Talk:List of postage stamps

	Philately portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philately, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of philately and stamp collecting on Wikipedia. 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 articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Technically, this is a list of stamp types rather than individual stamps, but I doubt any individual of the non-unique types will ever get its own article distinct from an article about the type. Stan 14:49, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

My guess is that when the list grows, it should be organized by country. Stan 14:49, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Your prediction seems to have come true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ardour (talk • contribs) 20:20, March 22, 2007

Unique Stamps

I'd like to see a list of unique stamps. I haven't found one anywhere. The only ones I know of are the British Guiana 1c Magenta and the Treskilling Yellow. If there are a reasonable number, then maybe someone can make such a list.24.64.223.203 23:02, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"notable" redundancy

With some half-million types of stamps in existence, I think's it pretty clear that any "list of postage stamps" must necessarily restrict itself to notable ones, so I think adding "notable" to the title is kind of redundant. Stan 13:07, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article seems subjective. How did you decide whether these stamps were/are notable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ardour (talk • contribs) 20:20, March 22, 2007

This is a subjective topic but notability is based on known rare, valuable or significant stamps known to philatelists. If you don't know the topic, then you won't be aware of what stamps are notable or not. Some Wiki-philatelists are members of the WikiProject Philately and watch this page. They have the knowledge to add, or remove edits, as has done in the past. Check out any of the listed stamps and you will come up with the answer that they are notable, and that is claimed in all of the individual articles, as is required by Wikipedia to comply with notability. ww2censor 02:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would be good to have a reference or two - presumably us philatelists have some origin for our beliefs as to which are the most notable, where do we hear it from? Auction catalogs? :-) Stan 12:46, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So let's see if we can cobble together a set of criteria into which "notable'" stamps fall;

very rare stamps where few are known to exist
some country's first issues are notable
stamps that sell at auction, or privately, for record amounts of money
intentional or unintentional errors that are well known and reported in the main philatelic press

for a start. I will look for some references too. What do you think? ww2censor 15:04, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About.com: Rarities of the World Image Gallery gallery of famous stamps produced by Erika Martinez artistic coordinator for H.E. Harris & Co., one of America's oldest stamp publication companies.
National Postal Museum: The Rarities Vault Article about some notable stamps ww2censor 03:27, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some of this is "lore" among collectors, when there are unusual stories of how an extremely rare stamp was created in error or how a stamp was discovered or the unusual circumstances of its production, such as the creation of the Post Office Mauritius or the relationship of the Hawaiian Missionaries to the early history of Hawaii. A clear example of this is in the value collectors assign to the Penny Black because of the historical circumstance surrounding its design and production -- greater than it would be based on scarcity alone or on the fact that it is a "number 1". Part of it is an undefinable "aura" which attaches to a stamp or cover which was prized by one of the greatest philatelists. The best philatelic writers, such as L. N. and M. Williams or Fred Melville, have popularized these legends. And there's also something about the "character" found in some of these, such as the Basel Dove. Once you hear this lore, you say to yourself, "Now, if I could find one of those ..." It's a qualitative appreciation and not simply rarity; it isn't merely in prices realized, and certainly it doesn't come from catalogs. Fconaway 04:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are probably correct Fconaway. I think the About.com listing is pretty accurate but I am sure its stamps too suffers the same character you mention. ww2censor 04:12, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stan Shebs asked for some references as to our "subjective" choice of the most notable stamps. Here's a good one, from a traditionalist's viewpoint: Edward J. Nankivell, "Great Rarities", Chapter VIII, pp. 34 et. seq., in Stamp Collecting as a Pastime, Stanley Gibbons Philatelic Handbooks, London and New York (1902) at Project Gutenberg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fconaway (talk • contribs) (13:34, July 21, 2007)

External Links

The stamp magazine link is not a primary source. In fact, it doesn't even cite primary sources, so it can't even be considered a secondary source. If you consider that a legitimate source, then http://www.famousstamps.org/famousstampsindex.htm is just as good, and actually much better because all the stamps are located on one page, and it includes the much more coverage than the stamp magazine link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.106.64 (talk • contribs) (14:13, July 11, 2007)

This has already been responded to here, here and here. Please do not add tis link again. ww2censor 18:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]