Talk:Philately

message: I rechecked Williams, and it's definitely "timbrophily" that was the proposed term. "Timbrophilia" might be a generalized affection for stamps, but we shouldn't mention it unless it's been documented as a past or present synonym of "philately". Stan 13:22, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Timbrophily" vs "Timbrophilia" 

message: For those interested, here are userboxes set up for placement on one's userpage. --Aquarius Rising 23:40, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Userboxes/Interests|Userbox]] 

message: Ya know, I carefully selected and arranged all the images so as to illustrate the concepts being discussed in the adjacent text. Moving them all into a gallery of microscopic thumbnails completely destroys that value. I'm going to revert unless somebody makes a really really good counterargument. (What is it with galleries these days anyway? Hundreds of well-illustrated articles are being ruined.) Stan 23:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh! very sorry, I made it into a gallery since the text and the images were not flowing very well. I thought it would look better in a gallery since they were all captioned. Please go ahead and revert it back to old format.--PremKudvaTalk 04:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree with Stan. Even though different browsers display images slightly differently I think it is better to try and place appropriate images close to the related text. When there is no real relationship between the text and the images there may be a case for the gallery of images as in Post box or stamp_collecting_equipment that Premkudva did. Cheers ww2censor 04:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

text: OK, rolled back to pre-gallerification, thanks for the permission! Did you have a specific flow problem in mind? I only use Moz on OS X, if some other browser was struggling, I wouldn't know about it. Perhaps the text should be pumped up, I find the flow is optimal at an average of about 1 - 1.5 images onscreen at any one time, and right now this one has 2- and even 3-image screens that do seem a bit squeezed. Stan 04:48, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image placement 

message: Philately is a fusion of "phil" the Greek word for love and "atélia" (pronounced a-tay-li-ah) the Greek word for "freedom from charges (taken to mean recipient's freedom from delivery charges by virtue of the stamp that the sender affixed to the letter)...Source: The Random House Dictionary of the English Language.
Cnutraj 08:07, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We don't have to guess, you know - Georges Herpin coined the term in a November 1864 article, explaining that it was a combination based on "philos" and "atelis", the latter explained as "free, exempt from any charge or tax, franked".  Fundamentals of Philately has a nice little summary on p. 32. Stan (talk) 19:37, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philately: Etymology 

message: In the introduction, "...a stamp collector may choose to acquire and arrange the little pictures without being much troubled about their origin or usage."  This phrase seems a bit unencyclopedic.  Suggestion: "...stamp collecting is the acquisition of stamps, at times without regard for origin or usage."  68.122.193.47 03:07, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Does anyone mind if I act on my suggestion? --Fcsuper 17:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --Fcsuper (talk) 00:47, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wording choice 

message: The lists under "Types of philately" might be a better fit under the article Topical stamp collecting.  The bulleted items seem to be such unnecessarily.  I realize this is a comment about formatting only.  It just struck me as odd when I was browsing through the article and then looked at that section for points of interest only to find out it was nothing more than a laundry list.  Fcsuper 03:15, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually this really needs either a substantial expansion or even rewrite into a more comprehensive article. Do you want to help? ww2censor 03:28, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll help where I can.  I'm not knowledgeable in this field.  Didn't even know what "never hinged" meant until yesterday. :) --Fcsuper 17:30, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Not uncommon for random editors to start random lists in the middle of an article. I moved the list to the topical collecting article, and linked to it from here. We need some sort of semi-objective criterion for what "X on stamps" deserve explicit mention - could be the 20 most popular, if any statistics or available, or maybe just the topics for which the ATA etc have published a list. (Without a written criterion, the list will just be too arbitrary to be meaningful.) Stan 05:45, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, Stan. --Fcsuper 17:30, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Types of philately 

message: What needs to be expanded?  If it's not a specific task, the tag should be removed. --In Defense of the Artist (talk) 21:23, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually it need more than just expansion, but possibly a rewrite and restructure to cover aspects not covered here. ww2censor (talk) 22:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the tag should be removed.  It is needs to be more encylopediatic, then that tag should be added instead.  Any objections to the rv of the expansion tag?— fcsuper (How's That?, That's How!) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) — 00:37, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Expand?

message: Is this link http://www.stamp-philately.com(removed link to now porn site) appropriate for WP, especially in the Socities section? It looks like a commercial business site to me. Sv1xv (talk) 11:31, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: An interesting project, sort of a half-ebay half-wiki. Too full of errors to be of any interest to us, look at the top of 1899 and see all the British Columbia stamps that actually date from 30-40 years earlier. We want to point people to better sources of info, not poorer ones. :-) (But pull all the PD images onto commons!) Stan (talk) 14:03, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Unsourced and, for Ireland anyway, have copied the images from Europeanstamps.net. You can shop at their store though it does not seem to be working yet. Not verifiable as yet, if ever. ww2censor (talk) 16:50, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If it is unsourced etc (I agree), why did you put it back in the article main text under philatelic societies? Couldn't you just delete it? I moved it from the main article to "Further reading" beacuse it is not appropriate for WP.  Sv1xv (talk) 18:57, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops! I reverted instead of deleting, but it's gone now. ww2censor (talk) 22:26, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Catalogue of the World ?

message: A user recently removed tweezers as philately tools, reasoning that these shouldn't be used. I wonder if this a) is correct and b)if so, shouldn't we mention something about the frequent use of these tools and why they are "dangerous"?--Narayan (talk) 17:44, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agreed with the change though not for the stated reason - stamp tongs characterizes them as a type of tweezer, so it's a confusing redundancy.  I checked three general refs, and none actually said "don't use tweezers"; the closest any got was "don't use your stamp tongs around the house", observing that damaged tweezer tips could in turn damage the stamps. Stan (talk) 18:27, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the point being made was that stamp tongs tend to have rounded blunt tips while tweezers often have sharp pointed tips and might cause damage. The trouble is, not everyone uses the term stamp tongs. It is rarely used in the UK for instance. Maidonian (talk) 11:26, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  tweezers 

message: I believe the article has sufficient citations that any statements lacking sourcing should be individually identified now. Balle010 (talk) 02:47, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing Tag