Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:05, 16 July 2006

Philately NA‑class

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Philately, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of philately and stamp collecting on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhilatelyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilatelyTemplate:WikiProject PhilatelyPhilately NA This page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Some Project Aims

Template:SampleWikiProject

This is mainly a writeup of the rules I've been applying when doing philatelic articles, should help make sense of things if someone else takes an interest in the subject. Stan 19:33, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Stamp image uploads

Is there a standard file naming format for images of stamps uploaded to WP? I have a few scans that I'd like to use to illustrate some of the articles I've been writing as a part of Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Trains, but don't want to just give the images any old name.

If there isn't one already, perhaps something like Stamp_XXXXX_999999.jpg where XXXXX is the issuing country name (which would expand to as long as is needed for the country name) and 999999 is the Scott catalog number (including leading zeros). For example, Stamp_United_States_B00001.jpg would be the filename for the first US semipostal for breast cancer research, while Stamp_Prince_Edward_Island_000015.jpg would be the filename for Scott number 15 of stamps issued by PEI. I mention Scott numbers only because that's the set of catalogs that I've got handy and it provides a handy example. We could include the catalog name in the filename, but that seems a bit much.

Thoughts? slambo 22:42, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

The format I've been using is "Stamp country year denomination disambig.jpg". Year and denomination alone is sufficient to uniquely identify a large number of the world's stamps, and the disambig can be something like "red" or "crown watermark" or "Robert Goddard". Scott is not used so much outside the US nor do they list every stamp ever issued, plus their number system is copyrighted and they go after anyone who seems like a threat, such as, say, a large repository of free philatelic information... See Category:Stamps on commons for a large collection of examples. Stan 12:49, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

This is an ACTIVE Wikiproject

I've had to rescue us from the clutches of the "inactive project" list and to try and heighten our profile I've created the active project banner at the top of this page and the project page.

Do please make use of the project member banner on your user page. --Jack 22:39, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

And to prove it's active see category:Compendium of postage stamp issuers --Jack 08:29, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

And the next-to-be (yes, ok, slow) increase of Category:Stamp designers. Sebjarod 17:55, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Question

Should we put a notice on the talk pages of every article related to Philately? I noticed that WikiProject Numismatics did that. I'm thinking this might bring some attention to this WikiProject.

Johann Wolfgang [ T ...C ]
04:41, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Classification of WikiProject

Hi,

I notice that this WikiProject is classified on the main list of WikiProjects as being "Humanities" (it sits between "Media" and "Philosophy"). Is this intentional? I collect stamps myself, although I confess I haven't edited philately articles here at all, but I don't recall philately considering itself alonside philosophy! Can I suggest that "Hobbies and Recreation" might be a better place for people to find the project?

Incidentally, if you need an independent "outsider" to give an opinion on stamp articles, or you need a bit of extra input for a featured article candidate, please leave a message on my talk page – I'd be happy to help out a little. I don't know much postal history, I am a collector rather than a scholar, but I know GB and NSW stamps fairly well and a bit about stamps in general. Also incidentally, we at WP:Chem put our name on talk pages of chemical substance articles, it seems to be common practice. Cheers, Walkerma 06:56, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Stamp pages mentioning Lsd currency

I notice that on many pages about GB Commonwealth stamps using £sd currency, such as Postage stamps and postal history of New South Wales, Australia, Falkland Islands, etc, the d values are given in p. This occurs even when the description relates to a stamp image that clearly shows the denomination as 2d or similar. The pages on GB stamps and Canadian stamps use d, however. Is there a reason for the use of p for d? In British currency usually p designates "new pence" (after February 1971 in UK). Thanks, Walkerma 22:20, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

In Ireland for instance, during the £sd period Irish stamps had the currency written as 'p' for pingin, the Irish for penny, and when decimalisation came in the 'p' was dropped, so you only see a numeral for the decimal penny as in this decimal set of definitive stamps that do not show a decimal penny, just the numeral. Prior to 1968 the penny was shown as a sterling 'd' for penny. However, it should be clear what currency is being referred to on all stamp pages. ww2censor 02:05, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I use "p" because Scott catalog does. It's a complete nuisance to try to keep track of the day/month/year of each nation's decimalization (UK is not the only place that changed). Any pedant wants to re-upload images or edit articles, be my guest. :-) Stan 03:58, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank for the info; I take it that it would be OK to change these where appropriate. I think SG usually uses the local currency symbol, and I figure if the stamp itself says "4d" it should be OK to correct the text to match with that. Cheers, Walkerma 06:16, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Postage stamp copyright

A useful task for this project is to research copyright status for stamp designs. About all we can say for sure is that 19th-c. images are most likely PD, and 21st-c. images are likely not. I've researched this some, but don't have a lot to show for it. It matters because PD images can go to commons, while ones still under copyright have to stay here. Stan 03:58, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

A first step in this idea on commons : Commons:Stamps/Public domain. Sebjarod 20:15, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Fish on stamps to be deleted

OK folks, time to spring into action - List of fish on stamps is proposed for deletion. Go weigh in if you think this material is at least as worth keeping as individual articles for each Pokemon. Stan 03:58, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Holiday stamps

Looking through the Christmas stamp I noticed a redlinked Holiday stamp. I believe that Christmas is just one festivity in this large world and Misplaced Pages still had not looked at the other stamps of other cultures. So I started this stub. The information is just for US Postage stamps. I would like to invite all of you to expand this article and although there is still very much more to write about US Holiday stamps, I believe there is much more to say of other countries' stamps. I would interested to see about Muslim countries and Chinese issues, as also if other Western countries with a high inmigration population has issued special multicultural festival stamps. --Francisco Valverde 10:58, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Express Mail

I noticed there are 3 articles that refer to Express Mail. Two are duplicates Express mail, Express Mail(USPS) and the third Express Mail Service that all refer to the express mail services as offered by postal administrations (UPU members) throughout the world. It seems to me that one of those duplicates should be deleted and used as a redirect while only one main article should cover the subject in depth with references to the express services offered by other, non-postal administration, carriers like Fedex, etc.

Proposal:

• Express Mail(USPS) should redirect to Express mail
• Express Mail Service shold be merged with Express mail
• Express mail should be expanded to become the main article.

Opinions sought. ww2censor 14:28, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. Lots of left hands not knowing what right hands are doing, a single article suffices since I doubt the subject can get longer than 3-4 screenfuls even with excruciating detail. Stan 14:49, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree. Seeing as this conversation has been dead for two months, is anyone gonna do it? Alphachimp 19:15, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I'll try to do it this weekend. Cheers ww2censor 13:01, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

So, Express mail is now the main article and it is done though I still need to make some more improvements but the basics are there now. ww2censor 02:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Romanian stamp dies

I'm guessing that someone on this project can do a better job than I can on the description of Commons:Image:Rom stamp dies 1.jpg. - Jmabel | Talk 04:00, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Seems good enough to me, any further detail would have to come from one of the world's dozen-odd specialists in Romanian philately, none are WP editors that I know of :-) . The pic will be very handy in an as-yet-nonexistent article on stamp printing, thanks! Stan 19:16, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Philately Articles Needed

I'm currently going through the compendium to include Main Article links in each micro entry (where appropriate) and it's clear that the majority are going to be missing. If you have any material that could be used to create a stub at least, could you please include it. The naming convention for new articles is on the WikiProject main page: it depends on if the article is philatelic only or a section in the country's general article.

As for what we're missing, this is just A B C & S with loads more to come!

A

Aden Protectorate States; Aegean Islands (Dodecanese); Åland Islands; Albania; Alderney; Algeria; Alsace-Lorraine; Andorra; Angola; Anguilla; Antigua & Barbuda; Argentina; Argentine Territories; Armenia; Aruba; Austro-Hungarian Military Post; Azerbaijan.

B

BA/BMA Issues; Baden; Bahawalpur; Bahrain; Bangladesh; Barbados; Basutoland; Bavaria; Belarus; Belgian Congo; Belgian Occupation Issues; Belgium; Belize; Benin; Bermuda; Bhutan; Bohemia & Moravia; Bolivia; Bosnia & Herzegovina; Bosnian Serb Republic; Botswana; Brazil; Bremen; British Honduras; British Indian Ocean Territory; British Occupation Issues; British Postal Agencies in Eastern Arabia; British Post Offices Abroad; British Post Offices in the Turkish Empire; British South Africa Company; British Virgin Islands; Brunei; Bulgaria; Bulgarian Territories; Burkina Faso; Burma; Burundi.

C

Cambodia; Cameroun; Canadian States; Canal Zone; Canary Islands; Cape of Good Hope; Cape Verde Islands; Cayman Islands; Central African Republic; Ceylon; Channel Islands; Chile; China (Indo-Chinese Post Offices); Chinese Nationalist Republic (Taiwan); Chinese People's Republic; Chinese Provinces; Christmas Island; Cocos (Keeling) Islands; Colombia; Colombian Territories; Comoro Islands; Congo Free State; Congo Republic; Cook Islands; Costa Rica; CPR Regional Issues; Crete; Crete (Austro-Hungarian Post Offices); Crete (French Post Offices); Croatia; Cuba; Cuba & Puerto Rico; Curacao; Cyprus; Cyrenaica; Czechoslovakia; Czech Republic.

S

Sabah; St Christopher Nevis & Anguilla; St Helena; St Kitts; St Kitts Nevis & Anguilla; St Lucia; St Pierre et Miquelon; St Vincent; Samoa; Samos; San Marino; Sao Tome e Principe; Sarawak; Saudi Arabia; Selangor; Senegal; Serbia; Serbian Occupation Issues; Serbia & Montenegro; Seychelles; Shanghai; Sierra Leone; Singapore; Slovakia; Slovenia; Solomon Islands; Somalia; Somaliland Protectorate; South Africa; South African Territories; South Georgia & South Sandwich Islands; South Korea; South Vietnam; South West Africa; Spain; Spanish Guinea; Spanish Morocco; Spanish Philippines; Spanish Post Offices Abroad; Spanish West Africa; Sri Lanka; Sudan; Sungei Ujong; Suriname; Swaziland; Swiss Cantonal Issues; Syria; Szeged.

To see the compendium project's progress, go to Category:Compendium of postage stamp issuers

To see the articles we already have, go to Category:Philately by country

All the best to everyone who is contributing to this project. --Jack 20:36, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Comment: If we add all the stamp issuing countries that have yet to be listed, I am sure it will be several hundred, so I am gald to see they have not been red linked. That is not to say that we should not make a list but I would recommend concentrating on existing links even if they need to be started. Without adding any more to the list of missing articles there are plenty (more than 250) of red linked philatelic pages already, especially at List of philatelic topics, List of philatelists, List of philatelic libraries and List of philatelic museums to name a few. I have been looking at filling an occasional one as information comes to hand, though my philatelic library is in storage right now. My own interest would be in the List of philatelic topics. ww2censor 14:50, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Comment I've only just joined this project and I spotted this on my inaugural tour! Wow! You don't do things by halves, do you? I see the word "British" appears frequently in your list and I collect British stamps including the old colonies, so I might be able to help in due course. Leave it with me. --AlbertMW 15:05, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Comment I'm aware of redlinks in the list articles and I agree these need to be addressed but I have started the missing countries so I'll finish that first and then move on to the redlinks, though I suspect a lot of these like the libraries and many of the philatelists are not going to be addressed for some considerable time. I would say the countries have priority but I would like to get most of the "topics list" underway. --BlackJack | 21:05, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Stubs renaming discussion - please see

There is a proposal to rename two postal and philatelic stub categories. Please join discussion at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion#.7B.7Btl.7CPostal-stub.7D.7D_.2F_.5B.5B:Category:Postal_stubs.5D.5D_and_.7B.7Bcl.7CPhilately_stubs.7D.7D

It's under 31 May, by the way.

I've voted for merge and rename but I'll go with consensus as long as nothing gets deleted. --Jack 20:58, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Philately and postal stub templates

We have a standard philately stub template {{philately-stub}} in wide use for philatelic subjects and there is a suitable alternative {{postal-stub}} for articles that are more relevant to postal systems than philately. One of these should be used whenever a stub is created.

I have just nominated two additional stub templates for deletion as they are superfluous, they are not in use and they have in any case an inappropriate icon. --Jack 05:49, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Category Deletion Proposed: UPU

See http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion#Category:Universal_Postal_Union Universal Postal Union for the discussion. --Jack 14:50, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

This discussion has amazingly become very heated and I would appreciate more views from the project members as we could effectively be prevented from improving our own project by the denizens of the deletion discussion pages. AlbertMW has already spoken up and I'd like to thank him for making a very valid point. --Jack 13:42, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Problem solved. UPU stays and is now a sub-category of the root itself. Lets all try and make use of it as appropriate. It now has four or five articles and it seems a few more may be forthcoming. --BlackJack | 20:39, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

• NA-Class Philately pages
• NA-importance Philately pages
• All WikiProject Philately pages