Talk:Postal history

Adding Wiki' links
Two Wiki' links were added to the Postal History page here (Pony Express and Postage stamps and postal history of the United States), pages which are directly involved with Postal history, but were removed for this reason: -- Ww2censor: "why only one country specific link - all or none - the project is already linked on the talk page not here - keep the topics significant to the article" -- The link was not added with the idea that this is 'the only one', but was added as a contribution to the page with the hopes that other such links would be added by those who know of other such links. Are not those pages specific to Postal History?

It was my understanding that pages are supposed to be built a little at a time by multiple users. If we are to apply the 'all or none' rule to all pages it seems this would prohibit users from making related contributions of all sorts and it seems that Wikipedia would implode if links were roundly removed in such a fashion. Can no one add material about American postal history to this page until they are ready to include postal history material from all other countries? GWillHickers (talk) 14:51, 17 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Strongly agree. The remedy for coverage that is too nation-centric has to be supplementation for other nations, not rampant deletion. Otherwise we "throw the baby out with the bathwater". LADave (talk) 18:54, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

The defining of the terms Postal History and Covers by philatelists
I question the inclusion of "the study of postage stamps" in the definition in the first sentence. Normally, the study of postage stamps is considered "traditional philately", which excludes postal history.

The term "covers" should be defined, such as "pre-stamp folded letters, stamp franked letter envelopes, and franked post cards, that passed through the mails", and could be expanded to include postal receipts. Postal system rate and route publications and maps are also considered collectible postal history artifacts.

Similarly, in the "Subject based studies" section, Postal Stationery is not considered a study area of Postal History, but if used through the mails, postal stationery covers are just additional varieties of franked cover. A postal history exhibit of just postal stationery covers (not unused postal stationery) would be possible, but arbitrarily limited in scope.

Part of the usual description of postal history is "the study of rates, routes, and markings"; some add also "means" meaning means of transport. The study of rates is intimately connected with the postal services provided. Drbillellis 02:25, 15 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drbillellis (talk • contribs)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 8 one external links on Postal history. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070422120850/http://www.linns.com:80/howto/refresher/airmails_20001030/refreshercourse.asp?uID= to http://www.linns.com/howto/refresher/airmails_20001030/refreshercourse.asp?uID=
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20041208201616/http://www.linns.com:80/howto/refresher/paquebot_20041213/refreshercourse.asp?uID= to http://www.linns.com/howto/refresher/paquebot_20041213/refreshercourse.asp?uID=
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071014021638/http://www.linns.com/howto/refresher/railway_103006/refreshercourse.asp?uID= to http://www.linns.com/howto/refresher/railway_103006/refreshercourse.asp?uID=
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070501102849/http://www.linns.com:80/howto/refresher/militaryPH_20021014/refreshercourse.asp?uID= to http://www.linns.com/howto/refresher/militaryPH_20021014/refreshercourse.asp?uID=
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070422122152/http://www.linns.com:80/howto/refresher/rates_20010716/refreshercourse.asp?uID= to http://www.linns.com/howto/refresher/rates_20010716/refreshercourse.asp?uID=
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070420155051/http://www.linns.com:80/howto/refresher/postalstationery_20020114/refreshercourse.asp?uID= to http://www.linns.com/howto/refresher/postalstationery_20020114/refreshercourse.asp?uID=
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070422115214/http://www.linns.com:80/howto/refresher/postalhistory_19980803/refreshercourse.asp?uID= to http://www.linns.com/howto/refresher/postalhistory_19980803/refreshercourse.asp?uID=
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071004212355/http://www.linns.com/howto/refresher/human_090505/refreshercourse.asp?uID= to http://www.linns.com/howto/refresher/human_090505/refreshercourse.asp?uID=

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 23:14, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

information accuracy
" For instance, a stamp apparently used before any other stamp of its type could be proved a forgery if it was postmarked at a location known not to have received any stamps until a later date."

In fact, authentic uses of stamps used from locations that did not receive supplies are common. These could have been brought to the post office by private individuals, or a post office employee could have brought them in from another post office. For many examples, see Alexander's 1847 cover census. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1010:B163:B77E:7006:EF50:9E8F:7239 (talk) 01:19, 1 August 2016 (UTC)