509:Commons categories for U.S. stamps 2657:. However, I don't understand why 2130:commons:Category:Stamps by country 1994:Template:Postal history by country 1454:Category:Postal history by country 1330:Viking Mission to Mars, 1978 Issue 438:Viking Mission to Mars, 1978 Issue 24: 5034:The article will be discussed at 3620:should be the upper category for 3608:on Commons to move the duplicate 890:I have to disagree somewhat with 801:Knowledge:Non-free content#Policy 5058:The discussion above is closed. 5014: 4284: 4218: 3610:Stamps depicting Abraham Lincoln 3546:Stamps depicting Abraham Lincoln 3538:Stamps depicting Abraham Lincoln 2777:back in 2008 so I am not sure a 2721:. What do you think? Regards, -- 2567:. I did not suggest you adding 2257:commons:Category:Stamps by topic 2147:commons:File:Admiral Canada1.jpg 2140:commons:Category:Stamps by topic 1567: 937:Viking Mission 'Fair-Use' Upload 653:fair-use is entrenched in US law 596:permission statement by the USPS 29: 4834:Excellent. Thanks, Stan. ---- 3918:counter to 7 and add a link to 2253:commons:Category:Stamps by year 2135:commons:Category:Stamps by year 1814:Central index of postal history 1696:More than a week ago I pointed 809:File:Stamp irl 1997 £1goose.jpg 614:Wikimedia Commons accepts only 232:http://www.jstor.org/pss/180419 230:, however an article linked at 4729:Postage stamps of Tripolitania 4711:Postage stamps of Cundinamarca 4401:and a consensus reached? ---- 4155:17:00, 27 September 2010 (UTC) 4128:16:13, 27 September 2010 (UTC) 4106:23:28, 19 September 2010 (UTC) 4033:01:55, 17 September 2010 (UTC) 4007:01:49, 17 September 2010 (UTC) 3985:00:59, 17 September 2010 (UTC) 3970:00:38, 17 September 2010 (UTC) 3934:15:06, 15 September 2010 (UTC) 3911:13:19, 15 September 2010 (UTC) 3896:13:14, 15 September 2010 (UTC) 3876:23:59, 13 September 2010 (UTC) 2993:List of notable postage stamps 2963:List of British postage stamps 2719:List of British postage stamps 2531:on Commons. I am quoting here: 2436:Let me tell you something. On 1244:United States Copyright Office 936: 805:Category:Fair use stamp images 1: 4967:An additional request, Stan: 4580:Source for books and articles 4510:05:44, 5 September 2010 (UTC) 4482:05:29, 5 September 2010 (UTC) 4462:01:46, 5 September 2010 (UTC) 4444:00:26, 5 September 2010 (UTC) 4409:20:59, 4 September 2010 (UTC) 3837:17:55, 5 September 2010 (UTC) 3824:14:53, 5 September 2010 (UTC) 3809:13:30, 5 September 2010 (UTC) 3773:13:13, 5 September 2010 (UTC) 3754:06:17, 5 September 2010 (UTC) 3639:Category:Christopher Columbus 3540:' category while there is no 2350:MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist 2309:address in the source info'? 991:has no prefix to its title. 5054:03:58, 1 November 2010 (UTC) 5010:09:01, 3 November 2010 (UTC) 4985:13:51, 18 October 2010 (UTC) 4738:Postal history of Heligoland 4676:14:13, 11 October 2010 (UTC) 4644:13:47, 11 October 2010 (UTC) 4630:That seems more suited to a 4625:05:03, 11 October 2010 (UTC) 3851:Errors, freaks, and oddities 2294:eBay as a stamp image source 1589:) 17:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC) 1166:United States Postal Service 1131:United States Postal Service 678:Here's an interesting page. 660:and additionally follow the 4963:15:59, 8 October 2010 (UTC) 4948:14:30, 8 October 2010 (UTC) 4921:15:59, 8 October 2010 (UTC) 4905:08:16, 2 October 2010 (UTC) 4887:01:44, 2 October 2010 (UTC) 4842:08:16, 2 October 2010 (UTC) 4818:20:28, 1 October 2010 (UTC) 4796:14:45, 1 October 2010 (UTC) 4774:13:48, 1 October 2010 (UTC) 4755:13:36, 1 October 2010 (UTC) 4702:Postage stamps of Antioquia 4602:14:27, 2 October 2010 (UTC) 4572:14:43, 1 October 2010 (UTC) 4553:14:06, 1 October 2010 (UTC) 4522:09:10, 1 October 2010 (UTC) 4374:04:45, 1 October 2010 (UTC) 4334:04:39, 1 October 2010 (UTC) 4276:04:22, 1 October 2010 (UTC) 4204:02:58, 1 October 2010 (UTC) 4175:01:51, 1 October 2010 (UTC) 4096:your WikiProject's feedback 3721:16:27, 30 August 2010 (UTC) 3699:13:21, 30 August 2010 (UTC) 3660:02:15, 30 August 2010 (UTC) 3622:George Washington on stamps 3600:00:44, 30 August 2010 (UTC) 3586:23:20, 29 August 2010 (UTC) 3571:22:28, 29 August 2010 (UTC) 3524:George Washington on stamps 3516:Stamps of the United States 3503:07:29, 29 August 2010 (UTC) 3480:00:46, 29 August 2010 (UTC) 3433:00:02, 29 August 2010 (UTC) 3401:22:39, 28 August 2010 (UTC) 3368:19:40, 28 August 2010 (UTC) 3294:12:30, 28 August 2010 (UTC) 3271:21:02, 27 August 2010 (UTC) 3222:20:44, 27 August 2010 (UTC) 3171:13:47, 27 August 2010 (UTC) 3157:13:44, 27 August 2010 (UTC) 3138:10:18, 27 August 2010 (UTC) 3100:17:43, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 3077:17:21, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 3062:17:12, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 3047:17:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 3023:17:19, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 3005:16:25, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2983:16:19, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2953:16:40, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2926:16:16, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2911:16:09, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2897:15:46, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2866:15:38, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2832:15:31, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2815:16:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2795:15:26, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2765:14:55, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2746:14:52, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2731:14:44, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2708:14:39, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2694:14:13, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2675:13:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2641:23:31, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2626:21:55, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2593:13:31, 27 August 2010 (UTC) 2512:07:45, 27 August 2010 (UTC) 2479:21:38, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2423:20:29, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2408:12:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2394:17:19, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2362:01:06, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2340:21:27, 25 August 2010 (UTC) 2319:21:27, 25 August 2010 (UTC) 2288:14:44, 25 August 2010 (UTC) 2269:14:33, 25 August 2010 (UTC) 2240:12:37, 25 August 2010 (UTC) 2226:12:30, 25 August 2010 (UTC) 2204:11:21, 25 August 2010 (UTC) 2192:Stamps of the United States 2188:standardized categorization 2178:01:57, 22 August 2010 (UTC) 2111:00:48, 20 August 2010 (UTC) 1187:Also on our USPS page, see 226:use that spelling, as does 5077: 4720:Postage stamps of Dalmatia 4539:. Do you plan to separate 4533:Postal history of Pakistan 4529:Postage stamps of Pakistan 4424:Postal history of Pakistan 4420:Postage stamps of Pakistan 4398:Postage stamps of Pakistan 4359:User WikiProject Philately 4080:Knowledge talk:Version 0.8 4076:articles with cleanup tags 4071:Knowledge talk:Version 0.8 3534:' category it would seem. 3302:Titles of articles in lead 3254:{{ebay item|300457841741}} 3191:so it now has the correct 2614:{{ebay item|300457841741}} 1565: 577:not acceptible on Commons: 472:Knowledge:Non-free content 378:11:44, 30 April 2010 (UTC) 364:16:57, 28 April 2010 (UTC) 346:16:14, 20 April 2010 (UTC) 325:16:11, 20 April 2010 (UTC) 294:15:50, 20 April 2010 (UTC) 279:08:27, 20 April 2010 (UTC) 259:07:09, 20 April 2010 (UTC) 244:22:34, 19 April 2010 (UTC) 218:20:44, 19 April 2010 (UTC) 200:19:32, 19 April 2010 (UTC) 176:18:55, 19 April 2010 (UTC) 133:18:43, 19 April 2010 (UTC) 4868:Frome, Howard., 1993 Jun. 4704:which should be moved to 4388:Pakistan postage articles 3705:Abraham Lincoln on stamps 3626:Abraham Lincoln on stamps 3614:Abraham Lincoln on stamps 3558:Abraham Lincoln on stamps 3550:Abraham Lincoln on stamps 3528:Abraham Lincoln on stamps 2803:b:World Stamp Catalogue/U 2773:had "notable" removed in 2575:were NOT for identifying 2097:00:07, 15 July 2010 (UTC) 2057:23:03, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 2040:22:19, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 2010:22:12, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 1980:18:11, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 1961:Postal history by country 1886:17:51, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 1844:17:33, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 1798:16:15, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 1758:14:43, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 1732:14:39, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 1714:05:14, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 1680:01:42, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 1666:00:36, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 1649:19:36, 17 June 2010 (UTC) 1546:14:34, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 1528:05:06, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 1484:00:30, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 1470:19:50, 17 June 2010 (UTC) 1432:00:40, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 1418:19:24, 17 June 2010 (UTC) 1359:18:42, 16 June 2010 (UTC) 1318:15:41, 16 June 2010 (UTC) 1303:18:08, 15 June 2010 (UTC) 1286:00:21, 14 June 2010 (UTC) 1215:17:45, 13 June 2010 (UTC) 1200:13:48, 13 June 2010 (UTC) 1183:09:28, 13 June 2010 (UTC) 1144:03:54, 13 June 2010 (UTC) 1123:09:41, 13 June 2010 (UTC) 1108:23:19, 11 June 2010 (UTC) 1093:16:55, 11 June 2010 (UTC) 1078:16:05, 11 June 2010 (UTC) 1054:non-free content criteria 1031:15:19, 11 June 2010 (UTC) 1016:21:41, 10 June 2010 (UTC) 1001:18:58, 10 June 2010 (UTC) 982:18:14, 10 June 2010 (UTC) 962:17:39, 10 June 2010 (UTC) 923:03:10, 10 June 2010 (UTC) 898:non-free content criteria 870:02:21, 10 June 2010 (UTC) 658:non-free content criteria 549:commons:Commons:Licensing 5060:Please do not modify it. 5002:articles. Thanks. ---- 4212:I meant something like: 3859:Talk:Postage stamp error 3797:same upper category page 2605:{{ebay item|1234567890}} 2581:{{ebay item|1234567890}} 2459:one of numerous examples 2073:Fair Use size limitation 1744:in full accordance with 896:must comply with all 10 855:17:51, 9 June 2010 (UTC) 840:09:05, 9 June 2010 (UTC) 825:03:00, 8 June 2010 (UTC) 813:File:Memin Pinguin 1.jpg 794:00:29, 7 June 2010 (UTC) 779:1978+ stamp image upload 763:21:36, 5 June 2010 (UTC) 743:21:20, 5 June 2010 (UTC) 718:02:35, 4 June 2010 (UTC) 692:00:44, 4 June 2010 (UTC) 674:16:01, 31 May 2010 (UTC) 640:09:41, 31 May 2010 (UTC) 562:05:15, 1 June 2010 (UTC) 544:19:50, 30 May 2010 (UTC) 523:13:35, 29 May 2010 (UTC) 508:12:53, 29 May 2010 (UTC) 489:21:38, 18 May 2010 (UTC) 466:17:59, 18 May 2010 (UTC) 422:13:13, 19 May 2010 (UTC) 106:Please do not modify it. 4860:, Alan D. Angon., 1972. 4664:Military post talk page 4514:Merger completed. ---- 3960:. What do they mean? -- 3940:List of birds on stamps 3901:That's fine with me. -- 2490:from Ebay and used the 1450:Category:Postal history 393:06:57, 8 May 2010 (UTC) 305:UK parliamentary papers 5022:Italian post in Saseno 4995:Italian post in Saseno 4953:No problemo, is done. 4685:In the two categories 4019:since this stands for 3258: 3110:WebCite (not Cite Web) 2989:List of postage stamps 2971:List of postage stamps 2967:List of postage stamps 2885:List of postage stamps 2771:List of postage stamps 2655:List of postage stamps 2544: 1860:and other examples in 1591: 698:Great Americans series 680:Great Americans series 624: 592: 440: 315:, and several others. 118:Hello. On this page - 4650:Commons category move 4392:We have two articles 4300:WikiProject Philately 4092:Knowledge for Schools 3250: 3189:KGV New Zealand stamp 2538: 1941:PostalhistoryAmericas 1702:article naming policy 1578: 1402:) 15:18, 17 June 2010 1060:page, especially the 612: 580: 436: 188:verifiable references 42:of past discussions. 4088:One Laptop per Child 4015:must be changed for 3635:Christopher Columbus 3590:Yes, of course. -- 3312:This is a survey of 3210:Admirals (philately) 3197:composite photo file 2752:Prince Consort Essay 2153:country & year: 1951:PostalhistoryOceania 1374: 724:Viking Mission issue 329:1911 Britannica use 4681:Inconsistent titles 3922:in the archive box. 3855:Postage stamp error 1919:PostalhistoryAfrica 1899:PostalhistoryEurope 350:Created stub here: 4873:Dieter Bortfeldt, 4234:WikiProject France 4047:Knowledge 1.0 team 3333:Descriptive titles 3179:Ebay item template 2649:and related issues 2276:Stamps of Thailand 2186:Have begun adding 1704:on his talk page. 1375:Adding Wiki' links 728:'Alice Paul' issue 479:being able to do. 453: 441: 331:Companhia do Nyasa 208:at that spelling? 114:Stamps from Nyassa 107: 5052: 5045: 4930:, that should be 4588:on line catalog, 4307: 4306: 4241: 4240: 4120:Papa Lima Whiskey 2529:Template:Cite web 2210:Stamps by country 1996:at the bottom of 1966:, already in the 1930:PostalhistoryAsia 1909:PostalhistoryAsia 1508:. I noticed that 1452:, and especially 1404: 1390:comment added by 1164:According to the 447: 309:UK Board of Trade 105: 100: 99: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 5068: 5046: 5042: 5018: 4363: 4357: 4309: 4288: 4281: 4266:How about this? 4235: 4229: 4222: 4215: 4189: 4185:Philately member 4183: 3886:Any objections? 3873: 3871: 3789:Malaysia article 3485:I would support 3279:information the 2854:reliable sources 2299:New development: 1965: 1959: 1955: 1949: 1945: 1939: 1934: 1928: 1923: 1917: 1913: 1907: 1903: 1897: 1571: 1570: 1403: 1384: 1254: 1253: 1251: 1250: 1236: 1058:Non-free content 907:reliably sourced 598:pointed out by 434: 419: 418: 354:which may help. 184:inline citations 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 5076: 5075: 5071: 5070: 5069: 5067: 5066: 5065: 5064: 5063: 5050: 5030:deletion policy 5019: 4999: 4977:Michael Romanov 4975:. Thank you! -- 4940:Michael Romanov 4936:this discussion 4934:, according to 4766:Michael Romanov 4683: 4652: 4609: 4582: 4545:Michael Romanov 4537:this discussion 4454:Michael Romanov 4390: 4361: 4355: 4308: 4292:This user is a 4278: 4242: 4233: 4227: 4225:This user is a 4187: 4181: 4163: 4147:Michael Romanov 4115: 4053:, then article 4043: 4025:Michael Romanov 4021:Stanley Gibbons 4013:Sta. & Gib. 4011:One more flaw. 3999:Michael Romanov 3962:Michael Romanov 3952:, e.g. see the 3942: 3903:Michael Romanov 3883: 3874: 3869: 3863: 3847: 3801:Michael Romanov 3781: 3739:Someone tagged 3737: 3713:Michael Romanov 3652:Michael Romanov 3578:Michael Romanov 3511: 3495:Michael Romanov 3323:discouraged by 3304: 3263:Michael Romanov 3231:with you about 3181: 3149:Michael Romanov 3145:Wayback Machine 3112: 3069:Michael Romanov 3015:Michael Romanov 2991:redirects from 2975:Michael Romanov 2945:Michael Romanov 2903:Michael Romanov 2858:Michael Romanov 2807:Michael Romanov 2723:Michael Romanov 2667:Michael Romanov 2651: 2618:Michael Romanov 2585:Michael Romanov 2471:Michael Romanov 2354:Michael Romanov 2296: 2261:Michael Romanov 2170:Michael Romanov 2123: 2121:Commons uploads 2075: 1992:Presumably the 1963: 1957: 1953: 1947: 1943: 1937: 1932: 1926: 1921: 1915: 1911: 1905: 1901: 1895: 1878:Michael Romanov 1866:Michael Romanov 1816: 1750:Michael Romanov 1724:Michael Romanov 1641:Michael Romanov 1577: 1576: 1568: 1564: 1538:Michael Romanov 1515:Michael Romanov 1462:Michael Romanov 1410:Michael Romanov 1385: 1377: 1264: 1262:Fair Use appeal 1259: 1258: 1257: 1248: 1246: 1238: 1237: 1233: 939: 781: 708:(minimal use). 649:freely licenced 432: 429: 412: 411: 336:so use Nyassa. 116: 110: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 5074: 5072: 5057: 5048: 5013: 4998: 4993:Nomination of 4991: 4990: 4989: 4988: 4987: 4924: 4923: 4908: 4907: 4890: 4889: 4870: 4869: 4862: 4861: 4851: 4850: 4849: 4848: 4847: 4846: 4845: 4844: 4825: 4824: 4823: 4822: 4821: 4820: 4801: 4800: 4799: 4798: 4777: 4776: 4745: 4744: 4735: 4726: 4717: 4708: 4682: 4679: 4651: 4648: 4647: 4646: 4608: 4605: 4581: 4578: 4577: 4576: 4575: 4574: 4556: 4555: 4489: 4488: 4487: 4486: 4485: 4484: 4389: 4386: 4385: 4384: 4383: 4382: 4381: 4380: 4379: 4378: 4377: 4376: 4343: 4342: 4341: 4340: 4339: 4338: 4337: 4336: 4315: 4314: 4313: 4312: 4311: 4310: 4305: 4304: 4289: 4279: 4259: 4258: 4257: 4256: 4239: 4238: 4223: 4213: 4207: 4206: 4162: 4159: 4158: 4157: 4135:SlaveToTheWage 4114: 4109: 4042: 4039: 4038: 4037: 4036: 4035: 4009: 3995:Michel catalog 3941: 3938: 3937: 3936: 3923: 3914: 3913: 3882: 3879: 3862: 3846: 3845:Proposed merge 3843: 3842: 3841: 3840: 3839: 3780: 3777: 3776: 3775: 3736: 3733: 3732: 3731: 3730: 3729: 3728: 3727: 3726: 3725: 3724: 3723: 3667: 3666: 3665: 3664: 3663: 3662: 3633:. Neither the 3616:. In general, 3561: 3535: 3510: 3507: 3506: 3505: 3469: 3468: 3463: 3458: 3453: 3444: 3443: 3442: 3441: 3440: 3439: 3438: 3437: 3436: 3435: 3410: 3409: 3408: 3407: 3406: 3405: 3404: 3403: 3389:postal history 3357: 3356: 3355: 3354: 3353: 3352: 3344: 3343: 3342: 3341: 3334: 3320: 3319: 3318: 3317: 3303: 3300: 3299: 3298: 3297: 3296: 3284: 3249: 3248: 3247:? I am citing: 3180: 3177: 3176: 3175: 3174: 3173: 3111: 3108: 3107: 3106: 3105: 3104: 3103: 3102: 3082: 3081: 3080: 3079: 3034: 3033: 3032: 3031: 3030: 3029: 3028: 3027: 3026: 3025: 2959: 2958: 2957: 2956: 2955: 2880: 2879: 2878: 2877: 2876: 2875: 2874: 2873: 2872: 2871: 2870: 2869: 2868: 2819: 2818: 2817: 2650: 2644: 2600: 2599: 2598: 2597: 2596: 2595: 2573:search results 2541: 2537: 2536: 2535: 2534: 2533: 2532: 2454:search results 2434: 2433: 2432: 2431: 2430: 2429: 2428: 2427: 2426: 2425: 2384: 2295: 2292: 2291: 2290: 2249: 2248: 2247: 2246: 2245: 2244: 2243: 2242: 2181: 2180: 2162: 2161:year together) 2145:For instance, 2143: 2142: 2137: 2132: 2122: 2119: 2118: 2117: 2116: 2115: 2114: 2113: 2074: 2071: 2070: 2069: 2068: 2067: 2066: 2065: 2064: 2063: 2062: 2061: 2060: 2059: 2017: 2016: 2015: 2014: 2013: 2012: 1998:postal history 1985: 1984: 1983: 1982: 1968:Postal history 1889: 1888: 1854:navigation box 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1831:Postal history 1815: 1812: 1811: 1810: 1809: 1808: 1807: 1806: 1805: 1804: 1803: 1802: 1801: 1800: 1774: 1773: 1772: 1771: 1770: 1769: 1768: 1767: 1766: 1765: 1764: 1763: 1734: 1687: 1686: 1685: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1639:left of it. -- 1633: 1632: 1631: 1630: 1621: 1612: 1600: 1599: 1566: 1563: 1560: 1559: 1558: 1557: 1556: 1555: 1554: 1553: 1552: 1551: 1550: 1549: 1548: 1493: 1492: 1491: 1490: 1489: 1488: 1487: 1486: 1437: 1436: 1435: 1434: 1376: 1373: 1372: 1371: 1370: 1369: 1368: 1367: 1366: 1365: 1364: 1363: 1362: 1361: 1327: 1326: 1325: 1324: 1323: 1322: 1321: 1320: 1263: 1260: 1256: 1255: 1230: 1229: 1225: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1221: 1220: 1219: 1218: 1217: 1162: 1161: 1160: 1159: 1158: 1157: 1156: 1155: 1154: 1153: 1152: 1151: 1150: 1149: 1148: 1147: 1146: 1040: 1039: 1038: 1037: 1036: 1035: 1034: 1033: 938: 935: 934: 933: 932: 931: 930: 929: 928: 927: 926: 925: 879: 878: 877: 876: 875: 874: 873: 872: 780: 777: 776: 775: 774: 773: 772: 771: 770: 769: 768: 767: 766: 765: 608:Commons policy 573: 572: 571: 570: 569: 568: 567: 566: 565: 564: 428: 425: 406: 405: 404: 403: 402: 401: 400: 399: 398: 397: 396: 395: 297: 296: 281: 267: 266: 265: 264: 263: 262: 261: 206:Niassa Company 179: 178: 156:Niassa Company 115: 112: 111: 102: 101: 98: 97: 92: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5073: 5061: 5056: 5055: 5051: 5044: 5039: 5037: 5031: 5027: 5023: 5017: 5012: 5011: 5008: 5006: 4996: 4992: 4986: 4982: 4978: 4974: 4970: 4966: 4965: 4964: 4960: 4956: 4952: 4951: 4950: 4949: 4945: 4941: 4937: 4933: 4929: 4922: 4918: 4914: 4910: 4909: 4906: 4903: 4901: 4896: 4892: 4891: 4888: 4884: 4880: 4876: 4872: 4871: 4867: 4864: 4863: 4859: 4856: 4855: 4854: 4843: 4840: 4838: 4833: 4832: 4831: 4830: 4829: 4828: 4827: 4826: 4819: 4815: 4811: 4807: 4806: 4805: 4804: 4803: 4802: 4797: 4793: 4789: 4785: 4781: 4780: 4779: 4778: 4775: 4771: 4767: 4764:procedure. -- 4763: 4759: 4758: 4757: 4756: 4753: 4751: 4743: 4739: 4736: 4734: 4730: 4727: 4725: 4721: 4718: 4716: 4712: 4709: 4707: 4703: 4700: 4699: 4698: 4696: 4692: 4688: 4680: 4678: 4677: 4673: 4669: 4665: 4661: 4660:Military mail 4657: 4656:Military post 4649: 4645: 4641: 4637: 4633: 4629: 4628: 4627: 4626: 4622: 4618: 4617:SteveStrummer 4614: 4606: 4604: 4603: 4599: 4595: 4591: 4587: 4579: 4573: 4569: 4565: 4560: 4559: 4558: 4557: 4554: 4550: 4546: 4542: 4538: 4534: 4530: 4526: 4525: 4524: 4523: 4520: 4518: 4512: 4511: 4508: 4506: 4501: 4497: 4493: 4483: 4480: 4478: 4473: 4469: 4465: 4464: 4463: 4459: 4455: 4451: 4447: 4446: 4445: 4441: 4437: 4433: 4429: 4425: 4421: 4417: 4413: 4412: 4411: 4410: 4407: 4405: 4399: 4395: 4387: 4375: 4371: 4367: 4360: 4353: 4352: 4351: 4350: 4349: 4348: 4347: 4346: 4345: 4344: 4335: 4331: 4327: 4326:SteveStrummer 4323: 4322: 4321: 4320: 4319: 4318: 4317: 4316: 4302: 4301: 4297: 4295: 4290: 4287: 4283: 4282: 4277: 4273: 4269: 4265: 4264: 4263: 4262: 4261: 4260: 4254: 4250: 4249:SteveStrummer 4246: 4236: 4230: 4224: 4221: 4217: 4216: 4211: 4210: 4209: 4208: 4205: 4201: 4197: 4193: 4186: 4179: 4178: 4177: 4176: 4172: 4168: 4167:SteveStrummer 4160: 4156: 4152: 4148: 4144: 4140: 4136: 4132: 4131: 4130: 4129: 4125: 4121: 4113: 4110: 4108: 4107: 4104: 4099: 4097: 4093: 4089: 4083: 4081: 4077: 4073: 4072: 4067: 4062: 4060: 4056: 4052: 4048: 4040: 4034: 4030: 4026: 4022: 4018: 4014: 4010: 4008: 4004: 4000: 3996: 3992: 3988: 3987: 3986: 3982: 3978: 3977:SteveStrummer 3974: 3973: 3972: 3971: 3967: 3963: 3959: 3955: 3951: 3947: 3939: 3935: 3931: 3927: 3924: 3921: 3916: 3915: 3912: 3908: 3904: 3900: 3899: 3898: 3897: 3893: 3889: 3880: 3878: 3877: 3872: 3866: 3860: 3856: 3852: 3844: 3838: 3835: 3833: 3827: 3826: 3825: 3821: 3817: 3814:Makes sense. 3813: 3812: 3811: 3810: 3806: 3802: 3798: 3794: 3790: 3785: 3778: 3774: 3770: 3766: 3762: 3758: 3757: 3756: 3755: 3751: 3747: 3742: 3734: 3722: 3718: 3714: 3710: 3706: 3702: 3701: 3700: 3696: 3692: 3687: 3683: 3679: 3675: 3674: 3673: 3672: 3671: 3670: 3669: 3668: 3661: 3657: 3653: 3649: 3644: 3641:on EN:WP and 3640: 3637:article, nor 3636: 3632: 3627: 3623: 3619: 3615: 3611: 3607: 3603: 3602: 3601: 3597: 3593: 3589: 3588: 3587: 3583: 3579: 3575: 3574: 3573: 3572: 3568: 3564: 3559: 3555: 3551: 3547: 3543: 3539: 3533: 3529: 3525: 3521: 3520:"xxxx stamps" 3518:' along with 3517: 3508: 3504: 3500: 3496: 3492: 3488: 3484: 3483: 3482: 3481: 3477: 3473: 3467: 3464: 3462: 3459: 3457: 3454: 3452: 3449: 3448: 3447: 3434: 3430: 3426: 3420: 3419: 3418: 3417: 3416: 3415: 3414: 3413: 3412: 3411: 3402: 3398: 3394: 3390: 3386: 3385:postage stamp 3381: 3378: 3377: 3376: 3375: 3374: 3373: 3372: 3371: 3370: 3369: 3365: 3361: 3350: 3349: 3348: 3347: 3346: 3345: 3339: 3335: 3332: 3331: 3330: 3329: 3328: 3326: 3315: 3311: 3310: 3309: 3308: 3307: 3301: 3295: 3291: 3287: 3282: 3278: 3274: 3273: 3272: 3268: 3264: 3260: 3259: 3257: 3255: 3246: 3242: 3238: 3234: 3230: 3226: 3225: 3224: 3223: 3219: 3215: 3211: 3207: 3203: 3198: 3194: 3190: 3186: 3178: 3172: 3168: 3164: 3160: 3159: 3158: 3154: 3150: 3146: 3142: 3141: 3140: 3139: 3135: 3131: 3126: 3122: 3121: 3117: 3109: 3101: 3097: 3093: 3088: 3087: 3086: 3085: 3084: 3083: 3078: 3074: 3070: 3065: 3064: 3063: 3059: 3055: 3051: 3050: 3049: 3048: 3044: 3040: 3024: 3020: 3016: 3012: 3008: 3007: 3006: 3002: 2998: 2994: 2990: 2986: 2985: 2984: 2980: 2976: 2972: 2968: 2964: 2960: 2954: 2950: 2946: 2942: 2938: 2935:will contain 2934: 2929: 2928: 2927: 2923: 2919: 2914: 2913: 2912: 2908: 2904: 2900: 2899: 2898: 2894: 2890: 2886: 2881: 2867: 2863: 2859: 2855: 2851: 2847: 2843: 2839: 2835: 2834: 2833: 2829: 2825: 2820: 2816: 2812: 2808: 2804: 2800: 2799: 2798: 2797: 2796: 2792: 2788: 2784: 2780: 2776: 2772: 2768: 2767: 2766: 2762: 2758: 2753: 2749: 2748: 2747: 2743: 2739: 2734: 2733: 2732: 2728: 2724: 2720: 2716: 2711: 2710: 2709: 2705: 2701: 2697: 2696: 2695: 2691: 2687: 2683: 2679: 2678: 2677: 2676: 2672: 2668: 2664: 2660: 2656: 2648: 2645: 2643: 2642: 2638: 2634: 2628: 2627: 2623: 2619: 2615: 2611: 2606: 2594: 2590: 2586: 2582: 2578: 2574: 2570: 2566: 2562: 2558: 2554: 2550: 2549: 2548: 2547: 2546: 2545: 2543: 2530: 2526: 2522: 2519: 2515: 2514: 2513: 2509: 2505: 2501: 2497: 2493: 2489: 2485: 2484: 2483: 2482: 2481: 2480: 2476: 2472: 2467: 2464: 2460: 2455: 2451: 2447: 2443: 2439: 2424: 2420: 2416: 2411: 2410: 2409: 2405: 2401: 2397: 2396: 2395: 2391: 2387: 2382: 2378: 2375:warning. -- 2374: 2369: 2368:item specific 2365: 2364: 2363: 2359: 2355: 2351: 2347: 2343: 2342: 2341: 2337: 2333: 2328: 2327:item specific 2323: 2322: 2321: 2320: 2316: 2312: 2308: 2304: 2300: 2293: 2289: 2285: 2281: 2277: 2273: 2272: 2271: 2270: 2266: 2262: 2258: 2254: 2241: 2237: 2233: 2229: 2228: 2227: 2223: 2219: 2215: 2214:Stamps of xxx 2211: 2207: 2206: 2205: 2201: 2197: 2193: 2189: 2185: 2184: 2183: 2182: 2179: 2175: 2171: 2167: 2163: 2160: 2156: 2152: 2151: 2150: 2148: 2141: 2138: 2136: 2133: 2131: 2128: 2127: 2126: 2120: 2112: 2108: 2104: 2100: 2099: 2098: 2094: 2090: 2086: 2082: 2081: 2080: 2079: 2078: 2072: 2058: 2054: 2050: 2045: 2044: 2043: 2042: 2041: 2037: 2033: 2029: 2025: 2024: 2023: 2022: 2021: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2011: 2007: 2003: 1999: 1995: 1991: 1990: 1989: 1988: 1987: 1986: 1981: 1977: 1973: 1969: 1962: 1952: 1942: 1936: 1931: 1920: 1910: 1900: 1893: 1892: 1891: 1890: 1887: 1883: 1879: 1875: 1871: 1867: 1864:. Regards, -- 1863: 1859: 1855: 1851: 1850: 1845: 1841: 1837: 1832: 1827: 1826: 1825: 1824: 1823: 1821: 1813: 1799: 1795: 1791: 1786: 1785: 1784: 1783: 1782: 1781: 1780: 1779: 1778: 1777: 1776: 1775: 1761: 1760: 1759: 1755: 1751: 1747: 1743: 1739: 1735: 1733: 1729: 1725: 1721: 1717: 1716: 1715: 1711: 1707: 1703: 1699: 1695: 1694: 1693: 1692: 1691: 1690: 1689: 1688: 1681: 1677: 1673: 1669: 1668: 1667: 1663: 1659: 1655: 1654: 1653: 1652: 1651: 1650: 1646: 1642: 1638: 1629: 1625: 1622: 1620: 1616: 1613: 1611: 1607: 1604: 1603: 1602: 1601: 1597: 1593: 1592: 1590: 1588: 1584: 1575: 1561: 1547: 1543: 1539: 1535: 1531: 1530: 1529: 1525: 1521: 1516: 1511: 1507: 1503: 1502: 1501: 1500: 1499: 1498: 1497: 1496: 1495: 1494: 1485: 1481: 1477: 1473: 1472: 1471: 1467: 1463: 1459: 1455: 1451: 1447: 1443: 1442: 1441: 1440: 1439: 1438: 1433: 1429: 1425: 1421: 1420: 1419: 1415: 1411: 1407: 1406: 1405: 1401: 1397: 1393: 1389: 1382: 1360: 1356: 1352: 1348: 1344: 1343: 1342: 1341: 1340: 1339: 1338: 1337: 1336: 1335: 1334: 1333: 1332: 1331: 1319: 1315: 1311: 1306: 1305: 1304: 1300: 1296: 1291: 1290: 1289: 1288: 1287: 1283: 1279: 1275: 1271: 1266: 1265: 1261: 1245: 1241: 1235: 1232: 1228: 1216: 1212: 1208: 1203: 1202: 1201: 1197: 1193: 1189: 1186: 1185: 1184: 1180: 1176: 1171: 1167: 1163: 1145: 1141: 1137: 1132: 1128: 1127: 1126: 1125: 1124: 1120: 1116: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1105: 1101: 1096: 1095: 1094: 1090: 1086: 1081: 1080: 1079: 1075: 1071: 1067: 1063: 1059: 1055: 1050: 1049: 1048: 1047: 1046: 1045: 1044: 1043: 1042: 1041: 1032: 1028: 1024: 1019: 1018: 1017: 1013: 1009: 1004: 1003: 1002: 998: 994: 990: 985: 984: 983: 979: 975: 971: 966: 965: 964: 963: 959: 955: 950: 944: 943: 924: 920: 916: 912: 908: 904: 900: 899: 893: 889: 888: 887: 886: 885: 884: 883: 882: 881: 880: 871: 867: 863: 858: 857: 856: 852: 848: 843: 842: 841: 837: 833: 828: 827: 826: 822: 818: 814: 810: 806: 802: 798: 797: 796: 795: 791: 787: 778: 764: 760: 756: 751: 746: 745: 744: 740: 736: 733: 729: 725: 721: 720: 719: 715: 711: 707: 703: 702:WP:NFC#Images 699: 695: 694: 693: 689: 685: 681: 677: 676: 675: 671: 667: 663: 662:WP:NFC#Images 659: 654: 650: 646: 645: 644: 643: 642: 641: 637: 633: 629: 623: 621: 617: 611: 609: 605: 601: 597: 591: 589: 584: 579: 578: 563: 559: 555: 550: 547: 546: 545: 541: 537: 532: 531: 526: 525: 524: 520: 516: 511: 510: 509: 505: 501: 497: 492: 491: 490: 486: 482: 477: 473: 469: 468: 467: 463: 459: 456: 452: 451: 446: 439: 435: 426: 424: 423: 420: 417: 416: 394: 390: 386: 385:I know Nyassa 383:appreciated. 381: 380: 379: 375: 371: 370:I know Nyassa 367: 366: 365: 361: 357: 353: 349: 348: 347: 343: 339: 335: 332: 328: 327: 326: 322: 318: 314: 310: 306: 301: 300: 299: 298: 295: 291: 287: 282: 280: 276: 272: 269:Yes, agreed. 268: 260: 256: 252: 251:I know Nyassa 247: 246: 245: 241: 237: 233: 229: 225: 221: 220: 219: 215: 211: 210:I know Nyassa 207: 203: 202: 201: 197: 193: 189: 185: 181: 180: 177: 173: 169: 165: 161: 157: 153: 149: 145: 141: 137: 136: 135: 134: 130: 126: 125:I know Nyassa 121: 113: 109: 96: 93: 91: 88: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 5059: 5040: 5033: 5003: 5000: 4997:for deletion 4925: 4898: 4874: 4865: 4857: 4852: 4835: 4748: 4746: 4684: 4653: 4610: 4607:Postal issue 4590:located here 4583: 4515: 4513: 4503: 4491: 4490: 4475: 4402: 4391: 4298: 4291: 4164: 4116: 4103:SelectionBot 4100: 4084: 4069: 4063: 4054: 4044: 4016: 4012: 3990: 3953: 3949: 3945: 3943: 3884: 3848: 3830: 3791:both ] and 3786: 3782: 3738: 3691:GWillHickers 3677: 3592:GWillHickers 3563:GWillHickers 3553: 3541: 3519: 3512: 3493:articles. -- 3490: 3470: 3445: 3358: 3340:begins with: 3321: 3313: 3305: 3286:GWillHickers 3280: 3276: 3253: 3251: 3244: 3240: 3236: 3232: 3214:GWillHickers 3201: 3192: 3184: 3182: 3127: 3123: 3119: 3113: 3035: 3010: 2849: 2845: 2837: 2736:year style. 2680:Did you ask 2652: 2629: 2613: 2604: 2601: 2580: 2576: 2568: 2564: 2560: 2556: 2552: 2539: 2524: 2523:template on 2520: 2517: 2504:GWillHickers 2499: 2495: 2491: 2465: 2449: 2445: 2437: 2435: 2415:GWillHickers 2386:GWillHickers 2380: 2376: 2372: 2367: 2332:GWillHickers 2326: 2311:GWillHickers 2306: 2302: 2298: 2297: 2250: 2232:GWillHickers 2213: 2209: 2196:GWillHickers 2191: 2187: 2158: 2144: 2124: 2103:GWillHickers 2089:GWillHickers 2076: 2049:GWillHickers 2027: 1925: 1874:WP:WORLDVIEW 1836:GWillHickers 1819: 1817: 1790:GWillHickers 1746:WP:LOWERCASE 1720:GWillHickers 1698:GWillHickers 1658:GWillHickers 1636: 1634: 1596:WP:LOWERCASE 1583:GWillHickers 1579: 1534:WP:WORLDVIEW 1510:GWillHickers 1476:GWillHickers 1424:GWillHickers 1392:Gwillhickers 1378: 1351:GWillHickers 1346: 1328: 1295:GWillHickers 1273: 1247:. Retrieved 1234: 1226: 1207:GWillHickers 1175:GWillHickers 1169: 1115:GWillHickers 1085:GWillHickers 1023:GWillHickers 993:GWillHickers 954:GWillHickers 945: 940: 910: 895: 832:GWillHickers 786:GWillHickers 782: 749: 735:GWillHickers 732:GWillHickers 684:GWillHickers 625: 619: 616:free content 613: 600:GWillHickers 593: 587: 582: 581: 574: 536:GWillHickers 529: 500:GWillHickers 458:GWillHickers 455:GWillHickers 448: 444: 414: 413: 407: 330: 163: 159: 117: 103: 78: 43: 37: 4294:participant 4228:participant 4061:algorithm. 3560:' category. 3554:"on stamps" 2715:VR official 2647:VR official 1572:Moved from 1562:Page titles 1386:—Preceding 415:Dr. Blofeld 36:This is an 4762:WP:REQMOVE 4632:Wiktionary 3956:column in 3920:/Archive 7 3206:this stamp 2850:notability 2488:image file 2466:accessdate 2450:accessdate 2446:accessdate 1736:I renamed 1249:2008-08-18 1227:References 706:WP:NFCC#3a 95:Archive 10 4788:ww2censor 4668:ww2censor 4636:ww2censor 4564:ww2censor 4436:ww2censor 4366:ww2censor 4268:ww2censor 4245:Philately 4196:ww2censor 4059:WikiTrust 4017:Sta. Gib. 3888:ww2censor 3881:Archiving 3393:Maidonian 3380:ww2censor 3281:Ebay item 3245:ebay item 3193:ebay item 3163:Maidonian 3130:Maidonian 3092:ww2censor 3054:Maidonian 2997:Maidonian 2918:Maidonian 2889:Maidonian 2842:Maidonian 2824:Maidonian 2787:ww2censor 2775:this edit 2757:Maidonian 2738:ww2censor 2700:Maidonian 2686:ww2censor 2682:Maidonian 2561:Knowledge 2518:Knowledge 2438:Knowledge 2381:Main Page 2373:blacklist 2280:ww2censor 2218:Maidonian 2085:Talk Page 2032:ww2censor 1972:ww2censor 1706:ww2censor 1520:ww2censor 1446:Ww2censor 1381:talk page 1274:Generally 1070:ww2censor 974:ww2censor 970:WP:NFCC#9 915:ww2censor 903:WP:NFCC#8 710:ww2censor 666:ww2censor 626:See also 356:Maidonian 338:Maidonian 317:ww2censor 271:Maidonian 236:Maidonian 228:this book 192:ww2censor 168:Maidonian 90:Archive 9 85:Archive 8 79:Archive 7 73:Archive 6 68:Archive 5 60:Archive 1 4782:Our own 4180:Is this 4055:versions 3991:Mitchell 3746:dramatic 3241:cite web 3237:cite web 3233:cite web 3185:cite web 2973:only? -- 2577:cite web 2569:cite web 2557:cite web 2553:cite web 2521:cite web 2500:cite web 2496:cite web 2492:cite web 2463:Cite web 2442:Cite web 1740:back to 1400:contribs 1388:unsigned 1056:and the 588:fair use 583:Fair use 496:currency 409:course.. 154:and the 5026:deleted 4879:Ecphora 4594:Ecphora 4296:in the 4143:JPPINTO 3926:—WWoods 3816:Ecphora 3765:Ecphora 3686:Romania 3487:Ecphora 3472:Ecphora 3360:Ecphora 3208:on the 3202:history 3116:linkrot 3011:Rarität 2846:notable 2663:removed 2565:Commons 2525:Commons 2400:Ecphora 2377:However 2307:general 2303:present 2164:topic: 1700:to the 1672:Ecphora 1506:WP:ALSO 1458:WP:ALSO 1278:Ecphora 1136:Ecphora 892:Ecphora 862:Ecphora 817:Ecphora 755:Ecphora 632:Ecphora 530:section 39:archive 4139:SimonP 3678:stamps 3526:' or ' 3277:source 3229:talked 3212:page. 2961:As to 1856:. See 1066:WT:NFC 164:Nyassa 160:Niassa 5049:matic 4613:Issue 4500:WP:MM 4472:WP:MM 3870:talk 3606:asked 2987:Yes, 2838:nerve 1637:right 730:can. 16:< 5005:Jack 4981:talk 4959:talk 4955:Stan 4944:talk 4917:talk 4913:Stan 4900:Jack 4883:talk 4837:Jack 4814:talk 4810:Stan 4792:talk 4784:Stan 4770:talk 4750:Jack 4689:and 4672:talk 4640:talk 4621:talk 4598:talk 4592:. 4568:talk 4549:talk 4531:and 4517:Jack 4505:Jack 4498:per 4477:Jack 4458:talk 4452:. -- 4440:talk 4426:and 4422:and 4404:Jack 4396:and 4370:talk 4330:talk 4272:talk 4253:talk 4200:talk 4192:here 4171:talk 4151:talk 4145:. -- 4124:talk 4090:and 4029:talk 4003:talk 3981:talk 3966:talk 3954:Type 3948:and 3930:talk 3907:talk 3892:talk 3861:. -- 3853:and 3832:Jack 3829:---- 3820:talk 3805:talk 3769:talk 3750:talk 3717:talk 3711:. -- 3695:talk 3656:talk 3650:. -- 3596:talk 3582:talk 3567:talk 3499:talk 3476:talk 3429:talk 3425:Stan 3397:talk 3364:talk 3290:talk 3267:talk 3218:talk 3167:talk 3153:talk 3147:. -- 3134:talk 3096:talk 3073:talk 3058:talk 3043:talk 3039:Stan 3019:talk 3001:talk 2979:talk 2965:vs. 2949:talk 2943:. -- 2939:and 2922:talk 2907:talk 2893:talk 2862:talk 2856:. -- 2828:talk 2811:talk 2791:talk 2761:talk 2742:talk 2727:talk 2704:talk 2690:talk 2671:talk 2661:was 2637:talk 2633:Stan 2622:talk 2610:this 2589:talk 2508:talk 2475:talk 2419:talk 2404:talk 2390:talk 2358:talk 2352:. -- 2346:EBay 2336:talk 2315:talk 2284:talk 2265:talk 2259:. -- 2236:talk 2222:talk 2200:talk 2174:talk 2107:talk 2093:talk 2053:talk 2036:talk 2006:talk 2002:Stan 1976:talk 1946:and 1882:talk 1876:. -- 1870:talk 1858:this 1840:talk 1794:talk 1754:talk 1748:. -- 1728:talk 1710:talk 1676:talk 1662:talk 1645:talk 1587:talk 1542:talk 1536:. -- 1524:talk 1480:talk 1466:talk 1460:. -- 1428:talk 1414:talk 1396:talk 1355:talk 1314:talk 1310:Stan 1299:talk 1282:talk 1270:here 1211:talk 1196:talk 1192:Stan 1179:talk 1170:when 1140:talk 1119:talk 1104:talk 1100:Stan 1089:talk 1074:talk 1027:talk 1012:talk 1008:Stan 997:talk 978:talk 958:talk 919:talk 866:talk 851:talk 847:Stan 836:talk 821:talk 811:and 790:talk 759:talk 739:talk 714:talk 688:talk 670:talk 636:talk 630:. 604:talk 594:The 558:talk 554:Stan 540:talk 519:talk 515:Stan 504:talk 485:talk 481:Stan 462:talk 389:talk 374:talk 360:talk 342:talk 334:here 321:talk 290:talk 286:Stan 275:talk 255:talk 240:talk 214:talk 196:talk 186:and 172:talk 146:and 129:talk 4658:to 4535:in 4231:in 4098:! 3950:AIR 3946:NOR 3857:at 3612:to 2717:to 2559:is 2159:and 2028:six 1822:-- 1190:. 750:not 5032:. 5007:| 4983:) 4971:→ 4961:) 4946:) 4919:) 4902:| 4885:) 4839:| 4816:) 4794:) 4772:) 4752:| 4740:→ 4731:→ 4722:→ 4713:→ 4674:) 4666:. 4642:) 4623:) 4600:) 4570:) 4551:) 4519:| 4507:| 4492:NB 4479:| 4460:) 4442:) 4434:. 4406:| 4372:) 4362:}} 4356:{{ 4332:) 4274:) 4202:) 4188:}} 4182:{{ 4173:) 4153:) 4141:, 4137:, 4126:) 4031:) 4005:) 3993:? 3983:) 3968:) 3932:) 3909:) 3894:) 3834:| 3822:) 3807:) 3771:) 3752:) 3719:) 3697:) 3658:) 3624:, 3604:I 3598:) 3584:) 3569:) 3501:) 3478:) 3431:) 3399:) 3387:, 3366:) 3292:) 3269:) 3220:) 3169:) 3155:) 3136:) 3098:) 3075:) 3067:-- 3060:) 3045:) 3021:) 3003:) 2981:) 2951:) 2924:) 2909:) 2895:) 2864:) 2830:) 2813:) 2793:) 2763:) 2744:) 2729:) 2706:) 2692:) 2673:) 2639:) 2624:) 2591:) 2510:) 2477:) 2469:-- 2421:) 2406:) 2392:) 2360:) 2338:) 2317:) 2286:) 2267:) 2238:) 2224:) 2202:) 2176:) 2168:-- 2109:) 2095:) 2087:. 2055:) 2038:) 2008:) 1978:) 1964:}} 1958:{{ 1954:}} 1948:{{ 1944:}} 1938:{{ 1933:}} 1927:{{ 1924:, 1922:}} 1916:{{ 1914:, 1912:}} 1906:{{ 1904:, 1902:}} 1896:{{ 1884:) 1842:) 1796:) 1756:) 1730:) 1712:) 1678:) 1664:) 1647:) 1626:→ 1617:→ 1608:→ 1544:) 1526:) 1482:) 1468:) 1430:) 1416:) 1398:• 1383:. 1357:) 1316:) 1301:) 1284:) 1242:. 1213:) 1198:) 1181:) 1142:) 1121:) 1106:) 1091:) 1076:) 1029:) 1014:) 999:) 980:) 960:) 921:) 868:) 853:) 838:) 823:) 792:) 761:) 741:) 716:) 690:) 672:) 638:) 622:. 610:: 560:) 542:) 521:) 506:) 487:) 464:) 391:) 376:) 362:) 344:) 323:) 311:, 307:, 292:) 277:) 257:) 242:) 216:) 198:) 190:. 174:) 131:) 64:← 4979:( 4957:( 4942:( 4915:( 4881:( 4812:( 4790:( 4768:( 4670:( 4638:( 4619:( 4596:( 4566:( 4547:( 4456:( 4438:( 4368:( 4328:( 4303:. 4270:( 4255:) 4251:( 4237:. 4198:( 4169:( 4149:( 4122:( 4027:( 4001:( 3979:( 3964:( 3928:( 3905:( 3890:( 3867:| 3818:( 3803:( 3767:( 3748:( 3715:( 3693:( 3654:( 3594:( 3580:( 3565:( 3497:( 3474:( 3427:( 3395:( 3362:( 3316:. 3288:( 3265:( 3216:( 3165:( 3151:( 3132:( 3094:( 3071:( 3056:( 3041:( 3017:( 2999:( 2977:( 2947:( 2920:( 2905:( 2891:( 2860:( 2826:( 2809:( 2789:( 2759:( 2740:( 2725:( 2702:( 2688:( 2669:( 2635:( 2620:( 2587:( 2506:( 2473:( 2417:( 2402:( 2388:( 2356:( 2334:( 2313:( 2282:( 2263:( 2234:( 2220:( 2198:( 2172:( 2105:( 2091:( 2051:( 2034:( 2004:( 1974:( 1935:, 1880:( 1868:( 1838:( 1792:( 1752:( 1726:( 1708:( 1674:( 1660:( 1643:( 1598:: 1585:( 1540:( 1522:( 1478:( 1464:( 1426:( 1412:( 1394:( 1353:( 1312:( 1297:( 1280:( 1252:. 1209:( 1194:( 1177:( 1138:( 1117:( 1102:( 1087:( 1072:( 1025:( 1010:( 995:( 976:( 956:( 917:( 864:( 849:( 834:( 819:( 788:( 757:( 737:( 712:( 686:( 668:( 634:( 602:( 556:( 538:( 517:( 502:( 483:( 460:( 387:( 372:( 358:( 340:( 319:( 288:( 273:( 253:( 238:( 212:( 194:( 170:( 127:( 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.