Talk:Stamp collecting

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Stamp collecting. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Stamp collecting at the Reference desk.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2020/apr/11/post-modern-why-millennials-have-fallen-in-love-with-stamp-collecting

Early discussions

It's not right to only mention the U.S. with regard to souvenir sheets. Most other countries have issued them as well. --user:Daniel C. Boyer

Mention "cinderellas"? --user:Daniel C. Boyer

I don't know that the Pacific Coast Rain Forest is the best example of a souvenir sheet. In my opinion the example should be from the classic era. --Daniel C. Boyer

Where should it mention about bourses? --Daniel C. Boyer 20:19, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

How about a "Getting stamps" or "how collectors acquire stamps" section, enumerating the half-dozen or so various sources. Stan 21:23, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

'Acquired stamps' section created 84.66.129.225 11:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who ever wrote the header of this article should read the definition to hobbies: "Hobbies are practised for interest and enjoyment, rather than financial reward.". He keeps going over and over about how unprofitable it is, but then so is paperclip collecting, that does not stop everyone from collectting them, check paper clips --K2laz 17:55, 17 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Added small section about topical collecting. I may add an article or two and link it from here. Also directed those interested in topicals to the ATA web site. --K2laz 18:32, 2004 May 18 (UTC)

Wasn't there a big fraud in Spain where people invested enourmous sums in useless stamps not too long ago? Is there a page about this? Marxmax 12:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cleanup last few sections

Suggestions: maybe the last few sections can be made sub-sections of one big section? each of them only consist of a small sentence or two.

Moved these links from article to talk page

External links

New Zealand Stamps

Malaysia Stamps

Merge in stamp club

In theory, one could have a detailed article specifically on stamp clubs; for instance, some are large and famous enough to put on their own shows and publish literature, and there is much debate in the philatelic world about the role that clubs play in the overall hobby. But might as well store the info here until it gets lengthy enough to support its own article. Stan 20:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merged 84.66.129.225 11:10, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stamp collecting equipment picture request

I have added a section called 'Stamp collecting equipment' which has a gallery to illustrate the various items used to collect - much better than another list. I am not a serious collector, and so only have a few of the commonly used items. Therefore, I'd be grateful if other users took pictures of their equipment, so that the section is more complete.

The gallery format works OK for now, but if more information is submitted then a table might be better.

Check out Category:Philately, I think you'll find many of the equipment bits already have their own articles... Stan 17:02, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a serious collector myself, but it seems like a watermark tray and fluid are fairly common pieces of kit: at least, the philately article suggest that they are important. I can't find a picture of one in the Philately category. I would submit a formal picture request, but I have no experience with the success of such things.177777 16:53, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Philately vs Stamp Collecting

Is there a reason there are two seperate articles for these? Cogswobble 17:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because they are two different activities? To be less flip, for many people they are synonymous, even though one is "study", and the other "collecting". Merging the articles could be made to work, if one were a good enough writer to keep all the aspects straight. Stan 18:15, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answer! Cogswobble 22:12, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These are two distinctly different topics though non-knowledgeable people may not know the difference and assume they are the same but each article explains that. ww2censor (talk) 23:41, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a copy of what I just put in the Philately talk page:

I'm not convinced for the need for separate articles. It's nice to maintain the distinction, which we can by explaining it in the text of the article, but in popular usage the difference is not all that significant.

If you have a look at the articles as they stand today, most of what is written in each is completely relevant to the other. Both articles mention equipment, specializations and organizations (though to inconsistently different degrees of detail), while additional information under Collecting such as history and catalogues is relevant to Philately.

For these reasons, I recommend a common article under Philately (the broader category) with a paragraph near the top describing the difference in emphasis between them.

Raichu2 (talk) 20:56, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Already stated my objections to this suggestion on the philately talk page. ww2censor (talk) 23:58, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Having now read both Philately and stamp collecting articles, I would say that the stamp collecting article is pretty good and gives a fair reflection of the hobby, but the philately article does not convey enough regarding the study of stamps, their printing, use etc. Bigger.Simon (talk) 20:29, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Philately is defined as the study or collection of postage stamps (https://www.britannica.com/topic/philately) The purpose of defining the two to separate 'expert' collectors to 'beginner' collectors is now referred to as 'stamp snobbery'.

U.S. centric

This reads very U.S centric...as do most of the articles on philately on Wikipedia. It'd be nice if people tried to write from a more international perspective —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.9.146.15 (talk) 11:30, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and have added a worldview tag to prompt changes. If i get time I will make some adjustments myself.--Dmol (talk) 11:10, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Need section "Famous stamp collectors"

See BBC News, Sarkozy and the 'hobby of kings'. Not only Sarkozy but also, e.g., Franklin D. Roosevelt (but no mention of the hobby in either WP article; lots via web search). --71.126.55.104 (talk) 12:59, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Check out List of philatelists. Stan (talk) 14:16, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that it should be added right after the section about stamp catalogues. --Thenachoman —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thenachoman (talk • contribs) 21:23, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Postage dues

The one sentence in here about postage due stamps tells absolutely nothing about them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thenachoman (talk • contribs) 21:17, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[!Siddiqui on line stamps Catalogue] ... pakistanphilately.com ... Really?

Can I be the only one here who wonders why [!Siddiqui on line stamps Catalogue] is the first external link, and has been for several years? Am I missing something here? Nemodomi (talk) 00:05, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. The source is available in Postage stamps and postal history of Pakistan, where it fits 100 per cent. --Michael Romanov (talk) 05:27, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

John Edward Gray

I found one philatelic source for John Edward Gray buying Penny Blacks on the first day but without any source I am not convinced. Anyone got something better? ww2censor (talk) 21:40, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Hamilton's A Hundred Years of Postage Stamps, p. 122, mentions "Dr. Grey"[sic], and says that he "claimed to be one of the first, if not the first serious stamp collector in the world". The book goes on to quote from an article that Gray wrote in Young England(?) in 1862 - "... I may state that I began to collect them shortly after the system was established, and for many years before it became a fashion ...". I don't think this is a definite answer, because the wording is vague and "after" could be referring to the bureaucratic organizing prior to the first day of sale, as Gray was knowledgeable of the postal reform. On the flip side, I'm sure that quite a few people bought stamps on that first day, and why would an interested person like Gray not go down himself to see how it was going? Still, we would need him to say something definite before we can include. Stan (talk) 23:57, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dr John Gray also "... claimed to have pioneered postal reforms, including the adoption of adhesive stamps, as early as 1834" according to James Mackay in The Guiness Book of Stamps, p. 73. This claim is also mentioned by Rowland Hill in one of his books. JPKos (talk) 01:27, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An article in the unfortunately named Stamp Lover from 1908 states that Dr Gray "...claimed to have started shortly after 1840." and in James A. Mackay's The Complete Guide to Stamps and Stamp Collecting it is stated that on the first day that the Penny Black was issued Dr Gray bought some as a memento and the same when the 2d Blue was issued and so on. In other words, he was not really collecting at first. I suppose the question is when do you have a collection, not on the first one but possibly when you have two or three? This sort of behaviour was typical of Gray and his work at the British Museum. Mackay was a terrible plagiarist, but I have never found him to be factually wrong. This story about Gray is an old one and I am sure a good source will turn up before long. Maidonian (talk) 01:28, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Section "Stamp Collecting" phrasing

To me, the phrase "No matter what one's interest, there are almost always stamps that will complement that interest.", in the Stamp Collecting section doesn't seem to add to the article. It kind of has a slogany, "Come join our stamp club :D!" feel. 74.10.242.204 (talk) 15:34, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chopped that sentence as it was copied from the cited website and as you say rather meaningless hype. Vsmith (talk) 15:37, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Filatelie.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Filatelie.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:07, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:800px-Filatelia Stumenti e materiali.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:800px-Filatelia Stumenti e materiali.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:800px-Filatelia Stumenti e materiali.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:05, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Exhibiting Stamps

I believe that there needs to be a section on stamp exhibitions and competitions. There probably should also be a List of philatelic organizations, or at least a mention of the primary ones in the article.The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk)

There is Philatelic exhibition which redirects from Stamp show and a category for Philatelic organizations. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:26, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Terrific! Now all we need is a link to it from this page! The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 22:25, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline due to internet.

I have removed the statement -..."but is now in decline with the rise of the internet which has sharply reduced the number of postal items arriving in households."
This seems very much to be original research. It is also very dubious, and is not supported by the reference given. The cite is just the opinion of the writer, and while he mentiones the internet, he does not support the claim that it is the cause of the decline.
Only an incredibly small percentage of the millions of each stamp produced ends up in a collection, so the decline in stamped mail would not have any affect. Most stamp collectors do not intend to collect an example of every stamp issued throughout the year.
While there seems to have been a massive decline in stamp collecting from its 19c heyday, it seems to have started in the post-war years decades before the internet was even thought of.
Other parts of the article have dealers saying the hobby is not in decline.
The reference was https://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/apr/13/stamp-collectors-catalogues-philately-clubs --Dmol (talk) 21:52, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Section removed

I've chopped the "Modern collecting" section as it was unsourced and overly promotional with multiple inline external links. Such a section would be a valid addition to the article - if properly sourced and without promotional content. Vsmith (talk) 13:45, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The modern section was not promotional but correctly identified those people that have influenced the hobby for modern collectors. You cannot source 'social media accounts' without linking to the social media accounts. Especially where these accounts are not accepted or understood by the tradition philatelic organisations. In addition, the 'Organization' section is now highly promotional, North American/UK centric and contain general societies that have no real presence in the international community.

124.169.117.42 (talk) 07:33, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article does not reflect modern collecting

This article is based solely on traditional stamp collecting and contains no information about the massive online world of stamp collecting.

By the early 2000s stamp collecting was seen to be in decline as the digital world surpassed traditional hobbies even though by 2013, The Wall Street Journal estimated the global number of stamp collectors was around 60 million.

This is misleading. Traditional philatelic organisations are dying (attendance at stamp clubs, societies etc which is usually the basis for the health of the hobby). This does not mean that philately is dying and the reference is now well-out of date. The content should reflect that users have moved to social media. Social media influencers such as Exploring Stamps have a base following equal to that of the American Philatelic Society. Most smaller channels have more than most stamp clubs and the demographics are usually under 50.

It's a negative statement that does not reflect the true health of the hobby.

124.169.117.42 (talk) 07:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Organizations

The organization section is highly promotional. While the APS and PTS are large organisations, they should not be singled out within the article. The Collectors Club is regional and has no real importance internationally to any other regional societies (it also contains almost a history of this one sole society). This is the same with the Cinderella Stamp Club (UK) etc.

The article should focus on the role of the traditional stamp club/society, and the movement over the last 10 years to social media accounts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.169.117.42 (talk) 07:46, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]