Talk:Definitive postage stamps of Ireland

Gibbons 2004 is missing

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

There is a missing reference. Was this footnote copied from another article? ---- CharlesGillingham (talk) 00:26, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Never mind. Found it. ---- CharlesGillingham (talk) 00:28, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Complete redesign?

Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

The introduction statement "Two changes involved only a difference of watermark, but six involved a complete redesign, some of which were necessary due to currency replacements: sterling to decimal, and decimal to euro." does not tally with the subsequent text.

the 1971 change was not "sterling to decimal". The Irish pound was never the same as the pound sterling, and both currencies existed in pre-decimal and decimal denominations. The Irish pound was at parity with sterling.
the break with sterling happened in 1979, totally separate from Decimal Day in 1971; in fact, the need to decimalise was precisely to retain the link with sterling when the UK decimalised.
the "decimal to euro" [i.e. Irish pound to euro] change appears to have taken place within series eight, without any change of series number.
The 1st → 2nd, 3rd → 4th, and 4th → 5th changes hardly amount to a "complete redesign".
Maybe two of these three involve the "difference of watermark" mentioned in the introduction; there is no subsequent reference to this watermark change.
I know nothing about philately. Who exactly decides, and when, that a certain issue was a new series rather than an augmentation of the pre-existing series? Is it the issuing postal authority which announces "this is a new issue", or do philatelists have some global standard that says, e.g., "a change to photogravure does not constitute a new issue, whereas a change of watermark does".

Saying six involved a "complete" redesign is misleading. As far as I can see, the following transitions occurred:

1st → 2nd	just 2 new stamps. How does this even qualify as a new series, when the 1937 addition of three stamps to the previous twelve was just an expansion of series one?
2nd → 3rd	complete redesign
3rd → 4th	new colours, decimal amounts
4th → 5th	new colours and amounts
5th → 6th	complete redesign
6th → 7th	complete redesign
7th → 8th	complete redesign
8th	change to Euro, but still called 8th series
8th → 9th	complete redesign

jnestorius^(talk) 09:25, 1 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

I'll review this later when I get out some reference books. ww2censor (talk) 13:42, 1 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

OK, I've had a chance to review the details in the Hibernian catalogue and this is how it breaks down:

1st → 2nd	Same design with change of watermark from 'se' to 'e' with 2 additional values (Hibernian, 2002, p 11)
2nd → 3rd	1st Gerl design was complete redesign with 'e' watermark (Hibernian, 2002, p 12)
3rd → 4th	2nd Gerl design with new colours, decimal currency with 'e' watermark (Hibernian, 2002, p 13)
4th → 5th	3rd Gerl design new colours and extra values with unwatermarked paper (Hibernian, 2002, p 13-14)
5th → 6th	Architecture series, a complete redesign (Hibernian, 2002, p 15)
6th → 7th	Treasures series, a complete redesign (Hibernian, 2002, p 16-17)
7th → 8th	Birds series, Irish currency, a complete redesign (Hibernian, 2002, p 17)
8th → 9th	change to dual currency need to reformat article (Hibernian, 2002, p 19)
9th → 10th	change to Euro, need to reformat article see image 4 (I don't have a catalogue)
10th → 11th	Wild flowers, complete redesign (I don't have the catalogue)

So I see where the confusion arises. When Hibernian catalogued the Gerl definitives, they specifically described the three different Gerl series with different series numbers, but, in the 2002 edition, stopped using any numeral for the series after the 7th series (Treasures), they just call it "Birds" without a numeral designation to distinguish the different changes in currency. They may have done in the latest, In the 2009 edition they have given the Birds series numeral designations 8th, 9th and 10th but I don't have a copy but saw the Birds series in Euro currency designated 10th per the ebay image referenced above. So the Wild flowers will be called 11th series. I will reformat the article with citations and refine the lede statement when I do that. It should say there were 11 different series with two watermark changes and five redesigns, but maybe it should say: there were six distinct designs, two watermark changes and three currency changes making the 11 series. That is no longer dubious but confirmed by the catalogue.

Just to throw the cat amongst the pigeons I see that An Post describes the Flowers series as the sixth series, using a new series only for a new design. Perhaps we should go with that but there are no WP:RS to verify that except page 10 of this Collectors news PDF linked from this page. Actually this would make more sense and be more understandable to the normal reader, if I can find more references. ww2censor (talk) 05:43, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Revised section headings with appropriate prose changes to reflect the 6 distinctly different designs issued. I think it reads more clearly now. ww2censor (talk) 13:37, 23 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

External links modified

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Definitive postage stamps of Ireland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:59, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Add topic