Talk:1930 Graf Zeppelin stamps

Dead link
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!


 * http://www.1847usa.com/identify/YearSets/1930Zepps.htm
 * In 1930 Graf Zeppelin stamps on 2011-05-25 03:01:20, 404 Not Found
 * In 1930 Graf Zeppelin stamps on 2011-06-02 03:49:23, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 03:49, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Change title
Several countries issued Graf Zeppelin stamps in 1930 but this article deals only with USA. So i suggest the title is changed accordingly. Arno-nl (talk) 11:25, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I would agree with this suggestion. Should we proceed with article renaming or discuss it further at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Philately? --Michael Romanov (talk) 13:16, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I think it is a de minimis change and should not be controversial. Give it a day for responses and then do it.  That is my suggestion.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 13:53, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Unclear what is being proposed here. The US Zeppelin stamps justify an article of their own as is demonstrated here. It should be moved to United States 1930 Graf Zeppelin stamps (or something similar) and a separate article created for other Zeppelin stamps. Philafrenzy (talk) 13:55, 24 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I would rename it Graf Zeppelin stamps (United States) as the year is redundant because then we can have a dab page if necessary to also link to Graf Zeppelin stamps (Germany), etc. How many countries actually issued Zeppelin stamps? I only see Finland, USSR and Tripolitana. Or maybe we wait until another article is written which then creates a need for a dab page. If not too much can be written about the other countries and their Zeppelin stamps the alternate is to create a general Zeppelin stamp article for those and have this as a sub page Graf Zeppelin stamps (United States) as suggested. ww2censor (talk) 14:17, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * and 7&6=thirteen -- Well, is there anyone ready to write about other Zepplin stamps? I'm not really keen with the idea of changing an article's name simply on the basis that someone 'might' come along and want to write about other 1930 Zep' stamps. There is nothing stopping anyone from creating a dedicated article for any other type of Zepplin stamps from an other country. Currently the lede and the entire article devotes itself to the US 1930 Zeppelin stamps, with a secondary section covering the baby Zeppelin of 1933. A name change that includes 'all' 1930 Zeppelin stamps for all countries would require a complete rewrite/reordering of the current article, beginning with the lede. Again, is there an editor with textual content and Reliable Sources ready to go? If we must change the name then I would go with what Philafrenzy and Ww2censor suggests and rename it to 'Graf Zeppelin stamps (United States)', and anyone who wants to cover Zep stamps from another country can create an article and do so. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 17:34, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * (7&6=thirteen, evidently the spelling/syntax of your user name won't allow anyone to 'ping' you.)
 * Agree with the above opinions that we should for now wait until another Zeppelin stamp article emerges covering issues for a different country. No rush, really. --Michael Romanov (talk) 18:11, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

I know. If you use User:7&6=thirteen it works. I agree, that we can change it, and also that there is no great urgency. We can do it if and when another article arises. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 18:15, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The current Zeppelin stamp article is not covered as a topographical subject, but rather a historical subject. I would have to object to lumping this subject in with other Zeppelin stamps and treating it as a topographical article. i.e.Zeppelins on stamps. In any case, I agree, there is no pressing reason for considering any sort of name change at this point. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 18:25, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Useful issues stated here -many thanks- and i also agree with you lot to wait for now. Arno-nl (talk) 08:00, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Nothing to wait for. This article is not intended to be a 'Zeppelins on stamps' article. It is a historical article about Graf Zeppelin mail and the stamps that were used --  a unique subject unto itself. If someone wants to create a Zeppelins on Stamps article that includes Zeppelin stamps from any country that issued them, they have my blessing. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 17:42, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Zeppelins on stamps is an entirely different, it's a topical stamp article as oppesed to the topic Zeppelin stamp which I have done some digging around on and there are several countries that issued stamps for Zeppelin mail, so I'll start something in a sandbox and let you see it. Maybe over the weekend. ww2censor (talk) 21:17, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Zeppelins on stamps and Zeppelin stamp are both topographical and identical subjects dealing with all Zeppelin stamps it would seem. The 1930 Graf Zeppelin stamps article deals with a specific and historical subject. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 18:40, 26 March 2016 (UTC)


 * So Gwillhickers, do you think those stamps overprinted for Zeppelin flights are the same as those commemorative stamps that have Zeppelins on them and were not intended for Zeppelin flights, as they had long ceased? I don't think so. Some countries issued stamps specifically for the Zeppelin flights, some of which do illustrate Zeppelins and some don't, and some are overprinted stamps. They are entirely different to stamps that happen to have Zeppelins on them, which are commemorative topical stamps. I've started a sandbox for those Zeppelin stamps specifically for the flights. Zeppelins on stamps is a totally incorrect title for the Zeppelin flight overprints. ww2censor (talk) 21:44, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * That's right. Topical stamps (i.e. stamps by subject) are not the same as stamps used for specific postal service type (i.e. stamps by function). --Michael Romanov (talk) 00:13, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I've no objections to adding anything to the article here that falls under the subject heading of 1930 Graf Zeppelin stamps/mail of the USA. Btw, the Graf Zep stamps  'were'  intended for use on Zeppelin mail, (3 different denominations for the three different mailing zones) even though most stamps were bought up by collectors. If you want to cover all Zep stamps used for mail flown by Zeppelins for the various countries that issued such stamps we have the Zeppelin mail article for that. The existing article here covers a specific historical subject. i.e.1930 Graf Zeppelin stamps used on mail flown on board the historical Graf Zeppelin mail run to various points about the globe. Is it your hope that we expand the subject scope of this article? If so it will mean we'll have to rewrite the lede and add other sections to the article which is sort of redundant since we have the Zeppelin mail article for that. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 21:55, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Based in part on Gwillhicker's comments it might in fact be best to incorporate the Zeppelin stamps into the Zeppelin mail article as that is what the stamps were for instead of starting a new article but also making a redirect from Zeppelin stamp to it. I still think a renaming would be best because the date is really of no use in the name as there is no need to distinguish this article from any other similarly named articles. If someone eventually feels like writing Zeppelins on stamps that can be referenced in any "See also" sections if appropriate. I've finished a table of all the Zeppelin stamps and will add it to the Zeppelin mail but someone should review the detail as some of the issues are a bit tricky. ww2censor (talk) 17:55, 31 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Incorporating the Zeppelin stamps you mention into the Zeppelin mail article sounds good.
 * The '1930' in the title here may not be needed in terms of distinguishing the article from any other(s), but it does serve to identify the issues of that year, which may also be useful when people do a google search on these stamps. In the event that someone may want to launch another article that needs such distinction in the title they can always do so one way or another. I would simply leave this title as it is until, if and when, there is a pressing reason to change it. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 18:49, 31 March 2016 (UTC)