Knowledge talk:WikiProject Philately/Archive 9

4895:

purchase stamps in the marketplace, especially from markets outside the collector's home nation. I believe that the Philately Portal at Knowledge could play a valuable role in helping resolve these concerns by creating a Database of Stamp Issues that would include both Stamp Identification Data from the relevant global-scope catalogues as well as information from Specialized Catalogues, and include the basic technical information regarding a stamp (perforation, dimensions, date of issue, etc). Given that Knowledge is now really the go-to internet source for reference information, this kind of a database would greatly enhance the coverage of philately in Knowledge and likely expose the hobby to many new potential collectors who, starting with the question "What is this stamp I have" start surfing links within the database to broader articles covering specific series which have already been contributed. I have created a mock-up of the kind of Knowledge post I envision here for a database entry in my sandbox

1873:, there is no justification, esp in opinionated matters when no discussion occurred before the deletions took place. Disagreements about 'critical commentary' and 'needed v. not needed images' are something else entirely. And you can always appeal any blocking. It happens all the time. Administrators are not gods and can be called to account if they abuse or take advantage of their administrative privileges to get over in a debate with another editor. As far as I know, an uninvolved administrator can only block you, and again only in cases where there is vandalism, sock-puppetry and other clear cases of serious policy violations. If that same editor follows you around from one article to the next and resorts to the same tacky and opinionated arguments as justification for such behavior then there are also 4069:, then you might have a chance but I can tell you other editors have brought up the same argument over the years, even for a change on this wiki alone, and nothing has happened to change the policy in the last 7 years. You should actually be happy and consider we are rather lucky there is even a non-free exception available to us because many other language wikis do not allow any non-free media at all. These copyright matters are taken so seriously that up to 10,000 German stamps are likely to be removed from the commons due to the legal status of German stamps being clarified which had been thought to be in the public domain. 2170: 2341:

the stamps of 1979) and of people depicted in artwork that can be connected back to real people (like Whistler's Mother). I included characters that are identified either explicitly by name or by likeness, but I'm sure that there are some that I missed because the actor images didn't match any that I saw in a quick search (like the character portrayed on the Enrico Caruso stamp of 1987; I don't really know opera, so I couldn't identify the character shown). I got up to about halfway through the 1995 comic strip issue in scanning the catalog and I would appreciate any input from other editors.

908:) it isn't the only postal operators. The second list currently just seems to be a duplicate of the first (and a non-encyclopedic list of websites...) and maybe they could be merged. This would enable to have a new list, based on the UPU list with : the governmental authority (the ministry), the regulator authority, the designated operator (which means the designated universal service provider responsible for the rights and obligations arising from the UPU Acts), its status and in case of liberalization its market share and its main competitors. What do you think of it? 3322:"are publications, usually periodical publications, that are printed or published electronically. (The online versions are called online magazines.) They are generally published on a regular schedule and contain a variety of content." As I see it, academic journals are a specialized subclass of magazines (namely: periodicals that are peer-reviewed and cover scholarly subjects). What exactly makes these philatelic periodicals "journals" and not "magazines"? (I take it that we can agree that they are not peer-reviewed academic journals)? Thanks. -- 4052:

also because there are circumstance where wikipedia material may be sold or used by others, whether commercially, derivatively or both, the educational exception that people often quote as a reason to use copyright images under the fair use doctrine does not apply and cannot be used. For that very reason an attribution is insufficient because post-1977 USPS stamps are simply in copyright. The only current possibility is to ensure that any non-free stamps, US or otherwise, are only used if they comply with

1994:#3, which says that it can be okay just to use a stamp "for identification" (i.e. simply to show what the stamp looks like). How should this be interpreted ? If for example a person X has been featured on a stamp, and that fact is mentioned in the article, is it okay to show what the stamp looked like, if the image is being used specifically in the context of the stamp, rather than as the main identification of person X at the top of the article ? 5020: 31: 1059:. The result was "keep" following a 4–4 tie on consensus. With this being a very small project, there doesn't seem to be any effective watch on AfD (or, indeed, on the altogether more contentious CfD) for philatelic items. Not sure what can be done about that except to regularly scan the titles in the proposed deletion lists but, if an item is found there, a notice should be posted on this page immediately to alert all members. 1106:) have been deleted for notability issues. I suppose anyone can claim each stamp is individually notable but with about 10,000 issues per year there has to be some thing special to justify an article. In depth design and issuance details are not enough to claim notability in my opinion especially as we are not a stamp catalogue which would have all those details. As I have previously stated and argued the foundation has the 4994:

would not bother much on such a project but instead recommend spending time improving interesting philatelic articles and leave the catalogues to those who will devote extensive time to it and have little else to do because such a database will take a long time and where are you getting the details; extensive use of those sources may well be a copyright violation too. If that's you then you have my full support.

2598: 2704: 2368:

depictions of Joseph and Mary and of the Madonna and child that have appeared on recent Christmas issues, instead opting to solicit discussion on the talk page regarding their inclusion. There are more references that we can find for the list, especially from newspaper accounts of more recent issues, or from other philatelic publications, and I expect to work on that as an ongoing project.

509:. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. 4177:, so please stop trying to wriggle around the non-free policy. It is what it is and the USPS statement does not help you. Regarding news sources using copyright images, they publish under the fair use doctrine but as you well know we have a much stricter policy. Exactly which celebrity's photos do you know from AP are in their biographies that fail 1587: 4181:? Most likely they should be deleted as copyright violations; give me a list and I'll review them. Why do we have to point out the same policies over and over? As I already suggested you need to get the foundation to change its policy. For now you will have to just be content that we can use some non-free stamp images instead of none at all. 3279:. So while some editors may wish to only define academic journals as journals that is not actually the case and we should not be forced into such a narrow meaning. In the philatelic world the majority of those publications are considered journals, so they are journals. Personally if, after discussion in the appropriate forum 610:

thing than having no concern. If assessing images is to be an assessment feature we can always discuss it merits. As you pointed out images without project banners do not appear on the Article Alert reports, so for images up for deletion, you may of course place a notice here if you wish. This is something I also told you.

4904:

allow users to get basic Identification information AND more importantly cross-references between the major catalogue numbering systems, which in the absence of any likely single global stamp identification standard being developed for the hobby will likely remain the basis for stamp identification for years to come.

4029:

that are unambiguously out of or free from copyright (or under a CC BY SA licence etc). You won't be able to put any copyrighted image on Commons no matter what disclaimer or caveat you add. In other words, your scope to use copyright U.S. stamps is limited to Knowledge hosting with a detailed rationale for each use.

904:. The former one is mainly based on the UPU membership list but it's unclear what the latter must contain, especially in countries where the postal sector has been liberalized. Even if in those countries the historical monopoly has the largest market share (80 % in the Netherlands, 90 % in Germany, 99 % in France 4098:

I thought that the additional blanket permission for news source publication found in the answer to my email would allow stamps in the same way photos of celebrities from the AP (with attribution at wikicommons) get into WP biographies. Stamp images are published online by the postal service, as well

4051:

are not permitted, so in most circumstances we cannot use them. I sort of expected as a long time editor you would appreciate the nuances of the fair use doctrine, which is what the USPS have stated above, as opposed to the enwiki's much stricter policy for non-free media. Besides it being policy and

3965:

which has prompted a start to deletion nominations in batches. However other than myself, it does not appear any German editors or other philatelists from any wiki have had any input. If all these stamps are removed from the commons, I estimate that the global wiki effect could be noticed in anywhere

2483:

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Knowledge struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for

2307:

page where these and others (like the folk heroes in the set issued in 1996) can be listed. The other actors on the list are commemorated as themselves; even though the stamps sometimes show actors in character (like the 1997 movie monsters set showing Boris Karloff, Bela Lugosi and Lon Chaney, Jr.,

1354:

Please will any Wikipedian philatelist with any of this set of stamps take photographs and donate them to Wikimedia? And if anyone were to donate photographs of the actual pillar boxes as well, that would also be very welcome. Photos of either the stamps or the pillar boxes would enhance the articles

4919:

Thank you for your interest in pushing forward this fascinating and important project. However, Knowledge is an encyclopedia in the first place and cannot be used for such a purpose as you suggest. Actually, there is another Wikimedia project, Wikibooks, that could be a home for your stamp database.

4653:

The unusual thing about the issue is that it is a rarity now worth $ 1000s, which is almost unheard of for modern stamps. The fact that a provisional issue was issued in Australia also makes it notable - it's not like it was issued by a country such as Guyana or Benin which have countless numbers of

4254:

I'm sorry but you still seem to be wriggling (no offence meant) to try and get around the policy. It's all about what you would like not what complies with policy. You can't support the AP claim you made and the two examples you gave are being used in the infobox of the articles in question which we

4227:

I persist in trying to convey information about stamps in an online encyclopedia because I believe the knowledge they, along with interpretive narrative, convey important facets of our culture and society of general interest, and that is worthwhile. Ah, the censor would like a list to pursue. I wish

4130:

criteria. The fair-use statement you have quoted is only for non-commercial use of the unaltered images and is therefore incompatible with Knowledge. You'd be better off looking for free (compatibly licenced or public domain) content rather than trying to 'fix' a system that most people don't see as

3823:

Not at all. Categories can and are created all the time, no discussion is needed for that. The distinction between academic journals and magazines is made in many areas, from astronomy to health-related subjects, to religion. A sweeping decision to do away with that distinction really cannot be made

3750:

Dear colleagues, let me sum up the discussion. At the moment, it's not straightforward to reach a consensus on this issue regarding the philatelic journals vs. magazines. Obviously, the issue is part of a more general problem to characterise articles about journals/magazines in Knowledge as a whole.

3189:

What this is all about IMHO is an effort to eventually restrict Journal categories to academic journals. There simply isn't the consensus to do so and I don't think this is the place to achieve it. As Michael Romanov suggests, that discussion should be taking place elsewhere so that there is a sound

3166:

peer-reviewed academic journals, not magazines. Having separate category trees for academic journals and magazines goes back many years, judging from the histories. It also makes sense, because academic journals really are a particular form of periodical. We have thousands of articles categorized in

3049:

as "philatelic magazines". Creating a cat is nothing out of the ordinary and does not normally need prior discussion or consensus and I create cats frequently. There are many disadvantages to a "Philatelic periodicals" cat (a argued by almost every participant who commented on that in the discussion

2340:

by looking through my copy of the 2006 Scott catalog. So far, I purposely left out most of the religious characters depicted on Christmas stamps (there's a whole argument that I don't want to get into right now). I also left out mention of generic classes of people (such as the Olympic athletes on

1780:

8. Contextual significance. applies: Non-free content of visual information found on the entire stamp image "significantly increases reader’s understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.” Stamps are a visual medium, it is not sufficient to describe

1724:

When the topical context is provided and a description is presented by a reliable source, which can be either USPS itself or Smithsonian Institute’s National Postal Museum, the USPS fair use license is satisfied for WP purposes, for stamps just as it is for commercially published baseball cards with

1071:

Please be assured that I have no axe to grind with AfD as I think it is an essential function, but it does need watching as notability can sometimes be given a skewed interpretation and perfectly acceptable articles can be lost simply because no one with any relevant knowledge comes forward to offer

818:

There's definitely much overlap here. Postmark, perhaps in theory a mark only showing the date and place where posted, often is used as a Cancellation or has killer bars attached. The problem is that both these are already pretty long and if merged would produce something clearly too long. Postal

609:

Don't distort what I wrote. I did not tell you that images were no concern to this project, I said that tagging images with this project's banner is not something we do because we don't assess images under the assessment criteria and therefore we do not track such tags. That is an entirely different

4217:

justified on this page with your approval, but since arbitrarily removed some time ago by a drive-by vandal without discussion. The presumption seemed to be against stamp images even though they meet additional tests of literary notability not found in the Foundation policy. A stamp's notability is

4028:

Only "fair use" images may be hosted here and only "free" images on Commons. That means that you can only use a fair use image in Knowledge if you have a significant discussion of the image in the relevant article and a rationale for each use of the image in an article. Commons can only have images

3249:

is an academic research journal in physics--it is not a magazine in the usual sense, and it is not about what is now known as philosophy. I would therefore support a category renaming for all the journal categories to academic journal or, possibly, research journal. The present wording, tho clear

2302:

would work? But now that I think about it further, the Star Wars stamps issued in 2007 aren't listed on that page either and they have almost the same situation of listing the character or the actor. However, the Star Wars stamps weren't photos from the films but paintings of characters and scenes

1851:

It seems that the lack of response here indicates the issue is not yet "ripe" as the Supreme Court would say, for stamps to match baseball cards, video games or TV shows as visual media on Knowledge in their own philately right. But I am interested in participating in that policy change whenever it

1837:

My previous experience in trying to uphold a consensus outcome from a Dispute Resolution is, that when an editor confronts an administrator, the administrator can blank the outcome, and I am blocked for violating the 3RR rule, not the disrupting administrator. On the other hand, I have now uploaded

1714:

That is an example of an article written to one stamp alone. There can also be topical philately articles. These investigate how cultural expression of significant events are commemorated by a visual medium, stamps, as promulgated by Congressional Joint Resolutions. USPS permits use of their stamps

1085:

Actually none of the so called RS have any critical commentary about the stamp itself, just facts about its issuance and design. The only claim was it popularity in-state purchases which is only to be expected and I don't see the other point as very substantive. Being an out-of-copyright stamp with

4993:

images, so that is a major problem in making a wikibooks catagloue really useful. External sites use the images as fair-use. We have also had some discussion about the use of stamp catalog numbers and we consider extensive use as a copyright violation though occasional use is allowed. Personally I

3995:

The use of stamp images, brochures, print advertisements, or other copyrighted materials for educational and news reporting purposes generally do not require prior approval from Integration and Planning. The Postal Service does not require a license for an educational use that is noncommercial and

3224:

I agree with Randykitty that what he describes has been the practice for at least the last 6 or 7 years to separate academic journals (with the understanding that there are some periodicals which can be equally well classified as either--that is, they carry both news & discussion of a science,

1125:

This article is a great example of why we should be routinely using www.webcitation.org to archive web pages in references. There are three references and five external links in the article and every one is now dead. There actually are two stamps, 1957 and 2007, as I am sure all the Americans here

4618:

That is not an emergency or provisional stamp, they is simply make-up rate stamps that many countries have issued to make up the difference between a new rate and the previous rate before stamps at the new rate are available. There are far more notable stamps that should have articles long before

4012:

is to show images as current news in an online encyclopedia. The concern of image misuse for commercial purposes by others "downstream" is accounted for by noting “United States Postal Service. All rights reserved.” Do you read #663.31 in the same way? Basically, WP and Wikicommons are prohibited

3800:

What was "out of process" here was the creation of the category Philatelic magazines in the first place since the previous discussion resulted in no consensus and the closer said "There seems come confusion over the distinction, if any, between "periodical", "magazine" and "journal", and no clear

2182:

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets

1384:

How long is this article going to get? It is already very long and you are only up to 1909! I think you should consider moving some of the content to subsidiary articles like "First stamps of Uruguay" or something similar. It could also do with a lot more in-text references. Otherwise, fine work.

4903:

Regarding the use of Catalogue numbers - I believe that the listing of catalogue numbers in and of themselves is a fair use of information. The database would not be in any way a competitor to the catalogues in terms of trying to offer valuation guidance, but rather a simple refernce that would

4801:

On what basis isn't it a provisional issue? The Adelaide issue is definitely "a postage stamp issued for temporary use (it was only sold for a couple of days in early January) to meet postal demands until new or regular stocks of stamps can be obtained (it stopped being sold after regular stamps

1011:

I eventually added my 2c worth, well more like 95c worth I think as I am accused of being just a little bit verbose. Thanks to all who contributed, so lets hope there will be an increase in philatelic editors from now on. Maybe we should write an article that could be sent to some of the English

965:

is inadequately titled but it is easily the most useful and informative of the three and should be regarded as the definitive document providing a list of this type. I think it should be expanded using essential and otherwise useful information culled from the other two lists which would then be

4307:

Can it be that you do not acknowledge stamps as informational content? But WP:NFCCP #5 says, Content. Non-free content meets general Knowledge content standards and is encyclopedic. That is my desire, adding informative content to the online encyclopedia, and informative content includes visual

4289:

You have clearly misapplied policy, and created something of your own desire, -- is it disliking the idea of an article as a "stamp album" as I recall one editor putting it? I have always included descriptive context interpreting the stamp images for significance. As to your last post, non-free

2613:

is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating

849:

I don't think the public would differentiate cachet but I agree. Cancellation is more of a philatelic term and postmark is what they all are to the public. Clearly some cancellations are not postmarks, particularly with revenue stamps for instance, but that distinction could be dealt with in an

4894:

One of the great frustrations collectors have is finding basic information regarding stamps that they may come into possession. Another big complaint among many collectors is that it is often frustrating to have to deal with the multitude of stamp catalogues when trying to identify stamps and

4691:(if anyone feels like expanding the article to a whole-world perspective), but there isn't really anything more notable than the hard-to-find provisional overprints of dozens of countries; except possibly that someone on ebay has managed to prove that there is, indeed, one born every minute. 2367:

Well, there it is, now in article space. I know that I've missed a couple that are depicted behind the main subject (like on the directors stamps) or where I couldn't identify exactly which character is shown (like on many of the opera singer commemoratives). I also purposely left out the

3317:

Yes, perhaps we should take this to CFD and rename all current "journal" cats to "academic journal". But before we do so, I'd like to have a better understanding of what people here think is the difference between "academic journal", "journal", and "magazine". According to our description,

1804:, had you simply restored the images and stood by your edits, per 3RR rule, demanding a discussion and a broader consensus on a per article/image basis, the images would not be orphans and hence automatically eligible for deletion. If it's not too late I'd give that option some thought. -- 3528:

I have moved your anchor, so that it actually goes to what you are trying to link. And I said earlier, wherever this comes from (Ulrich's apparently, I have no access to that service) is not giving correct info, as already the first journal that I checked is most definitely peer reviewed.

3966:

between 15–50K articles. More reviewers will be needed to determine which images are good and which must go. Some can possibly be moved to those language wikis that allow non-free media in certain circumstances like the enwiki. Please review this issue and if you can assist please do so.

3044:

That old discussion was closed "no consensus" in April of last year, didn't really remember that. I have not started moving articles between cats ("philatelic journals" has only 14 entries, so that would be the work of minutes). I just categorized the new articles on magazines created by

5084:

inconsistencies in factual bits, like date of issue. Quite a lot of "business logic" in the backend, to handle randomness like all the different ways to write the same denomination, and right now I'm working on connecting souvenir sheets to the stamps on them, you can see an example at

5083:

Heh, an excuse for a status update - stampdata.com is still under development, now up to 530K types or so. I've been gradually morphing it something that is a union of data and images originating from different websites, about 1.5M URLs at this point, and can get reports on things like

3070:

I would support separate categories for magazines and journals, or separate categories for journals and academic journals. The terms are similar but the concepts are different and if there are enough items to fill multiple categories then I see no problem in having multiple categories.

1110:

where such detail would be far more appropriate. With so few active philatelists I suppose an occasional one will slip through, as do one on other topics or even hoaxes, until someone spots them. Perhaps there is a need now to review all the individual stamp article for notability.

3459:

Pls read more carefully: "found the following non-referred academic/scholarly journals in English among the results: Art and Australia, Agricultural Science, The Australian Law Journal, Australian Nursing and Midwifery Journal, etc. (just the first few, in alphabetical order)".

1350:

commemorated this batch of post boxes with a set of stamps of 50c, $ 1 and $ 2.60. Wikimedia has no images of either the pillar boxes or the stamps commemorating them. There are such photos elsewhere online, but all that I have found seem to be copyright "all rights reserved".

4195:

Sorry, an AP example escapes me. I am not sure it is fair to characterize me as making up excuses or wriggling. But it seems it is enough to present a low resolution version of an image on WP, "unsuitable for commercial reproduction" -- as in the case of product logos in

3631:

I understand that "peer review" might be carried out by editorial board members or external invited experts. I, too, thought that "editorial peer review" meant editorial-board peer review (citation needed), but I could only source its usage when referring to the whole of

2399: 931:

was for those national organisations and even though since postal liberalisation other are permitted to provide some postal services, most appear to be, certainly in the French case, international organisations who are now servicing the country. Can they really be termed

125:

I was not very happy with the title or structure of this article when I first noticed it and with the extensive use of Mueller's Handbook valuations it may also be a copyright violation. I'm not sure what to do with it but we are not a valuation database or catalogue per

3366:

Good point. I was thinking about peer review in the narrow sense of submissions being blind reviewed by two or three referees, but you're right that it can also just involve the editors. Using that definition, it's correct that all academic journals are peer reviewed.

1715:

for educational use, and that is the purpose fulfilled at Knowledge in topical philately articles. The visual medium requires a visual representation for encyclopedic treatment of the subject, the stamp image in its entirety for purposes of identification of the stamp.

1612:

Thanks. Any critique as it now has a) no image files bleeding into unaligned text, b) more complete sources, c) uses more resources available at Wikimedia Commons (from 3 to 8), and d) includes three new uploads expanding the Commons data base? Any comment is welcome.

1877:

issues at stake. It seems there are plenty of NFC examples in place to support many if not all of your contributions. Having an image removed from WP simply because it was orphaned on the basis of someone's opinion about 'critical commentary', etc, seems a shame. --

1662:#8. Stamps exceed baseball cards in notability by virtue of their origin, a Congressional Joint Resolution. They exceed baseball cards in public circulation. No harm is done USPS by reproducing the images, only the stamps themselves can be used for lawful postage. 3351:

Being peer-reviewed is basically the definition of an academic journal. The form of the peer review may differ (sometimes the peer review is done by the editorial board only - mainly in mathematics), but in principle, if it is not peer-reviewed, it's a magazine.

4290:

images are not restricted to info boxes, WP:NFCCP #9. "Restrictions on location. Non-free content is allowed only in articles (not disambiguation pages), and only in article namespace", not only Info boxes as you assert -- according to the policy you cited.

3246:

As the discussion above shows, these distinctions are not obvious from the words "journal" and "magazine", especially because individual publication often use the words in their titles in different senses for historical reason--for example, 'Philosophical

4771:

I think we may be 'divided by a common language' here. I don't see any reason why the 4c rose of 1980 (Scott 693) or the 5c blob of 2007 (no idea of Scott number - my Scott catalogue is much older than that) can't be provisional stamps (temporary issues)

1540: 3143:

unless all interested parties and the whole Knowledge community come to a definite solution how to treat journals, peer-reviewed academic journals, magazines, etc. in terms of adequate categories. And then, we will just accept the common rule. Okay?

819:

markings is more general and includes a great variety of marks that could be added to a cover; the other articles could be linked from that one. Private cancellation should go and its limited content moved. Cachet is something entirely different.

2723:

15:29, 17 June 2015‎ Randykitty (talk | contribs)‎ . . (5,171 bytes) (-13)‎ . . (Undid revision 667361844 by Michael Romanov (talk) Please do not add non-existing cats; we have cat "philatelic journals" and "philatelic magazines", this falls in the

152:

My initial reaction upon seeing the article was to send it to AFD, but upon reflection I do think it can be salvaged if someone with knowledge in the area has a go at tidying it up. One thing I do think is that it should be moved to something like

4204:. The stamp images fall under the same criteria, --- low resolution unsuitable for counterfeiting. It is not the policy which restricts stamp images, the images as captured from the Smithsonian Institute Arago webpage meet the Foundation criteria. 4988:

built a database partly based on Wikimedia content. However, building something that others have already done the donkey work on seems rather a waste of time, especially considering we have a very restrictive copyright policy that only allows

3999:

For the aforementioned uses, users must cite the source of the image, the United States Postal Service, and include language crediting the Postal Service and noting its rights, such as: “ United States Postal Service. All rights reserved.”

3840:

I doubt it's reasonable to insist on a specific POV if there is no consensus. And doubtfully it's understandable to introduce someone's own status quo in the absence of consensus. Hope for your understanding and cooperation. Best regrads,

2484:

the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please

1751:, a topical philately article, — and seven others in two other articles, four of which have been resolved because USPS used reproductions of free-use art and simply added their label, so the images themselves are held as uncopyrightable. 3755:

and maintain it as the status quo until more general discussion in Knowledge results in solving this issue. Based on this consideration, I am taking the liberty and reverting all articles about philatelic journals/magazines to the single

2308:

all in costume with their film character names shown as well), the actors' names are shown either in the stamp design or on the pane that included the stamps. As to commemorating living people on US stamps, that policy changed in 2011 (

1240:

that are either orphans or are not notable in their own right that can be used to start to pad out the main article which is in dire need of major expansion. Any takers? Anyone got some good French catalogues or other reference books?

2257:

with a description "Film character" because it is not, as such the actor who is commemorated. However, you may want to llok at the other stamps where it says "actor" and see if the stamp was for the film of the actor themselves.

4932:. The former is a good example of building an advanced database. The latter needs more efforts from people like you. So, I would suggest you to take over that project and adapt it to the needs of your stamp database. Regards, -- 3385:

for non-referred academic/scholarly journals. It seems only a three-pronged definition works: academic review (peer review, editorial or not); academic audience; and academic content (not just news/views/interviews -- e.g., the

4519: 3598:

And since "editorial peer review" leaves the door wide open, I suspect that many publications in the philately literature could be called "scholarly journals" (maybe not "academic journals", as it involves members outside of

1518: 1091: 2238:, but I'm split on adding the information for the Harry Potter issue of November 2013. The stamps show still photos from the films, so I'm tempted to put the actor names rather than the character names. Thoughts? Thanks. 4232:, -- but others have arrived at a consensus that information in an online encyclopedia is an important value to promote in its own right, and I think the same standard should be applied to stamps, a much more benign arena. 1758:(non-free content, images) 3. Stamps and currency: For identification of the stamp or currency, not the subjects depicted on it. That consideration was dismissed, the recommendation was to use an online source such as 3336:

To complicate this further, I think it should be noted that not all academic journals are peer reviewed, so I'm not sure that peer review alone can be used to differentiate between (academic) journals and magazines.

1095: 2272:

I would say, is the person on the stamp depicted wearing glasses or not? If he is, it's Harry Potter, because Daniel Radcliffe doesn't wear them in real life. Plus, living people don't appear on U.S. stamps, AFAIK.

1979:

More generally, what is the policy framework that should be applied for other post-1978 stamps (and I believe there are others, even relating just to the history of Virginia) in this and other articles on themes in

1062:

Defence of the Oklahoma statehood stamp was mounted mainly by the Oklahoma project as the author was one of its members and had presumably been politely advised of the proposal (or he saw it in his watchlist). The

4899:

as a proposal of what I am thinking. I know this would be a huge kind of project to undertake but I think the benefits to the global philatelic community of providing such a reference database would be immense.

3960:

that stalled late in 2012. You should read that page and its associated talk page where about 10,000 German stamps have been identified as possibly being copyright violations. A new discussion started a week ago

3204:"Eventually"?? Like it or not, this has been the practice for years. As it is you who wants to change accepted practice, the burden is upon you to show that this would be advantageous for the project. Thanks. -- 3105:. That all the "journal" cats have only "journal" and not "academic journal" in their titles is, I guess, historical. It would be a major undertaking to rename all those cats to "academic journal" (WP Journals 1067:

are worth reading, though, as they made some good points about why a particular stamp issued to commemorate a historic event is notable. We could use those in a future case and present Oklahoma as a precedent.

2001:" should be considered a fully first-rank encyclopedic topic, worthy of encyclopedic consideration in its own right? Or do we consider it as some kind of second-rank topic, merely an adjunct or a spin-out of " 505: 3786:. Indeed, it has all characteristics of it: 2/ "write your article in a conversational style and in first person", 3/ no peer review, 4/ authors receive an honorarium (try that with an academic journal...) -- 4003:

All aforementioned uses must consist of the unaltered, original image or text as issued or published by the Postal Service. Any modification or alteration to an image or to text constitutes an unauthorized

5058:

thinking about this over the weekend and now I think the potential issues with copyright for the catalog ID information may just be too much of an issue. Think it's time to go back to the drawing board.

199:

I think it's acceptable as is (a little odd, but no more so than many articles) or could be generified. I don't see enough valuations to be copyright issue, they are just a sample from a large-ish work.

4125:

WW2censor is correct. Knowledge has its own strict standards for content: either it must be released under a licence which (at a minimum) permits commercial use and derivative works, or else fulfill the

1868:

As far as I know, even if an administrator deletes one of your edits a forth time he/she is in violation of the 3RR. Unless the deleting administrator is reverting vandalism or clear cases of copyright

4462:

Nice work on the article :) I added a couple of sentences about the stamps of Jersey, Guernsey, Gibraltar and Qatar. I'm aware of the Irish issues (which are apparently called "Stamps on a Roll" - see

3868: 4896: 1478:

in the Flickr collection. Looks like it was designed for a royal visit. I don't think passenger traffic was normal at all but there must have been some because people had to carry out maintenance.

354: 3283:

and not here, we are not allowed to use the term journal for philatelic publications then we should upmerge those considered by some as magazines and by philatelists as journals, to the main cat

3233:. (There is also the special category of "review journals", periodicals that carry only articles of a highly advanced nature reviewing progress in a field, rather than reporting research--the 2674:

have redesigned their website but lacking any search ability so all the refresher course links we have used are now broken, offline, dead or unavailable. The ones I noticed can be found by the

1381:

The stamps will probably be copyright so you won't be able to use them. You could link to copyright images elsewhere in external links. Have you seen this: www.stampprinters.info/URpen2.pdf‎ ?

1658:

NFC policy allows commercial baseball cards to be featured in topical articles on baseball players with descriptive language alongside, why not USPS stamps in topical philately articles? See

993: 2574:. I will try to expand this further, and I thought I'd mention it here in case some of you are able to find more referenced info about this. Btw, watch out because his nephew (his brother 1670: 2682:

suggest there are Linn's Refresher Course links in 39 articles so should not take too long if a few people help out, especially on the articles they are interested in. Thanks in advance.

1931:

You may be interested in the articulate discussion between two administrators, Jheald (pro) and Masem (con) on the subject of including USPS stamp images in topical philately articles at

1346:, Worcestershire. It is claimed that there were nine of them and that as many as six survive. Most are painted bright yellow, and they form a minor icon of Uruguayan history. In 1993 the 4968:

I was about to reply on your talk page but came here to look for a link to give you but I see that Michael Romanov has already replied. Knowledge is an encyclopaedia not a catalogue per

1064: 936:? If, for each country, we are to include all those providing postal services no matter how limited or far reaching the list will become extremely unwieldy and overly long. Besides the 345: 4099:

as copied by news outlets for public domain distribution. I make no alteration for profitable use, and give the same USPS protections notice for any subsequent user as the USPS uses.

3867:

There is a call for re-categorizing "Postcards of country X" based on a country depicted on a postcard and ignoring country that actually issued it. For instance, if a postcard (e.g.

948:

the latter two are essentially duplicate lists. So now may be the time to merge or consolidate these into a smaller number of dissimilar but associated lists. What way should we go?

4218:

related to millions of copies of each stamp in circulation and its nomination by an Act of Congress, not in scholarly acclaim of each stamp as a stand alone object of the fine arts.

1636: 1765:

On the contrary, I believe that a simple statement of description from a primary (USPS) source may be sufficient commentary. Two other editors agree. That seems to be backed up at

4155:

It doesn't matter what anyone else does outside Knowledge, we only allow copyright images here with a strong individual rationale for each image. Which AP photos do you refer to?

3996:

limited to teaching, scholarship, and research. Likewise, it does not require one for the reporting of current news in newspapers, news magazines, news journals, and other media.

2678:, so we can add archiveurl and archivedate fields to the citation templates. Please update any you find and convert untemplated citations into templated ones to use those fields. 2570:, an American businessman and philanthropist who was also a philatelist. I have added some referenced info about his donation of an extensive collection of Canadian stamps to the 996:. I have added my comments. If anyone else would like to contribute, now is the time to do so. Also if anyone has any comments on my contributions I should be happy to hear them. 3729: 2974: 1909: 1103: 3909: 2541: 594:

I've been informed that images are not in the concern of this project, so I will discontinue providing notices to the deletion of stamp images and the like to this project. --

503:

article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so,

2147: 3907:, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at 2998:

did not refer me to it in the first place. Anyway, what is outcome of that old discussion? Nothing has been done since then until recently. And now, still without consensus,

1285:

is on the commons and is interesting due to the address town changing both states and names, so might well suit either the German or Polish article. I can't make up my mind.

3732:, the only outstanding issue seems to have been dismissed where it reads "Why can't it go directly under Periodicals like Audio periodicals and Periodicals about writers?". 4571: 3872: 1820:

Thank you, but the seven day limit is past for all twelve uploads, although Mercy11 tried to keep the Puerto Rico Flag by restoring the file, but without replacing it on

3957: 3956:

You may not be aware of the public domain issues about the German stamps, instigated after a March 2012 German court decision, which started this Commons review process

3106: 104: 3093:

There is no objection at all to have separate categories for magazines and academic journals, which we have for many different subjects. For military subjects, we have

2336:

Looking further, I see there was a discussion already about the Star Wars stamps with the suggestion then to make a list of fictional characters on US stamps. So I've

2618:! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you! 2458: 1969: 1566: 3801:

reasoning, except perhaps by example to support one name over another." It is Randykitty that needs consensus here for the existence of Philatelic magazines at all.

4576: 4326: 2514: 84: 4523: 2431: 1087: 72: 67: 59: 2235: 945: 1148:

are available on the WaybackMachine but none of them could be considered thrid-party reliable sources other than one which is not actually about those stamps.

833:

It's a reasonable point but not re cachet which is unconnected as Ecphora says. The purpose of postmarking is essentially cancellation so I would suggest that

3114: 2337: 1360: 4776:

make-up rate stamps (increasing 10c to 14c, and 45c to 50c) at the same time. I agree, though, that I wouldn't call a 30c stamp in any way 'undenominated'.

1665:

Why not allow USPS images in topical philately articles as stubs, then as descriptive narrative and commentary are added they become C class articles as at

4013:

from cropping or otherwise altering the total stamp image as copyrighted by the Postal Service, and otherwise it can represent the image with attribution.

3637: 3162:

I just gave them as examples of categorizing, I didn't say they are perfect... Having said that, I checked just the first two entries, and they seem to be

1776:

Additionally, unlike demands for third party reliable source critical commentary before displaying a stamp image in a topical philately article, I believe

1205: 4408:

since 2015. I don't know a lot about the topic, but I could try to help out in writing the article if someone else is willing to help. Some useful links:

1932: 1595: 757:

All dead links have been replaced by a link to the webarchive version. Same applies to the former AskPhil site which is currently being redeveloped. ----

4522:(not just the one mentioned). There was a previous discussion on the notability of such lists 5+ years ago, actually about the fist on stamps lists, at 4441:, you are welcome to add information. In particular, I am curious to learn about the Qatar issues, and aren't there also similar stamps from Ireland? -- 1838:

over 80 stamp images related to topics I am interested in, published three philately topical articles and working on expanding one and adding two more.

362: 3603:) -- don't they have editorial selection carried out by philately experts for a philately audience describing their philately studies/investigations? 2859: 2143: 669: 4591: 4263:

though I think this stamp is now in the public domain. The moral issues are a complete aside and we don't take a stand on that here to my knowledge.

1525:

This is way out of my league, could one of y'all take a look? It's AFC-space, so you can add comments directly to the text, top of the article, etc.

5119: 4466:) but I can't find a reliable source containing information about them. If I do manage to find something, I'll add it to the article. Best regards, 1404: 1282: 3985:

So, I finally asked the USPS about its copyright policy for using stamp images on Knowledge, published by a non-profit foundation. The answer is:

3167:

some "journal" cat or another. I don't doubt that several (perhaps even many) are incorrectly categorized. But that is an argument in the sense of

3277:

many publications issued at stated intervals, such as academic journals, or the record of the transactions of a society, are often called journals

1403:

If you are looking for someone to take and post a photograph of some object located in Uruguay, you might try using one of the request pages. See

2304: 3139:– are these military JOURNALS peer-reviewed academic publications called true "journals"? Nope. No way. So, I would continue to use the single 4806:, so they are postage stamps. I don't think that the people who bought this issue are "foolish" - it is a rare issue from a popular country. 322: 3880: 3861: 3664: 2651:

I have just nominated this for deletion as a search on my sources failed to find and mention of this person. Russian speakers may do better.

5027: 1072:

a rationale. CfD is a different matter entirely and I strongly believe it should be terminated with category control given to projects. ----

3110: 1452: 47: 17: 4925: 4228:

you would start removing all the logos for violent games connected with acts of violence, especially those of mass murder, documented at

2892:

exists because you created it just recently, on 25 May 2015. As far as I can see the problem, the possible solutions could be as follows:

2074:

It's still there - it'd be great if someone from this project could do the review. As far as I know, it's the only Philately GAN around!

1126:

know. This would seem to make the case for notability a little stronger as sources for the second one are likely to reference the first.

110:

Any views on this one? Should it be changed to Postmarks of the Austrian Empire which might be more in tune with this Wiki's objectives?

4813: 4491: 3914: 1769:

8. A baseball card is not fair use to illustrate the article on Barry Bonds unless "to illustrate a passage on the card itself; see the

1456: 1264: 695: 673: 650: 625: 595: 576: 550: 463: 415: 377: 326: 290: 4832:

has been created that mentions this issue amongst other such stamps issued. Please add any others you know of with suitable citations.

4661: 4553: 4333: 4197: 2625: 2518: 646: 1773:

article." That is, use of a USPS stamp after 1978 can be fair use if the stamp has a passage describing the stamp itself alongside.

4600: 4339:—for images of U.S. stamps issued in 1978 or later", a template I have used for every stamp download for use in article namespaces. 2309: 171:

It wouldn't be difficult to change it to a postal history article along those lines. It would be a pity to lose all of the content.

4946:

Michael thanks for your reply, the World Stamp Catalog Wikibook indeed does look like it would be a good home for such a project!

4558: 2169: 717: 4256: 3548: 937: 928: 901: 554: 532: 3292: 3011: 2928: 691: 4561: 4066: 3903: 3507: 3015: 1499: 1221: 2037:", created in 1849. I just wondered if anyone could possibly fill the infobox in with a catalogue value for the type? Thanks! 4344: 4237: 4104: 4018: 3296: 3284: 2435: 2010:

Perspectives of those working in articles in this area, as to what the best ways forward would be, would I think be useful.

1940: 1857: 1789: 1730: 1678: 1618: 1574: 4484: 3489: 3876: 98:

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

5107:

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

2607:

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that

1998: 1973: 1762:, can be used, describe the stamp image and link it to the online source for readers to obtain the visual information. 1747:

At WP:NFU review, editors are defended orphaning then deleting six of the USPS stamp images with the fair use template at

1233: 1225: 154: 803:, plus some others. Clearly this is an important area but I suspect that there is plenty of scope for some mergers here? 4308:

images of postage stamps, a government sponsored aid to national and international exchange of information and commerce.

3757: 3752: 3140: 3102: 3007: 2935: 2921: 2906: 2822: 2792: 2788: 2742: 1690: 1229: 3300: 3098: 1433:

having add a couple of citations. Can anyone add some more as this is a rather well known a decent set of catalogues.

1013: 624:

Sorry, I apologize, I misread that. For some reason I read that as Philately does not concern itself with images. --

3171:: it is not a reason to follow that example, but a reason to clean up and correct those incorrect categorizations. -- 4008:

It seems to me I can use download images from the Smithsonian Arago.com freely including recent issues. The article

3707: 528: 3922: 3617:

I'm talking about peer-review being carried out by editorial board members, not the editors. Not the same thing. --

3288: 3136: 3094: 3023: 3003: 2939: 2917: 2910: 2889: 2842:

No need to create a cat "Philatelic magazines", as it already exists. And we have clearly separated categories for

2818: 2734: 1316: 1179: 38: 3989:

The following uses of copyrighted material generally do not require prior approval from Integration and Planning:

905: 4937: 4581: 4340: 4233: 4100: 4014: 3888: 3846: 3765: 3168: 3149: 3031: 3010:

to the new cat. Is everyone happy with that? After reading the previous discussion, my guess is to create either

2960: 2863: 2830: 2800: 2750: 1936: 1853: 1801: 1785: 1726: 1674: 1614: 1570: 1213: 1182:

that shows how many problems a page has and for how long (sort by count). I have added to the main project page.

1145: 4417: 3109:

about 700 categories, the vast majority being "journal" cats...). BTW, I have posted notes on the talk pages of

2120: 1933:

Knowledge talk:Non-free content/Archive 63#RfC: Is stamp non-free content use explained by WP:NFCI Guideline #3?

4546: 4229: 3779: 3372: 3342: 2183:

will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

1852:

is undertaken, because I believe such a policy change is justified under the existing USPS fair use licensing.

1530: 1325: 1260: 1217: 1052: 572: 4201: 2005:", not worth encyclopedic consideration in its own right, but being presented separately for reasons of space? 1475: 4817: 2691: 2486: 966:

superfluous. Once we fully understand the scope of the list, a more suitable title should be introduced. ----

4734: 4665: 4628: 4624: 2770: 2615: 2609: 2597: 2128: 2097: 2081: 2065: 2044: 1997:

Plus, something that has emerged in the discussion: Do we think that the subject of an article title like "

1268: 962: 941: 897: 699: 677: 654: 629: 599: 580: 459: 411: 381: 330: 286: 271: 5097: 5068: 5039: 5003: 4955: 4941: 4913: 4884: 4841: 4821: 4785: 4746: 4700: 4669: 4640: 4608: 4535: 4503: 4475: 4450: 4431: 4378: 4348: 4272: 4241: 4190: 4164: 4140: 4108: 4078: 4038: 4022: 3975: 3945: 3926: 3892: 3850: 3833: 3810: 3795: 3769: 3741: 3719: 3683: 3667: 3626: 3612: 3583: 3559: 3538: 3523: 3501: 3469: 3447: 3433: 3415: 3399: 3376: 3361: 3346: 3331: 3312: 3261: 3213: 3199: 3180: 3153: 3126: 3084: 3059: 3035: 2985: 2964: 2875: 2834: 2804: 2782: 2754: 2660: 2639: 2587: 2553: 2530: 2503: 2470: 2447: 2411: 2377: 2350: 2321: 2285: 2267: 2247: 2224: 2159: 2132: 2101: 2085: 2069: 2048: 2019: 1944: 1921: 1889: 1861: 1815: 1793: 1734: 1705: 1682: 1648: 1622: 1607: 1578: 1555: 1534: 1511: 1487: 1468: 1442: 1416: 1394: 1375: 1328: 1294: 1272: 1250: 1191: 1173: 1157: 1135: 1120: 1086:

no stamp categories on the commons it did not pop up as an possible issue and I don't think it appeared on

1079: 1040: 1031:. I seem to recall someone started something along those lines a few years ago but it fell by the wayside. 1005: 973: 957: 917: 879: 859: 844: 828: 812: 764: 752: 731: 703: 681: 658: 633: 619: 603: 584: 562: 540: 518: 481: 467: 434: 419: 385: 334: 311: 294: 259: 241: 209: 194: 180: 166: 143: 119: 3480: 3478:

reading carefully and the text that you cite above is nowhere in the comment that you linked. Anyway, the

3079: 2955:

I would really appreciate to hear other opinions because we need to reach a consensus about this issue. --

2571: 1885: 1811: 1701: 1312: 1107: 396: 302:

Did the obvious stuff. Doesn't seem to be a lot to base an article on. They don't seem to have a website.

3653: 2544:, which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated. 2490:

and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my

739:

There are around 100 references to it as a source for country articles, most of which refer to it as the

4781: 4696: 4604: 4471: 4446: 4427: 4214: 4160: 4136: 4034: 4009: 3962: 3918: 3806: 3737: 3715: 3679: 3646: 3633: 3608: 3579: 3555: 3519: 3511: 3484:

has an article here, so it was easy to check its homepage. Took me 30 sec to find out that this journal

3465: 3429: 3421: 3395: 3382: 3195: 2981: 2656: 2466: 2220: 1917: 1821: 1748: 1666: 1644: 1483: 1390: 1209: 1131: 1027: 1001: 855: 808: 748: 727: 477: 430: 307: 255: 176: 162: 115: 2521:

for whom their listing on the roll seems to be their sole claim to notability. All discussion welcome.

3022:

is, for example, a newspaper). Personally, I don't appreciate too much the idea of the single new cat

2920:. Those that have a strong philatelic research content and issued by philatelic societies are kept in 2645: 185:

Will someone with some Austrian knowledge port this into a postal history article or shall we ADF it?

5093: 4969: 4933: 4809: 4657: 4596: 4366: 3941: 3884: 3842: 3829: 3791: 3761: 3650: 3622: 3534: 3497: 3443: 3411: 3357: 3327: 3209: 3176: 3145: 3122: 3055: 3046: 3027: 2956: 2871: 2826: 2796: 2778: 2746: 1311:

As far as I can tell, these two articles cover exactly the same topic. The places for discussion are

796: 558: 536: 278: 205: 131: 1502:

may well interest others because it may well affect a wide range of other postal authority's names.

425:

As recent stamps of Royal Mail they will still be under copyright. Could consider a fair use image.

5035: 4999: 4880: 4849: 4837: 4742: 4636: 4531: 4499: 4438: 4268: 4186: 4074: 3971: 3544: 3368: 3338: 3308: 2687: 2624:

To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to

2583: 2567: 2559: 2443: 2281: 2263: 2155: 2002: 1603: 1526: 1507: 1464: 1438: 1371: 1321: 1290: 1246: 1187: 1153: 1116: 1036: 953: 924: 834: 780: 615: 237: 232:? It might warrant an article though it is mentioned in the Egypt post and postage stamp articles. 190: 139: 4973: 4929: 3390:

is a magazine, not a journal, despite being edited by academicians who are peers of the readers).

4631:), could be made into a real article that would include this stamp. IMHO, that's all it's worth. 4374: 3295:. While we are discussing this category tree we should move all the authors who are listed under 3019: 2716: 2708: 2671: 2575: 2549: 2124: 2092: 2076: 2060: 2039: 2034: 1962: 1951: 1430: 1055:, I notice it was proposed for deletion in 2009 by someone who claimed the subject does not meet 1021: 913: 514: 450: 402: 282: 229: 127: 5060: 4947: 4905: 3543:

Well, it's a law journal, so peer review might well have been introduced recently, like in the

3492:. So I still don't know where you got this, but your source is apparently not very reliable. -- 2994:

Oh, I see that it's a long and old story. Sorry, I did not know about that. I am wondering why

1166:

I didn't know there is a philately alerts page. I've corrected quite a few banners lately. ----

718:

http://web.archive.org/web/20121102091100/http://www.jl.sl.btinternet.co.uk/stampsite/home.html

4722: 4688: 4260: 3271:

Quite clearly Knowledge's own definition of journal is not exclusive to academic journals per

3117:

about this discussion, so that interested editors there can participate in this discussion. --

3072: 2795:? Please go ahead and make them magazines since they are NOT peer-reviewed by academicians. -- 2733:

is NOT magazine. It is an annual philatelic research journal. What's the point in introducing

1879: 1805: 1695: 1412: 1301: 1141: 824: 4463: 3640: 5120:"Stock Photo - URUGUAY - CIRCA 1993: stamp printed by Uruguay, shows Letter Box, circa 1993" 4921: 4860: 4777: 4692: 4586: 4480: 4467: 4457: 4442: 4423: 4156: 4132: 4030: 3802: 3733: 3711: 3675: 3671: 3604: 3575: 3551: 3515: 3461: 3425: 3391: 3191: 2977: 2847: 2762: 2652: 2462: 2406: 2372: 2345: 2316: 2242: 2216: 2015: 1913: 1640: 1551: 1479: 1386: 1305: 1127: 997: 851: 804: 744: 723: 473: 426: 303: 251: 172: 158: 111: 2186:

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

927:

and I suggested it warranted further discussion. As I replied there, I understood that the

248: 5089: 5064: 5019: 4990: 4981: 4951: 4909: 4048: 3937: 3825: 3787: 3618: 3571: 3530: 3493: 3454: 3439: 3407: 3353: 3323: 3205: 3172: 3118: 3051: 2999: 2995: 2867: 2774: 2635: 2499: 2491: 1874: 1347: 201: 3778:

first. I have reverted one of your categorizations as a "journal" instead of a magazine:

5031: 4995: 4876: 4872: 4833: 4738: 4632: 4527: 4495: 4389: 4264: 4182: 4178: 4127: 4093: 4070: 4053: 3967: 3657: 3304: 2683: 2579: 2526: 2439: 2274: 2259: 2189:• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film 2151: 1991: 1984: 1777: 1755: 1599: 1503: 1460: 1434: 1367: 1286: 1242: 1208:

is a poor stub yet there are eight (that I can find) individual French stamp articles:

1183: 1168: 1149: 1112: 1074: 1032: 968: 949: 874: 839: 788: 759: 611: 233: 186: 135: 4976:, as Michael mentions above but there are also two quite extensive online catalogues: 4173:

You also seem to have forgotten that the educational use excuse does not fly here per

3706:

Pragmatically, I'd suggest sidestepping the classification issue with the creation of

2148:

c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright#Postal cancellations: presumably public domain but...

4864: 4829: 4730: 4726: 4620: 4370: 4174: 3775: 3387: 3280: 3257: 2851: 2766: 2738: 2545: 1766: 1659: 909: 510: 4388:

There should be an article about Post & Go stamps, which were introduced in the

1754:

All had description of the non-free USPS licensed upload images in conformance with

1541:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/List of postage stamps of Pakistan from 2007 to 2017

1204:

Following on from the issue of notability of individual stamps or stamp series, the

3661: 2614:

easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested,

2254: 1784:

Is my understanding mistaken, and if not, what is the appropriate place for appeal?

1770: 1688:

A good example of a NFC stamp image used in a topical capacity can be found in the

1408: 820: 2975:

Knowledge:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 April 22#Category:Philatelic journals

868:

should be a separate article too as it is about the study, not about the markings

3645:). It is not to be confused with "editorial review", which may be understood as 3438:

That doesn't contain a single example of a non peer-reviewed academic journal. --

3406:

Can you give us one example of an academic journal that is not peer-reviewed?? --

1090:

because the banner was not correct. Recently a number of stamp articles both GB (

4737:

to include mention of this stamp, if someone is prepared to do some work on it.

4729:

that apparently several foolish people are prepared to pay silly money for. The

4047:

3250:

to specialists , is not clear to others, and WP is not written for specialists.

2517:

on one article as a representative of the many created for people listed on the

2403: 2369: 2342: 2313: 2239: 2011: 1547: 1056: 46:

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

4566: 4856: 3241:

series are the best known. We have in fact yet another category for these. )

2631: 2495: 1356: 1339: 865: 800: 2916:

2. Articles about publications produced by commercial companies are moved to

2234:

I'm going through some of my references today to add more information to the

1950:

For the avoidance of doubt, I am not in fact an admin, but I have hung round

4875:. Any members of this WikiProject are encouraged to vote on the proposals.-- 4802:

arrived)". Although the issue consists of counter-printed stamps, they were

4401: 4325:

Can stamps after 1978 be encyclopedic content? yes, WP:NFCCP #10.b.links to

3643: 2522: 2201:• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost 2192:• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers. 2179:

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

1237: 4549:, an unusual modern provisional issue which generated some press coverage: 3869:

Commons:File:Indian stretcher bearers at work (Gallipoli) (14831089314).jpg

4524:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Philately/Archive 6#Notability of topical lists

4412: 2628:. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X. 499:

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Philately for a

5085: 4868: 4520:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/List of birds on stamps of Bophuthatswana

4397: 3600: 3319: 3252: 2843: 1519:

Knowledge talk:Articles for creation/American Civil War history on stamps

784: 3550:), which was then still considered an academic law journal nonetheless. 2211: 3272: 713:

The original of this site appears now to be dead. It is archived here:

3774:

If you want a category deleted or merged, you will have to list it at

872:. It will never be much more than a stub but that doesn't matter. ---- 4393: 3783: 2854:

academic journals, then, yes, they should be re-categorized, just as

2207:

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:

1908:

Should category Philatelic journals be renamed Philatelic magazines?

1343: 792: 4890:

Creating a Stamp Database As Part of the Knowledge Philately Project

1459:

changed much of the description. Was it accurate or just vandalism?

1987:#3 relevant here ? If so, what steer does it give the discussion ? 1596:

Knowledge:WikiProject Philately/Assessment#Requesting an assessment

4405: 3510:, as described in the wikilink that I gave you three times above: 2195:• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc. 2168: 2142:

These two issues are in disucssion at the Commons Village pump at

1637:

Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:1948 US Christmas Seal.jpg

2773:, despite its title, is a newspaper, not an academic journal. -- 2198:• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____ 2033:

I've just created the article for the first Belgian stamp, the "

395:

Could someone with knowledge of UK stamps please add details of

4977: 3514:(hint: you may wish to use your browser's search/find option). 4897:

User:DJCMH/sandbox/French_Morocco_1926_Hassan_Tower_Definitive

4213:

Note the example of the image of the Julia de Burgos stamp at

2913:. The former is deleted, the latter is maintained from now on. 2058:

It's now up for GA review, I'd welcome any potential reviews!

25: 2144:

c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright#Loriot and old German stamps

1546:

This deletion discussion may be of interest to this project.

2596: 837:

should be the retained article if mergers are proposed. ----

5026:

Actually I just checked the wikibooks copyright policy and

4494:

makes a few mentions which appear to be introductory year.

3225:

and research articles --by far the best known of these are

2675: 2305:

list of fictional characters on stamps of the United States

896:

Hello. There are currently two lists of postal operators :

4721:

As previously stated, no matter your opinion, it is not a

4065:

However, if you can persuade the foundation to change its

3952:

Up to 10,000 German stamps may be deleted from the commons

2791:

are NOT academic journals. Why don't you recategorize ALL

2578:'s son) is also called William Hayden Ahmanson. Thank you. 3932:

Discussion now closed. The result of the discussion was:

2821:? And if yes, do we need to recategorize all articles in 1671:

Commemoration of the American Civil War on postage stamps

1342:

from England, almost certainly from Cochrane & Co of

4518:

All the lists of birds on stamps are up for deletion at

3958:

c:Commons:WikiProject Public Domain/German stamps review

1338:

In 1879 Uruguay imported a batch of cast iron hexagonal

346:

File:Postcard from Caradog Roberts to Rachel Jenkins.jpg

323:

File:German postage stamp in honor of Heinrich Göbel.png

318:

File:German postage stamp in honor of Heinrich Göbel.png

249:

http://www.egyptstudycircle.org.uk/PostalHistory/pe.html

4985: 4392:

in 2008, but are now being issued elsewhere such as in

2679: 1099: 370: 366: 358: 350: 2850:. If the periodicals in "philatelic journals" are not 1759: 743:, though that does not appear to be the correct name. 4924:. Currently, it contains two catalog-type databases: 1824:, it too is gone...justice delayed is justice denied. 2542:

Category:Philately articles needing expert attention

2430:

The use of Scott catalog numbers was discussed here

1334:

Uruguayan pillar boxes and stamps commemorating them

3388:

IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Society Magazine

3026:. But I will accept any consensus we will reach. -- 2769:, hence it is a magazine, not a journal. Just like 2165:

Leaflet for Wikiproject Philately at Wikimania 2014

551:

image:2006 definitives (british postage stamps).jpg

340:

Postcard from Caradog Roberts to Rachel Jenkins.jpg

3784:webpage of the publication states it is a magazine 3666:) in general. So I think we need an article about 2709:Talk:Kollektsioner § Kollektsioner is not magazine 1140:I agree that archived links are useful because of 4629:Non-denominated postage#Letter-denominated stamps 3862:Commons:Category talk:Postcards#"Postcards of..." 647:image:Gold mining at Kolar Gold Fields, India.jpg 105:Valuation of cancellations of the Austrian Empire 4483:was linked from the one you gave above. Some of 4255:do allow for specific stamps such the stamps in 4198:File:Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition logo.jpg 3652:); the editor's decision based on peer reviews; 1970:File:Virginia ratification 1988 U.S. stamp.1.jpg 1567:Postage stamps and postal history of Puerto Rico 4327:Knowledge:Image copyright tags/Non-free content 3987: 3424:, where other relevant quotations are sourced. 3291:. I totally disagree with a combined category 2204:The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014 1569:. Is this the place to request an assessment? 1500:Talk:Office national des postes#Requested move 1012:language philatelic publications, such as the 3782:. There are several reasons for that. 1/ The 3420:Sure, I gave four in the link above, pls see 2787:Wait a minute. Following this rationale, ALL 2236:list of people on stamps of the United States 946:List of members of the Universal Postal Union 546:2006 definitives (british postage stamps).jpg 270:Hello all, Please try to expand this article 8: 4926:b:International Postage Meter Stamp Catalog‎ 4526:. You may want to contribute your thoughts. 3115:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Academic Journals 2697:Philatelic magazines vs. Philatelic journals 2150:and I think your imput will be appreciated. 1361:Postage stamps and postal history of Uruguay 4361:Clair Aubrey Huston or Clair Aubrey Houston 3303:because they certainly are not literature. 1904:Philatelic journals or Philatelic magazines 1631:Christmas seal category deletion at Commons 692:image:Letter to Russia with krokozyabry.jpg 642:Gold mining at Kolar Gold Fields, India.jpg 5030:I see that they do allow fair-use images. 4807: 4733:redirect should be separated out from the 4655: 4594: 3293:Category:Philatelic journals and magazines 3012:Category:Philatelic journals and magazines 2929:Category:Philatelic journals and magazines 2303:in the films. Maybe it's time to start a 2138:German stamps and Argentinian meter images 1743:USPS template images orphaned for deletion 1635:This discussion may interest people here: 4418:Posts at Commonwealth Stamps Opinion blog 3904:Category:Post towns in the United Kingdom 3898:Category:Post towns in the United Kingdom 3639:), or even external-experts peer review ( 3488:peer reviewed, as clearly stated in the [ 2934:4. All articles are kept in the original 2860:Category:International relations journals 2300:CharacterName (as portrayed by ActorName) 1935:. Survey. Support. Coat of Many Colours. 670:Knowledge:Files_for_deletion/2013_July_22 2927:3. All articles are moved to a combined 1972:being used appropriately on the article 1961:The issues in the current discussion at 1405:Category:Knowledge requested photographs 506:here are the questions for the interview 157:and less emphasis placed on valuations. 5111: 3963:c:COM:VP#What to do with German Stamps? 2566:Hello. I have created an article about 2402:as a DYK nomination for the main page. 1968:Most concretely, is the specific image 709:The Encyclopaedia of Postal Authorities 5086:http://stampdata.com/sheet.php?id=1404 4437:I have recently started an article on 3871:) issued in Australia depicts Turkey, 2436:a renewed duscussion on the same topic 1313:Talk:Cover (philately)#Merger proposal 247:More, including a bibliography, here: 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 4369:, and the article text do not match. 3006:and started moving the articles from 2479:Comment on the WikiProject X proposal 2026:Stamp good article reviewer - sought! 1760:Arago: people, postage & the post 1283:File:1833 Poland Gostyń stampless.jpg 687:Letter to Russia with krokozyabry.jpg 228:Does anyone know anything more about 7: 3877:Commons:Category:Postcards of Turkey 3111:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Magazines 2761:We use "journal" here as short for " 1180:New WikiProject Cleanup Listing Tool 1178:You might also be interested in the 155:Postal markings of the Austro Empire 94:The following discussion is closed. 18:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Philately 4627:that some make up stamps were (see 1457:File:London Post Office Railway.jpg 1263:has been nominated for deletion -- 694:has been nominated for deletion -- 649:has been nominated for deletion -- 575:has been nominated for deletion -- 553:has been nominated for deletion -- 531:has been nominated for deletion -- 376:has been nominated for deletion -- 325:has been nominated for deletion -- 4804:sold at post offices at face value 4545:There should be an article on the 3751:So, I would stick to the previous 2626:Knowledge:WikiProject X/Newsletter 2519:Roll of Distinguished Philatelists 2310:USA Today article about the change 989:This project is being profiled in 399:'s designs to the article on him? 24: 4687:They may be worthy of mention at 4054:all 10 non-free policy guidelines 2230:Harry Potter or Daniel Radcliffe? 5103:The discussion above is closed. 5018: 4972:and we also have the wikibook's 4559:Commonwealth Stamps Opinion Blog 4365:which is it? the article title, 4257:Jamaica 1968 human rights stamps 3670:before it can be used to define 3190:basis for the proposed changes. 2702: 1585: 938:List of national postal services 929:List of national postal services 902:List of national postal services 29: 3016:Category:Philatelic periodicals 2670:Do anyone else notice that the 1990:Specifically on the meaning of 1927:Including USPS nfc stamp images 1673:with about 40 viewers per day? 1108:wikibooks:World Stamp Catalogue 1098:), Canadian (like those linked 923:A455bcd9 brought this issue up 741:Encyclopaedia of Postal History 529:image:Stamp CA 1973 8c Xmas.jpg 4175:WP:IUP#Copyright and licensing 3708:Category:Philately periodicals 3512:Talk:Academic journal#evidence 3508:Ulrich's Periodicals Directory 3422:Talk:Academic journal#evidence 3297:Category:Philatelic literature 3285:Category:Philatelic literature 3235:Reports on Progress in Physics 2817:Do we need to introduce a new 2562:, collector of Canadian stamps 2471:16:35, 27 September 2014 (UTC) 590:File deletions and WPPHILATELY 1: 4641:17:37, 26 February 2016 (UTC) 4609:14:46, 26 February 2016 (UTC) 4536:17:47, 15 November 2015 (UTC) 4504:23:08, 14 November 2015 (UTC) 4476:18:35, 14 November 2015 (UTC) 4379:15:22, 13 November 2015 (UTC) 3760:. Thank you. Best regards, -- 3289:Category:Philatelic magazines 3024:Category:Philatelic magazines 3004:Category:Philatelic magazines 2940:Category:Philatelic magazines 2918:Category:Philatelic magazines 2911:Category:Philatelic magazines 2890:Category:Philatelic magazines 2819:Category:Philatelic magazines 2735:Category:Philatelic magazines 2253:For my 2¢ worth, I would put 2049:21:49, 17 December 2013 (UTC) 1999:History of Virginia on stamps 1974:History of Virginia on stamps 1488:00:08, 18 December 2013 (UTC) 1234:Navigation and Commerce issue 1226:Marianne du 14 Juillet series 4978:http://colnect.com/en/stamps 4623:which actually redirects to 4451:14:19, 9 November 2015 (UTC) 3758:Category:Philatelic journals 3753:Category:Philatelic journals 3301:Category:Philatelic authors‎ 3141:Category:Philatelic journals 3103:Category:Military newspapers 3008:Category:Philatelic journals 2936:Category:Philatelic journals 2922:Category:Philatelic journals 2907:Category:Philatelic journals 2823:Category:Philatelic journals 2793:Category:Philatelic journals 2789:Category:Philatelic journals 2743:Category:Philatelic journals 2640:16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC) 2588:10:34, 23 October 2014 (UTC) 2554:06:31, 19 October 2014 (UTC) 1725:a more limited circulation. 1691:Breast cancer research stamp 1535:21:16, 22 January 2014 (UTC) 1469:10:32, 31 October 2013 (UTC) 1443:17:28, 31 October 2013 (UTC) 1417:14:20, 21 October 2013 (UTC) 1395:11:56, 20 October 2013 (UTC) 1376:10:49, 20 October 2013 (UTC) 1329:20:37, 17 October 2013 (UTC) 1295:22:14, 16 October 2013 (UTC) 1222:Marianne des Français series 181:10:10, 28 January 2013 (UTC) 167:04:50, 28 January 2013 (UTC) 144:23:32, 27 January 2013 (UTC) 120:21:22, 27 January 2013 (UTC) 4432:15:04, 3 October 2015 (UTC) 4349:13:52, 8 October 2015 (UTC) 4273:09:45, 8 October 2015 (UTC) 4242:07:36, 8 October 2015 (UTC) 4191:12:34, 7 October 2015 (UTC) 4165:10:51, 7 October 2015 (UTC) 4141:04:14, 8 October 2015 (UTC) 4109:10:06, 7 October 2015 (UTC) 4079:23:07, 5 October 2015 (UTC) 4039:19:20, 5 October 2015 (UTC) 4023:17:58, 5 October 2015 (UTC) 3992:663.31 Fair Use Exceptions 3976:10:55, 7 October 2015 (UTC) 3946:13:50, 20 August 2015 (UTC) 3824:at one small subproject. -- 3099:Category:Military magazines 2531:15:00, 2 October 2014 (UTC) 2504:15:17, 1 October 2014 (UTC) 2494:. Thank you for your time! 1594:, but it is actually here: 1565:I've recently expanded the 1512:11:33, 9 January 2014 (UTC) 1498:The renaming discussion at 1273:05:55, 30 August 2013 (UTC) 1251:08:27, 22 August 2013 (UTC) 1230:Marianne et l'Europe series 1192:10:45, 18 August 2013 (UTC) 1174:09:55, 18 August 2013 (UTC) 1158:10:45, 18 August 2013 (UTC) 1136:10:08, 17 August 2013 (UTC) 1121:07:51, 17 August 2013 (UTC) 1080:06:12, 17 August 2013 (UTC) 1041:17:55, 14 August 2013 (UTC) 1006:01:48, 13 August 2013 (UTC) 974:04:45, 14 August 2013 (UTC) 958:20:50, 13 August 2013 (UTC) 918:16:26, 13 August 2013 (UTC) 880:06:28, 10 August 2013 (UTC) 664:Many stamps up for deletion 5148: 5098:19:58, 29 April 2016 (UTC) 5040:17:48, 29 April 2016 (UTC) 5004:17:39, 29 April 2016 (UTC) 4956:17:09, 29 April 2016 (UTC) 4942:17:01, 29 April 2016 (UTC) 4914:16:33, 29 April 2016 (UTC) 4885:11:26, 27 April 2016 (UTC) 4842:23:03, 31 March 2016 (UTC) 4786:05:15, 10 March 2016 (UTC) 4329:which specifies "use of ** 3137:Category:Military journals 3095:Category:Military journals 3018:(taking into account that 2765:". This periodical is not 2700: 2338:started it in my userspace 2121:Draft:Postal Certification 2070:07:55, 14 March 2014 (UTC) 1922:18:38, 22 April 2014 (UTC) 1890:11:43, 12 April 2014 (UTC) 1862:08:59, 12 April 2014 (UTC) 1816:19:40, 11 April 2014 (UTC) 1735:09:05, 12 April 2014 (UTC) 1706:16:36, 10 April 2014 (UTC) 1669:or B-class articles as at 1623:14:31, 18 March 2014 (UTC) 1608:14:08, 18 March 2014 (UTC) 1579:14:04, 18 March 2014 (UTC) 1556:12:05, 14 March 2014 (UTC) 1425:Barefoot revenue catalogue 1317:Knowledge:Proposed mergers 1261:image:Veera Puran Appu.jpg 1144:but all the dead links on 860:20:18, 9 August 2013 (UTC) 845:20:09, 9 August 2013 (UTC) 829:18:31, 9 August 2013 (UTC) 813:09:19, 6 August 2013 (UTC) 335:23:58, 27 April 2013 (UTC) 312:01:06, 20 April 2013 (UTC) 295:22:34, 19 April 2013 (UTC) 260:00:25, 22 March 2013 (UTC) 242:18:39, 21 March 2013 (UTC) 210:19:04, 21 March 2013 (UTC) 195:18:42, 21 March 2013 (UTC) 4822:21:48, 7 March 2016 (UTC) 4747:10:32, 4 March 2016 (UTC) 4701:04:56, 4 March 2016 (UTC) 4670:00:00, 4 March 2016 (UTC) 4547:Adelaide 2016 provisional 4541:Adelaide 2016 provisional 4334:Non-free USGov-USPS stamp 3927:00:12, 29 July 2015 (UTC) 3915:Categories for discussion 3893:09:22, 27 July 2015 (UTC) 3879:. The discussion is open 3851:14:18, 10 July 2015 (UTC) 3834:12:51, 10 July 2015 (UTC) 3811:12:30, 10 July 2015 (UTC) 3796:12:18, 10 July 2015 (UTC) 3770:10:49, 10 July 2015 (UTC) 3742:04:38, 24 June 2015 (UTC) 3720:04:31, 24 June 2015 (UTC) 3684:14:23, 22 June 2015 (UTC) 3627:22:02, 19 June 2015 (UTC) 3613:19:48, 19 June 2015 (UTC) 3584:15:43, 22 June 2015 (UTC) 3560:04:22, 24 June 2015 (UTC) 3539:04:51, 23 June 2015 (UTC) 3524:17:58, 22 June 2015 (UTC) 3502:15:55, 22 June 2015 (UTC) 3470:15:13, 22 June 2015 (UTC) 3448:14:58, 22 June 2015 (UTC) 3434:14:23, 22 June 2015 (UTC) 3416:22:02, 19 June 2015 (UTC) 3400:19:41, 19 June 2015 (UTC) 3377:14:49, 19 June 2015 (UTC) 3362:14:37, 19 June 2015 (UTC) 3347:14:23, 19 June 2015 (UTC) 3332:09:09, 19 June 2015 (UTC) 3313:22:24, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 3262:17:24, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 3214:15:38, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 3200:15:14, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 3181:15:02, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 3154:14:40, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 3127:14:27, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 3085:13:34, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 3060:14:27, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 3036:12:04, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 2986:11:00, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 2973:This was discussed here: 2965:07:43, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 2876:07:10, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 2864:Category:Finance journals 2835:00:26, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 2813:Further discussion needed 2805:00:13, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 2783:20:39, 17 June 2015 (UTC) 2755:20:26, 17 June 2015 (UTC) 2692:14:17, 23 June 2015 (UTC) 2448:13:14, 23 July 2014 (UTC) 2412:17:25, 30 June 2014 (UTC) 2378:01:48, 27 June 2014 (UTC) 2351:22:34, 24 June 2014 (UTC) 2322:03:33, 24 June 2014 (UTC) 2286:19:11, 23 June 2014 (UTC) 2268:18:08, 23 June 2014 (UTC) 2248:16:30, 23 June 2014 (UTC) 2225:09:38, 27 June 2014 (UTC) 2160:14:37, 19 June 2014 (UTC) 2133:14:36, 13 June 2014 (UTC) 1965:include (as I see them): 1794:20:10, 7 April 2014 (UTC) 1683:11:28, 9 April 2014 (UTC) 1649:13:28, 4 April 2014 (UTC) 1214:Colonial Exposition Issue 1146:Oklahoma Statehood Stamps 1088:the philately alerts page 765:18:48, 31 July 2013 (UTC) 753:10:48, 30 June 2013 (UTC) 732:10:38, 30 June 2013 (UTC) 704:05:27, 29 July 2013 (UTC) 682:03:27, 23 July 2013 (UTC) 659:07:16, 22 July 2013 (UTC) 634:08:44, 11 July 2013 (UTC) 620:08:39, 11 July 2013 (UTC) 604:07:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC) 585:04:49, 10 July 2013 (UTC) 573:image:Irl 9shillingPO.png 563:06:00, 27 June 2013 (UTC) 541:04:48, 24 June 2013 (UTC) 524:Stamp CA 1973 8c Xmas.jpg 519:14:58, 15 June 2013 (UTC) 5105:Please do not modify it. 4930:b:World Stamp Catalogue‎ 4848:About some proposals on 4514:Lists of birds on stamps 4230:Video game controversies 4202:File:Doom logo color.png 3780:The American Philatelist 3002:decided to create a new 2661:12:33, 14 May 2015 (UTC) 2487:review the proposal here 2298:Perhaps listing them as 2102:09:24, 21 May 2014 (UTC) 1654:Stamps v. baseball cards 1218:Heroes of the Resistance 1053:Oklahoma Statehood Stamp 934:national postal services 892:List of postal operators 482:22:35, 4 June 2013 (UTC) 468:22:04, 4 June 2013 (UTC) 439:Thanks, but I asked for 435:21:55, 4 June 2013 (UTC) 420:20:28, 4 June 2013 (UTC) 386:22:04, 3 June 2013 (UTC) 96:Please do not modify it. 5069:09:28, 2 May 2016 (UTC) 4980:and one of own editors 4974:b:World Stamp Catalogue 4735:non-denominated postage 4625:Non-denominated postage 4582:Norvic Philatelics Blog 2856:The Wall Street Journal 2771:The Wall Street Journal 2540:This is a notice about 2086:08:02, 4 May 2014 (UTC) 2020:13:23, 1 May 2014 (UTC) 1945:10:32, 1 May 2014 (UTC) 1781:them with text alone. 963:List of postal entities 942:List of postal entities 898:List of postal entities 272:Correios De Timor-Leste 266:Correios De Timor-Leste 4920:Please have a look at 4487:The Collector Magazine 4413:Post and Go Check List 4006: 3481:Australian Law Journal 2858:is not categorized in 2726: 2715:Discussion moved from 2601: 2593:WikiProject X is live! 2572:National Postal Museum 2173: 2116:AfC submission - 13/06 397:Philip Sutton (artist) 4592:Sydney Morning Herald 4490:may be of some help, 4215:Puerto Rico on stamps 4010:Puerto Rico on stamps 3668:editorial peer review 3634:scholarly peer review 3490:submission guidelines 3299:into the appropriate 3239:Annual Reviews in ... 2905:1. All articles from 2721: 2600: 2438:is now taking place. 2426:Stamp catalog numbers 2172: 1822:Puerto Rico on stamps 1749:Puerto Rico on stamps 1667:Puerto Rico on stamps 1210:Ceres series (France) 1065:arguments they raised 1028:Gibbons Stamp Monthly 42:of past discussions. 4986:http://stampdata.com 4922:b:Category:Philately 4439:Post & Go stamps 4384:Post & Go stamps 4367:Clair Aubrey Houston 4341:TheVirginiaHistorian 4234:TheVirginiaHistorian 4101:TheVirginiaHistorian 4015:TheVirginiaHistorian 3981:Going to the source. 3910:the category's entry 3050:linked to above). -- 1937:TheVirginiaHistorian 1854:TheVirginiaHistorian 1786:TheVirginiaHistorian 1727:TheVirginiaHistorian 1675:TheVirginiaHistorian 1615:TheVirginiaHistorian 1571:TheVirginiaHistorian 1256:Veera Puran Appu.jpg 797:Private cancellation 775:Postmarks ad nauseam 492:WP Philately in the 3730:previous discussion 3654:editorial selection 3647:editorial screening 3545:Stanford Law Review 2568:William H. Ahmanson 2560:William H. Ahmanson 2457:Is up for deletion 2003:History of Virginia 1278:Poland/German cover 835:Cancellation (mail) 781:Cancellation (mail) 568:Irl 9shillingPO.png 230:this postal service 4855:I proposed to add 3656:in magazines; and 3169:WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS 2717:Talk:Kollektsioner 2602: 2576:Robert H. Ahmanson 2174: 1561:Assessment request 1431:Barefoot Catalogue 1017:American Philately 779:We currently have 97: 4824: 4812:comment added by 4723:provisional stamp 4689:Provisional stamp 4672: 4660:comment added by 4611: 4599:comment added by 4572:Linn's Stamp News 4261:HMS Glasgow error 3135:And — looking at 3020:Linn's Stamp News 2848:academic journals 2737:? I am returning 2729:The fact is that 2409: 2375: 2348: 2319: 2245: 2090:Still looking :( 1983:Is the guideline 1954:for what seems a 1302:Cover (philately) 1022:Linn's Stamp News 298: 281:comment added by 95: 90: 89: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 5139: 5132: 5131: 5129: 5127: 5116: 5022: 4861:letter (message) 4485:these issues of 4461: 4396:since 2014, and 4338: 4332: 4097: 4067:licencing policy 4049:derivative works 3919:RevelationDirect 3917:page. Thank you. 3875:in the category 3873:it should now be 3672:academic journal 3458: 3082: 3077: 2763:academic journal 2706: 2705: 2646:Yury Serebryakov 2604:Hello everyone! 2536:Expert attention 2453:Timbres magazine 2407: 2398:...and now it's 2373: 2346: 2317: 2277: 2243: 2212:Project leaflets 1593: 1589: 1588: 1453:This recent edit 1448:Is this correct? 1324: 1306:Philatelic cover 466: 457: 453: 418: 409: 405: 375: 374: 297: 275: 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 5147: 5146: 5142: 5141: 5140: 5138: 5137: 5136: 5135: 5125: 5123: 5118: 5117: 5113: 5109: 5108: 4991:freely licenced 4982:User:Stan Shebs 4934:Michael Romanov 4892: 4853: 4654:provisionals. 4543: 4516: 4492:This 2010 issue 4455: 4386: 4363: 4336: 4330: 4091: 3983: 3954: 3900: 3885:Michael Romanov 3883:. Thank you. -- 3865: 3843:Michael Romanov 3762:Michael Romanov 3570:Not to mention 3452: 3146:Michael Romanov 3080: 3073: 3047:Michael Romanov 3028:Michael Romanov 2957:Michael Romanov 2827:Michael Romanov 2815: 2797:Michael Romanov 2747:Michael Romanov 2720: 2712: 2711: 2703: 2699: 2676:Wayback Machine 2668: 2665: 2649: 2595: 2564: 2538: 2513:I've raised an 2511: 2481: 2455: 2428: 2275: 2232: 2167: 2140: 2118: 2028: 1929: 1906: 1745: 1656: 1633: 1586: 1584: 1563: 1544: 1523: 1517:Help reviewing 1496: 1450: 1427: 1348:Correo Uruguayo 1336: 1320: 1309: 1280: 1258: 1202: 1049: 987: 944:, we also have 925:on my talk page 894: 777: 711: 689: 666: 644: 592: 570: 548: 526: 497: 455: 449: 448: 407: 401: 400: 393: 348: 344: 342: 320: 276: 268: 226: 108: 100: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 5145: 5143: 5134: 5133: 5110: 5102: 5101: 5100: 5080: 5079: 5078: 5077: 5076: 5075: 5074: 5073: 5072: 5071: 5047: 5046: 5045: 5044: 5043: 5042: 5011: 5010: 5009: 5008: 5007: 5006: 4961: 4960: 4959: 4958: 4891: 4888: 4852: 4846: 4845: 4844: 4799: 4798: 4797: 4796: 4795: 4794: 4793: 4792: 4791: 4790: 4789: 4788: 4758: 4757: 4756: 4755: 4754: 4753: 4752: 4751: 4750: 4749: 4710: 4709: 4708: 4707: 4706: 4705: 4704: 4703: 4678: 4677: 4676: 4675: 4674: 4673: 4646: 4645: 4644: 4643: 4613: 4612: 4589: 4584: 4579: 4574: 4569: 4564: 4556: 4542: 4539: 4515: 4512: 4511: 4510: 4509: 4508: 4507: 4506: 4421: 4420: 4415: 4390:United Kingdom 4385: 4382: 4362: 4359: 4358: 4357: 4356: 4355: 4354: 4353: 4352: 4351: 4316: 4315: 4314: 4313: 4312: 4311: 4310: 4309: 4298: 4297: 4296: 4295: 4294: 4293: 4292: 4291: 4280: 4279: 4278: 4277: 4276: 4275: 4247: 4246: 4245: 4244: 4222: 4221: 4220: 4219: 4208: 4207: 4206: 4205: 4170: 4169: 4168: 4167: 4150: 4149: 4148: 4147: 4146: 4145: 4144: 4143: 4131:being broken. 4116: 4115: 4114: 4113: 4112: 4111: 4084: 4083: 4082: 4081: 4060: 4059: 4058: 4057: 4042: 4041: 3982: 3979: 3953: 3950: 3949: 3948: 3899: 3896: 3864: 3859: 3858: 3857: 3856: 3855: 3854: 3853: 3837: 3836: 3816: 3815: 3814: 3813: 3772: 3747: 3746: 3745: 3744: 3723: 3722: 3703: 3702: 3701: 3700: 3699: 3698: 3697: 3696: 3695: 3694: 3693: 3692: 3691: 3690: 3689: 3688: 3687: 3686: 3658:author editing 3596: 3595: 3594: 3593: 3592: 3591: 3590: 3589: 3588: 3587: 3586: 3568: 3567: 3566: 3565: 3564: 3563: 3562: 3379: 3369:Cordless Larry 3339:Cordless Larry 3275:which states: 3266: 3265: 3243: 3242: 3221: 3220: 3219: 3218: 3217: 3216: 3187: 3186: 3185: 3184: 3183: 3157: 3156: 3130: 3129: 3088: 3087: 3075:Blue Rasberry 3067: 3066: 3065: 3064: 3063: 3062: 3039: 3038: 2989: 2988: 2971: 2970: 2969: 2968: 2967: 2948: 2947: 2946: 2945: 2944: 2943: 2932: 2925: 2914: 2898: 2897: 2896: 2895: 2894: 2893: 2881: 2880: 2879: 2878: 2814: 2811: 2810: 2809: 2808: 2807: 2758: 2757: 2719: 2713: 2701: 2698: 2695: 2667: 2664: 2648: 2643: 2594: 2591: 2563: 2557: 2537: 2534: 2510: 2507: 2480: 2477: 2475: 2454: 2451: 2427: 2424: 2423: 2422: 2421: 2420: 2419: 2418: 2417: 2416: 2415: 2414: 2387: 2386: 2385: 2384: 2383: 2382: 2381: 2380: 2358: 2357: 2356: 2355: 2354: 2353: 2329: 2328: 2327: 2326: 2325: 2324: 2291: 2290: 2289: 2288: 2231: 2228: 2215: 2209: 2208: 2206: 2205: 2203: 2202: 2166: 2163: 2139: 2136: 2117: 2114: 2113: 2112: 2111: 2110: 2109: 2108: 2107: 2106: 2105: 2104: 2027: 2024: 2023: 2022: 2008: 2007: 2006: 1995: 1988: 1981: 1977: 1959: 1928: 1925: 1905: 1902: 1901: 1900: 1899: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1895: 1894: 1893: 1892: 1844: 1843: 1842: 1841: 1840: 1839: 1830: 1829: 1828: 1827: 1826: 1825: 1744: 1741: 1740: 1739: 1738: 1737: 1719: 1718: 1717: 1716: 1709: 1708: 1655: 1652: 1632: 1629: 1628: 1627: 1626: 1625: 1562: 1559: 1543: 1538: 1527:MatthewVanitas 1522: 1515: 1495: 1492: 1491: 1490: 1449: 1446: 1426: 1423: 1422: 1421: 1420: 1419: 1398: 1397: 1382: 1335: 1332: 1322:John Broughton 1308: 1298: 1279: 1276: 1257: 1254: 1206:French article 1201: 1198: 1197: 1196: 1195: 1194: 1164: 1163: 1162: 1161: 1160: 1048: 1045: 1044: 1043: 986: 980: 979: 978: 977: 976: 893: 890: 889: 888: 887: 886: 885: 884: 883: 882: 789:Postal marking 776: 773: 772: 771: 770: 769: 768: 767: 721: 720: 710: 707: 688: 685: 665: 662: 643: 640: 639: 638: 637: 636: 591: 588: 569: 566: 547: 544: 525: 522: 496: 490: 489: 488: 487: 486: 485: 484: 392: 389: 341: 338: 319: 316: 315: 314: 267: 264: 263: 262: 225: 222: 221: 220: 219: 218: 217: 216: 215: 214: 213: 212: 147: 146: 107: 102: 101: 92: 91: 88: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5144: 5121: 5115: 5112: 5106: 5099: 5095: 5091: 5087: 5082: 5081: 5070: 5066: 5062: 5057: 5056: 5055: 5054: 5053: 5052: 5051: 5050: 5049: 5048: 5041: 5037: 5033: 5029: 5025: 5021: 5017: 5016: 5015: 5014: 5013: 5012: 5005: 5001: 4997: 4992: 4987: 4983: 4979: 4975: 4971: 4970:WP:NOTCATALOG 4967: 4966: 4965: 4964: 4963: 4962: 4957: 4953: 4949: 4945: 4944: 4943: 4939: 4935: 4931: 4927: 4923: 4918: 4917: 4916: 4915: 4911: 4907: 4901: 4898: 4889: 4887: 4886: 4882: 4878: 4874: 4870: 4866: 4865:greeting card 4862: 4858: 4851: 4847: 4843: 4839: 4835: 4831: 4830:make up stamp 4827: 4826: 4825: 4823: 4819: 4815: 4814:46.11.101.215 4811: 4805: 4787: 4783: 4779: 4775: 4770: 4769: 4768: 4767: 4766: 4765: 4764: 4763: 4762: 4761: 4760: 4759: 4748: 4744: 4740: 4736: 4732: 4731:make up stamp 4728: 4727:make up stamp 4724: 4720: 4719: 4718: 4717: 4716: 4715: 4714: 4713: 4712: 4711: 4702: 4698: 4694: 4690: 4686: 4685: 4684: 4683: 4682: 4681: 4680: 4679: 4671: 4667: 4663: 4659: 4652: 4651: 4650: 4649: 4648: 4647: 4642: 4638: 4634: 4630: 4626: 4622: 4621:make up stamp 4617: 4616: 4615: 4614: 4610: 4606: 4602: 4598: 4593: 4590: 4588: 4585: 4583: 4580: 4578: 4575: 4573: 4570: 4568: 4567:Glen Stephens 4565: 4563: 4562:(+ follow-up) 4560: 4557: 4555: 4552: 4551: 4550: 4548: 4540: 4538: 4537: 4533: 4529: 4525: 4521: 4513: 4505: 4501: 4497: 4493: 4489: 4488: 4482: 4479: 4478: 4477: 4473: 4469: 4465: 4459: 4454: 4453: 4452: 4448: 4444: 4440: 4436: 4435: 4434: 4433: 4429: 4425: 4419: 4416: 4414: 4411: 4410: 4409: 4407: 4403: 4399: 4395: 4391: 4383: 4381: 4380: 4376: 4372: 4368: 4360: 4350: 4346: 4342: 4335: 4328: 4324: 4323: 4322: 4321: 4320: 4319: 4318: 4317: 4306: 4305: 4304: 4303: 4302: 4301: 4300: 4299: 4288: 4287: 4286: 4285: 4284: 4283: 4282: 4281: 4274: 4270: 4266: 4262: 4258: 4253: 4252: 4251: 4250: 4249: 4248: 4243: 4239: 4235: 4231: 4226: 4225: 4224: 4223: 4216: 4212: 4211: 4210: 4209: 4203: 4199: 4194: 4193: 4192: 4188: 4184: 4180: 4176: 4172: 4171: 4166: 4162: 4158: 4154: 4153: 4152: 4151: 4142: 4138: 4134: 4129: 4124: 4123: 4122: 4121: 4120: 4119: 4118: 4117: 4110: 4106: 4102: 4095: 4090: 4089: 4088: 4087: 4086: 4085: 4080: 4076: 4072: 4068: 4064: 4063: 4062: 4061: 4055: 4050: 4046: 4045: 4044: 4043: 4040: 4036: 4032: 4027: 4026: 4025: 4024: 4020: 4016: 4011: 4005: 4001: 3997: 3993: 3990: 3986: 3980: 3978: 3977: 3973: 3969: 3964: 3959: 3951: 3947: 3943: 3939: 3935: 3931: 3930: 3929: 3928: 3924: 3920: 3916: 3912: 3911: 3906: 3905: 3897: 3895: 3894: 3890: 3886: 3882: 3878: 3874: 3870: 3863: 3860: 3852: 3848: 3844: 3839: 3838: 3835: 3831: 3827: 3822: 3821: 3820: 3819: 3818: 3817: 3812: 3808: 3804: 3799: 3798: 3797: 3793: 3789: 3785: 3781: 3777: 3773: 3771: 3767: 3763: 3759: 3754: 3749: 3748: 3743: 3739: 3735: 3731: 3727: 3726: 3725: 3724: 3721: 3717: 3713: 3709: 3705: 3704: 3685: 3681: 3677: 3673: 3669: 3665: 3662: 3659: 3655: 3651: 3649:in journals ( 3648: 3644: 3641: 3638: 3635: 3630: 3629: 3628: 3624: 3620: 3616: 3615: 3614: 3610: 3606: 3602: 3597: 3585: 3581: 3577: 3573: 3569: 3561: 3557: 3553: 3549: 3546: 3542: 3541: 3540: 3536: 3532: 3527: 3526: 3525: 3521: 3517: 3513: 3509: 3506:My source is 3505: 3504: 3503: 3499: 3495: 3491: 3487: 3483: 3482: 3477: 3473: 3472: 3471: 3467: 3463: 3456: 3451: 3450: 3449: 3445: 3441: 3437: 3436: 3435: 3431: 3427: 3423: 3419: 3418: 3417: 3413: 3409: 3405: 3404: 3403: 3402: 3401: 3397: 3393: 3389: 3384: 3381:There's some 3380: 3378: 3374: 3370: 3365: 3364: 3363: 3359: 3355: 3350: 3349: 3348: 3344: 3340: 3335: 3334: 3333: 3329: 3325: 3321: 3316: 3315: 3314: 3310: 3306: 3302: 3298: 3294: 3290: 3286: 3282: 3278: 3274: 3270: 3269: 3268: 3267: 3264: 3263: 3259: 3255: 3254: 3245: 3244: 3240: 3236: 3232: 3228: 3223: 3222: 3215: 3211: 3207: 3203: 3202: 3201: 3197: 3193: 3188: 3182: 3178: 3174: 3170: 3165: 3161: 3160: 3159: 3158: 3155: 3151: 3147: 3142: 3138: 3134: 3133: 3132: 3131: 3128: 3124: 3120: 3116: 3112: 3108: 3104: 3100: 3096: 3092: 3091: 3090: 3089: 3086: 3083: 3078: 3076: 3069: 3068: 3061: 3057: 3053: 3048: 3043: 3042: 3041: 3040: 3037: 3033: 3029: 3025: 3021: 3017: 3013: 3009: 3005: 3001: 2997: 2993: 2992: 2991: 2990: 2987: 2983: 2979: 2976: 2972: 2966: 2962: 2958: 2954: 2953: 2952: 2951: 2950: 2949: 2941: 2937: 2933: 2930: 2926: 2923: 2919: 2915: 2912: 2909:are moved to 2908: 2904: 2903: 2902: 2901: 2900: 2899: 2891: 2887: 2886: 2885: 2884: 2883: 2882: 2877: 2873: 2869: 2865: 2861: 2857: 2853: 2852:peer-reviewed 2849: 2845: 2841: 2840: 2839: 2838: 2837: 2836: 2832: 2828: 2824: 2820: 2812: 2806: 2802: 2798: 2794: 2790: 2786: 2785: 2784: 2780: 2776: 2772: 2768: 2767:peer-reviewed 2764: 2760: 2759: 2756: 2752: 2748: 2744: 2740: 2739:Kollektsioner 2736: 2732: 2731:Kollektsioner 2728: 2727: 2725: 2718: 2714: 2710: 2696: 2694: 2693: 2689: 2685: 2681: 2677: 2673: 2663: 2662: 2658: 2654: 2647: 2644: 2642: 2641: 2637: 2633: 2629: 2627: 2623: 2619: 2617: 2612: 2611: 2610:WikiProject X 2605: 2599: 2592: 2590: 2589: 2585: 2581: 2577: 2573: 2569: 2561: 2558: 2556: 2555: 2551: 2547: 2543: 2535: 2533: 2532: 2528: 2524: 2520: 2516: 2508: 2506: 2505: 2501: 2497: 2493: 2489: 2488: 2478: 2476: 2473: 2472: 2468: 2464: 2461:. Any views? 2460: 2452: 2450: 2449: 2445: 2441: 2437: 2433: 2425: 2413: 2410: 2405: 2401: 2397: 2396: 2395: 2394: 2393: 2392: 2391: 2390: 2389: 2388: 2379: 2376: 2371: 2366: 2365: 2364: 2363: 2362: 2361: 2360: 2359: 2352: 2349: 2344: 2339: 2335: 2334: 2333: 2332: 2331: 2330: 2323: 2320: 2315: 2311: 2306: 2301: 2297: 2296: 2295: 2294: 2293: 2292: 2287: 2283: 2279: 2271: 2270: 2269: 2265: 2261: 2256: 2252: 2251: 2250: 2249: 2246: 2241: 2237: 2229: 2227: 2226: 2222: 2218: 2214: 2213: 2199: 2196: 2193: 2190: 2187: 2184: 2180: 2177: 2171: 2164: 2162: 2161: 2157: 2153: 2149: 2145: 2137: 2135: 2134: 2130: 2126: 2125:FoCuSandLeArN 2122: 2115: 2103: 2099: 2095: 2094: 2093:Brigade Piron 2089: 2088: 2087: 2083: 2079: 2078: 2077:Brigade Piron 2073: 2072: 2071: 2067: 2063: 2062: 2061:Brigade Piron 2057: 2056: 2055: 2054: 2053: 2052: 2051: 2050: 2046: 2042: 2041: 2040:Brigade Piron 2036: 2031: 2025: 2021: 2017: 2013: 2009: 2004: 2000: 1996: 1993: 1989: 1986: 1982: 1978: 1975: 1971: 1967: 1966: 1964: 1960: 1957: 1953: 1949: 1948: 1947: 1946: 1942: 1938: 1934: 1926: 1924: 1923: 1919: 1915: 1911: 1903: 1891: 1887: 1883: 1882: 1876: 1872: 1867: 1866: 1865: 1864: 1863: 1859: 1855: 1850: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1845: 1836: 1835: 1834: 1833: 1832: 1831: 1823: 1819: 1818: 1817: 1813: 1809: 1808: 1803: 1800: 1799: 1798: 1797: 1796: 1795: 1791: 1787: 1782: 1779: 1774: 1772: 1768: 1763: 1761: 1757: 1752: 1750: 1742: 1736: 1732: 1728: 1723: 1722: 1721: 1720: 1713: 1712: 1711: 1710: 1707: 1703: 1699: 1698: 1693: 1692: 1687: 1686: 1685: 1684: 1680: 1676: 1672: 1668: 1663: 1661: 1653: 1651: 1650: 1646: 1642: 1638: 1630: 1624: 1620: 1616: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1605: 1601: 1597: 1592: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1576: 1572: 1568: 1560: 1558: 1557: 1553: 1549: 1542: 1539: 1537: 1536: 1532: 1528: 1520: 1516: 1514: 1513: 1509: 1505: 1501: 1493: 1489: 1485: 1481: 1477: 1473: 1472: 1471: 1470: 1466: 1462: 1458: 1454: 1447: 1445: 1444: 1440: 1436: 1432: 1424: 1418: 1414: 1410: 1406: 1402: 1401: 1400: 1399: 1396: 1392: 1388: 1383: 1380: 1379: 1378: 1377: 1373: 1369: 1364: 1362: 1358: 1352: 1349: 1345: 1341: 1333: 1331: 1330: 1327: 1323: 1318: 1314: 1307: 1303: 1299: 1297: 1296: 1292: 1288: 1284: 1277: 1275: 1274: 1270: 1266: 1265:76.65.128.222 1262: 1255: 1253: 1252: 1248: 1244: 1239: 1235: 1231: 1227: 1223: 1219: 1215: 1211: 1207: 1199: 1193: 1189: 1185: 1181: 1177: 1176: 1175: 1172: 1170: 1165: 1159: 1155: 1151: 1147: 1143: 1139: 1138: 1137: 1133: 1129: 1124: 1123: 1122: 1118: 1114: 1109: 1105: 1102:and US (like 1101: 1097: 1093: 1089: 1084: 1083: 1082: 1081: 1078: 1076: 1069: 1066: 1060: 1058: 1054: 1046: 1042: 1038: 1034: 1030: 1029: 1024: 1023: 1018: 1015: 1010: 1009: 1008: 1007: 1003: 999: 995: 992: 985: 981: 975: 972: 970: 964: 961: 960: 959: 955: 951: 947: 943: 939: 935: 930: 926: 922: 921: 920: 919: 915: 911: 907: 906:French source 903: 899: 891: 881: 878: 876: 871: 867: 863: 862: 861: 857: 853: 848: 847: 846: 843: 841: 836: 832: 831: 830: 826: 822: 817: 816: 815: 814: 810: 806: 802: 798: 794: 790: 786: 782: 774: 766: 763: 761: 756: 755: 754: 750: 746: 742: 738: 737: 736: 735: 734: 733: 729: 725: 719: 716: 715: 714: 708: 706: 705: 701: 697: 696:76.65.128.222 693: 686: 684: 683: 679: 675: 674:76.65.128.222 671: 663: 661: 660: 656: 652: 651:76.65.128.222 648: 641: 635: 631: 627: 626:76.65.128.222 623: 622: 621: 617: 613: 608: 607: 606: 605: 601: 597: 596:76.65.128.222 589: 587: 586: 582: 578: 577:76.65.128.222 574: 567: 565: 564: 560: 556: 552: 545: 543: 542: 538: 534: 530: 523: 521: 520: 516: 512: 508: 507: 502: 495: 491: 483: 479: 475: 471: 470: 469: 465: 461: 456:Pigsonthewing 452: 446: 442: 438: 437: 436: 432: 428: 424: 423: 422: 421: 417: 413: 408:Pigsonthewing 404: 398: 391:Philip Sutton 390: 388: 387: 383: 379: 378:70.24.245.196 372: 368: 364: 360: 356: 352: 347: 339: 337: 336: 332: 328: 327:70.24.250.103 324: 317: 313: 309: 305: 301: 300: 299: 296: 292: 288: 284: 283:Rahman.safwan 280: 273: 265: 261: 257: 253: 250: 246: 245: 244: 243: 239: 235: 231: 224:Posta Europea 223: 211: 207: 203: 198: 197: 196: 192: 188: 184: 183: 182: 178: 174: 170: 169: 168: 164: 160: 156: 151: 150: 149: 148: 145: 141: 137: 133: 132:WP:NOTCATALOG 129: 124: 123: 122: 121: 117: 113: 106: 103: 99: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 5124:. Retrieved 5114: 5104: 5023: 4902: 4893: 4854: 4808:— Preceding 4803: 4800: 4773: 4662:46.11.121.43 4656:— Preceding 4595:— Preceding 4554:9news.com.au 4544: 4517: 4486: 4481:This webpage 4422: 4387: 4364: 4007: 4002: 3998: 3994: 3991: 3988: 3984: 3955: 3933: 3908: 3902: 3901: 3866: 3572:Law journals 3485: 3479: 3475: 3276: 3251: 3248: 3238: 3234: 3230: 3226: 3163: 3074: 2855: 2816: 2730: 2722: 2669: 2650: 2630: 2621: 2620: 2616:check us out 2608: 2606: 2603: 2565: 2539: 2512: 2485: 2482: 2474: 2456: 2432:3+ years ago 2429: 2299: 2255:Harry Potter 2233: 2210: 2200: 2197: 2194: 2191: 2188: 2185: 2181: 2178: 2175: 2141: 2119: 2091: 2075: 2059: 2038: 2032: 2029: 1955: 1930: 1910:Comment here 1907: 1881:Gwillhickers 1880: 1870: 1807:Gwillhickers 1806: 1783: 1775: 1771:Billy Ripken 1764: 1753: 1746: 1697:Gwillhickers 1696: 1694:article. -- 1689: 1664: 1657: 1634: 1590: 1564: 1545: 1524: 1497: 1494:Naming issue 1451: 1428: 1366:Best wishes 1365: 1353: 1340:pillar boxes 1337: 1310: 1281: 1259: 1203: 1167: 1073: 1070: 1061: 1050: 1026: 1020: 1016: 991:The Signpost 990: 988: 984:The Signpost 983: 967: 933: 895: 873: 869: 838: 778: 758: 740: 722: 712: 690: 667: 645: 593: 571: 549: 527: 504: 500: 498: 493: 464:Andy's edits 460:Talk to Andy 451:Andy Mabbett 444: 440: 416:Andy's edits 412:Talk to Andy 403:Andy Mabbett 394: 343: 321: 277:— Preceding 269: 227: 109: 93: 78: 43: 37: 4828:A new page 4778:Daveosaurus 4693:Daveosaurus 4601:46.11.29.54 4587:Stampboards 4577:news.com.au 4468:Xwejnusgozo 4458:Schlosser67 4443:Schlosser67 4424:Xwejnusgozo 4157:Philafrenzy 4133:Daveosaurus 4031:Philafrenzy 3803:Philafrenzy 3734:Fgnievinski 3712:Fgnievinski 3676:Fgnievinski 3605:Fgnievinski 3576:Fgnievinski 3552:Fgnievinski 3516:Fgnievinski 3462:Fgnievinski 3426:Fgnievinski 3392:Fgnievinski 3287:and not to 3192:Philafrenzy 2978:Philafrenzy 2942:is deleted. 2707:Moved from 2680:This search 2653:Philafrenzy 2463:Philafrenzy 2217:Adikhajuria 1914:Philafrenzy 1641:Philafrenzy 1480:Philafrenzy 1429:I dePRODed 1387:Philafrenzy 1128:Philafrenzy 998:Philafrenzy 982:Profile in 852:Philafrenzy 805:Philafrenzy 745:Philafrenzy 724:Philafrenzy 474:Philafrenzy 427:Philafrenzy 304:Philafrenzy 252:Philafrenzy 173:Philafrenzy 159:Daveosaurus 128:WP:NOPRICES 112:Philafrenzy 36:This is an 4857:stationery 3938:Richardguk 3826:Randykitty 3788:Randykitty 3619:Randykitty 3531:Randykitty 3494:Randykitty 3455:Randykitty 3440:Randykitty 3408:Randykitty 3354:Randykitty 3324:Randykitty 3206:Randykitty 3173:Randykitty 3119:Randykitty 3052:Randykitty 3000:Randykitty 2996:Randykitty 2938:. The new 2868:Randykitty 2775:Randykitty 2035:Epaulettes 1958:long time. 1871:violations 1767:WP:NFC#UUI 1660:WP:NFC#UUI 1357:Pillar box 866:marcophily 801:Marcophily 555:65.94.79.6 533:65.94.79.6 85:Archive 10 5126:2 October 5032:ww2censor 4996:ww2censor 4877:RekishiEJ 4834:ww2censor 4739:ww2censor 4725:, it's a 4633:ww2censor 4528:ww2censor 4496:ww2censor 4402:Gibraltar 4265:ww2censor 4183:ww2censor 4094:Ww2censor 4071:ww2censor 3968:ww2censor 3320:magazines 3305:ww2censor 3164:bona fide 2844:magazines 2684:ww2censor 2580:Zigzig20s 2492:talk page 2440:ww2censor 2400:submitted 2260:ww2censor 2152:ww2censor 1875:'Hounding 1600:ww2censor 1504:ww2censor 1474:There is 1461:ww2censor 1435:ww2censor 1368:Motacilla 1287:ww2censor 1243:ww2censor 1238:Type Sage 1184:ww2censor 1150:ww2censor 1113:ww2censor 1033:ww2censor 950:ww2censor 850:article. 612:ww2censor 511:–Mabeenot 274:Regards 234:ww2censor 187:ww2censor 136:ww2censor 79:Archive 9 73:Archive 8 68:Archive 7 60:Archive 5 5024:Comment: 4869:postcard 4810:unsigned 4658:unsigned 4619:this. A 4597:unsigned 4398:Guernsey 4371:Frietjes 3601:academia 3383:evidence 3247:Magazine 3237:and the 2546:Iceblock 2176:Hi all, 1980:stamps ? 1476:this too 1300:Merging 1104:this one 1096:this one 1092:this one 1051:Reading 910:A455bcd9 864:I think 785:Postmark 501:Signpost 494:Signpost 291:contribs 279:unsigned 5122:. 123RF 4873:WP:VA/E 4850:WT:VA/E 4179:WP:NFCC 4128:WP:NFCC 3913:on the 3728:In the 3273:Journal 3231:Science 2724:latter) 2666:Linns's 2408:(Speak) 2374:(Speak) 2347:(Speak) 2318:(Speak) 2244:(Speak) 2030:Hello, 1992:WP:NFCI 1985:WP:NFCI 1778:WP:NFCC 1756:WP:NFCI 1409:Ecphora 1359:" and " 1142:linkrot 821:Ecphora 441:details 359:history 39:archive 4867:& 4394:Jersey 4200:, and 3934:delete 3776:WP:CFD 3281:WP:CFD 3227:Nature 3101:, and 3081:(talk) 2672:Linn's 2404:Slambo 2370:Slambo 2343:Slambo 2314:Slambo 2278:rose64 2240:Slambo 2012:Jheald 1963:WT:NFC 1952:WT:NFC 1548:Pburka 1344:Dudley 1319:. -- 1200:France 870:per se 793:Cachet 445:images 5061:DJCMH 4948:DJCMH 4906:DJCMH 4406:Qatar 4259:and 3107:lists 2888:Yes, 2632:Harej 2622:Note: 2496:Harej 1014:APS's 367:watch 363:links 16:< 5128:2013 5094:talk 5090:Stan 5065:talk 5036:talk 5028:here 5000:talk 4984:has 4952:talk 4938:talk 4928:and 4910:talk 4881:talk 4838:talk 4818:talk 4782:talk 4743:talk 4697:talk 4666:talk 4637:talk 4605:talk 4532:talk 4500:talk 4472:talk 4464:here 4447:talk 4428:talk 4404:and 4375:talk 4345:talk 4269:talk 4238:talk 4187:talk 4161:talk 4137:talk 4105:talk 4075:talk 4035:talk 4019:talk 4004:use. 3972:talk 3942:talk 3936:. — 3923:talk 3889:talk 3881:here 3847:talk 3830:talk 3807:talk 3792:talk 3766:talk 3738:talk 3716:talk 3680:talk 3623:talk 3609:talk 3580:talk 3556:talk 3535:talk 3520:talk 3498:talk 3466:talk 3444:talk 3430:talk 3412:talk 3396:talk 3373:talk 3358:talk 3343:talk 3328:talk 3309:talk 3258:talk 3229:and 3210:talk 3196:talk 3177:talk 3150:talk 3123:talk 3113:and 3056:talk 3032:talk 2982:talk 2961:talk 2872:talk 2866:. -- 2862:or 2846:and 2831:talk 2825:? -- 2801:talk 2779:talk 2751:talk 2745:. -- 2741:to 2688:talk 2657:talk 2636:talk 2584:talk 2550:talk 2527:talk 2523:Bazj 2500:talk 2467:talk 2459:here 2444:talk 2434:and 2282:talk 2264:talk 2221:talk 2156:talk 2146:and 2129:talk 2098:talk 2082:talk 2066:talk 2045:talk 2016:talk 1956:very 1941:talk 1918:talk 1886:talk 1858:talk 1812:talk 1790:talk 1731:talk 1702:talk 1679:talk 1645:talk 1619:talk 1604:talk 1591:Done 1575:talk 1552:talk 1531:talk 1508:talk 1484:talk 1465:talk 1439:talk 1413:talk 1407:. 1391:talk 1372:talk 1326:(♫♫) 1315:and 1304:and 1291:talk 1269:talk 1247:talk 1236:and 1188:talk 1169:Jack 1154:talk 1132:talk 1117:talk 1100:here 1094:and 1075:Jack 1057:WP:N 1037:talk 1025:and 1002:talk 994:here 969:Jack 954:talk 940:and 914:talk 900:and 875:Jack 856:talk 840:Jack 825:talk 809:talk 799:and 760:Jack 749:talk 728:talk 700:talk 678:talk 668:See 655:talk 630:talk 616:talk 600:talk 581:talk 559:talk 537:talk 515:talk 478:talk 472:OK. 443:not 431:talk 382:talk 371:logs 355:talk 351:edit 331:talk 308:talk 287:talk 256:talk 238:talk 206:talk 202:Stan 191:talk 177:talk 163:talk 140:talk 130:and 116:talk 5088:. 4871:to 4774:and 3253:DGG 3014:or 2515:AfD 2509:AfD 2312:). 2276:Red 1802:TVH 1455:to 1363:". 1047:AfD 672:-- 458:); 410:); 5096:) 5067:) 5038:) 5002:) 4954:) 4940:) 4912:) 4883:) 4863:, 4859:, 4840:) 4820:) 4784:) 4745:) 4699:) 4668:) 4639:) 4607:) 4534:) 4502:) 4474:) 4449:) 4430:) 4400:, 4377:) 4347:) 4337:}} 4331:{{ 4271:) 4240:) 4189:) 4163:) 4139:) 4107:) 4077:) 4037:) 4021:) 3974:) 3944:) 3925:) 3891:) 3849:) 3841:-- 3832:) 3809:) 3794:) 3768:) 3740:) 3718:) 3710:. 3682:) 3674:. 3625:) 3611:) 3582:) 3574:. 3558:) 3537:) 3529:-- 3522:) 3500:) 3486:is 3476:am 3474:I 3468:) 3446:) 3432:) 3414:) 3398:) 3375:) 3360:) 3352:-- 3345:) 3330:) 3311:) 3260:) 3212:) 3198:) 3179:) 3152:) 3144:-- 3125:) 3097:, 3058:) 3034:) 2984:) 2963:) 2874:) 2833:) 2803:) 2781:) 2753:) 2690:) 2659:) 2638:) 2586:) 2552:) 2529:) 2502:) 2469:) 2446:) 2284:) 2273:-- 2266:) 2223:) 2158:) 2131:) 2123:. 2100:) 2084:) 2068:) 2047:) 2018:) 1943:) 1920:) 1912:. 1888:) 1860:) 1814:) 1792:) 1733:) 1704:) 1681:) 1647:) 1639:. 1621:) 1606:) 1598:. 1577:) 1554:) 1533:) 1510:) 1486:) 1467:) 1441:) 1415:) 1393:) 1374:) 1293:) 1271:) 1249:) 1232:, 1228:, 1224:, 1220:, 1216:, 1212:, 1190:) 1171:| 1156:) 1134:) 1119:) 1077:| 1039:) 1019:, 1004:) 971:| 956:) 916:) 877:| 858:) 842:| 827:) 811:) 795:, 791:, 787:, 783:, 762:| 751:) 730:) 702:) 680:) 657:) 632:) 618:) 602:) 583:) 561:) 539:) 517:) 480:) 462:; 447:. 433:) 414:; 384:) 369:| 365:| 361:| 357:| 353:| 333:) 310:) 293:) 289:• 258:) 240:) 208:) 193:) 179:) 165:) 142:) 134:. 118:) 64:← 5130:. 5092:( 5063:( 5034:( 4998:( 4950:( 4936:( 4908:( 4879:( 4836:( 4816:( 4780:( 4741:( 4695:( 4664:( 4635:( 4603:( 4530:( 4498:( 4470:( 4460:: 4456:@ 4445:( 4426:( 4373:( 4343:( 4267:( 4236:( 4185:( 4159:( 4135:( 4103:( 4096:: 4092:@ 4073:( 4056:. 4033:( 4017:( 3970:( 3940:( 3921:( 3887:( 3845:( 3828:( 3805:( 3790:( 3764:( 3736:( 3714:( 3678:( 3663:, 3660:( 3642:, 3636:( 3621:( 3607:( 3578:( 3554:( 3547:( 3533:( 3518:( 3496:( 3464:( 3457:: 3453:@ 3442:( 3428:( 3410:( 3394:( 3371:( 3356:( 3341:( 3326:( 3307:( 3256:( 3208:( 3194:( 3175:( 3148:( 3121:( 3054:( 3030:( 2980:( 2959:( 2931:. 2924:. 2870:( 2829:( 2799:( 2777:( 2749:( 2686:( 2655:( 2634:( 2582:( 2548:( 2525:( 2498:( 2465:( 2442:( 2280:( 2262:( 2219:( 2154:( 2127:( 2096:( 2080:( 2064:( 2043:( 2014:( 1976:? 1939:( 1916:( 1884:( 1856:( 1810:( 1788:( 1729:( 1700:( 1677:( 1643:( 1617:( 1602:( 1573:( 1550:( 1529:( 1521:? 1506:( 1482:( 1463:( 1437:( 1411:( 1389:( 1370:( 1355:" 1289:( 1267:( 1245:( 1186:( 1152:( 1130:( 1115:( 1035:( 1000:( 952:( 912:( 854:( 823:( 807:( 747:( 726:( 698:( 676:( 653:( 628:( 614:( 598:( 579:( 557:( 535:( 513:( 476:( 454:( 429:( 406:( 380:( 373:) 349:( 329:( 306:( 285:( 254:( 236:( 204:( 189:( 175:( 161:( 138:( 114:( 50:.

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

Knowledge

talk:WikiProject Philately/Archive 9 - Knowledge

Index