User:Ww2censor/Sandbox

ww2censor (talk · contribs · count): I've been involved in 1 FA, 3 FACS 1, 2 3, 1 GA, 17 DYKs.

Littlewoods building where a lot of British censorship took place

Vernons building in Aintree where the Permit Branch worked

Make-up stamp

A make-up stamp is a postage stamp issued by postal authorities to make up the difference in the cost of postage when rates have been increased and stamps are not available in the new denomination and no other values exist for that purpose. There are two types: one with a numerical denomination printed on it and the other does not have a specific value printed on it and this is known as non-denominated postage.

Australia

In Australia six different 30¢ make-up stamps, three showing kangaroos and three depicting koala bears, and all are inscribed “Adelaide 2016” at the bottom, were on sale of just two days in January 2016. At the end of 2015 Australia Post decided, that from 4 January 2016, they would increase the domestic rate from 70¢ to $1.50 but introduced a new rate for "standard letter," a slower service, which was $1.00; 30¢ more that the previous first class rate. The supply of regular 30¢ Crocodile definitive stamps that customers could use to make up the new $1.00 rate were in short supply, so the Adelaide general post office pressed into service a slow 22-year-old CPS machine normally only used annually for stamp show souvenir stamps, etc., to print a quantity of 30¢ peel-and-stick stamps. The only retained machine was in Adelaide though all states had them from 1994.

Several of these 2016 Australian make-up stamps have been offered for sale on eBay at up to 1,000 times face value as well as used copies on covers.

Canada

Also in 2014 Canada Post issued a make-up stamp denominated 22¢ to make to allow use of the previous rate 63¢ stamps when the rate was increased to 85¢. It joined the existing definitive insect issue which did not have this value at that time and was printed in panes of 50 stamps.

Germany

Deutsche Post added two internet only make-up rate stamps, valued €0.02 to their website to allow customers to use up their internet purchased €0.58 stamps when the rate was increased to €0.60 for domestic mail and a €0.10 for registered mail and some international rates on 1 January 2014 but were no longer available after 31 March 2014.

United States

United States Postal Service issued a new 3¢ definitive stamps, illustrating a star with red and blue points, specifically as a make up stamp in June 2002.

DPMGS

Robert Oliphant 1718-1795 (sources)
http://www.thepeerage.com/p58010.htm#i580098
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/X1JJ-8Z5

Master of the King's Postes

• Brian Tuke 1509–1545
• John Mason 1545–1566 and William Paget
• Thomas Randolph 1566– (d 1590)
• John Stanhope 1590–1621
• Charles Stanhope 1621–1637
• Thomas Witherings (d 1651) and William Frizell 1632– (Postmaster for Foreign Parts)
• Philip Burlamachi 1640–1642 - Thomas Witherings' position in sequestration
• Earl of Warwick Inland PMG - Thomas Witherings (d 1651) - Foreign PMG
• Edmund Prideaux 1649– (d 1659)
• John Manley 1653–1655
• John Thurloe 1655–1660
• Benjamin Worsley 1660
• Thomas Scott 1660

(*Philip Froude 1678–1688)

• GPO - PMG's & Secretaries
• Postmasters General BPMA

Ineligible for copyright protection

From WP:non-free content review:

At Commons we encounter frequently cases like this logo and we have set up a gallery of logos that are below the threshold of originality according to the United States Copyright Office or some US court decision. Please allow me to extract some interesting cases from this gallery:

• 
  found to be below the threshold by the Copyright Office
• 
  likewise rejected by the Copyright Office, cites multiple court decisions

It is worthwile to read through the lengthy reasonings of the Copyright Office and to consider how this could apply to the case with the Kodak logo. The Kodak logo consists of Kodak typescript which is not copyrightable (this should be well known). The selection of the two colors is also below the threshold. What remains is the stylized letter "K". It is made out of a box with round corners from which the two arms of the "K" have been cut. Now lets turn to the rationales of the Copyright Office refered to above. In the Nikken logo case (left logo), it was concluded that

the "Y" shaped figures in a square with rounded corners lacked sufficient creativity to support a copyright registration. She noted that color and the use of geometric shapes are not copyrightable. Bases on these findings, she concluded that the logo consisted of a simple combination and arrangement of three elements which together created a simple arrangement that was aesthetically pleasing but not copyrightable.

And in the other decision (of the Jeff Ho logo) it is noted that

the determination of whether a work is copyrightable has to do, not with aesthetic or commercial value, but with whether there is sufficient original and creative authorship. Simple variations of standard designs and their simple arrangement do not furnish a basis on which to support a copyright claim, [..]

And somewhat later a court decision is quoted:

The court, however, found that in order to achieve a "distinguishable variation" from a public domain work, the variation must be substantial.

Now lets return to the Kodak logo. The stylized letter is based on the shape of the "K" and a box of rounded corners, all of them are in the public domain. Minor variations and simple arrangements as in this case give it a pleasing design but this does not appear to lift it above the minimal threshold of originality. --AFBorchert (talk) 18:05, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Another comment:

I believe you have a point. When this logo is compared to the two given above (or more notoriously, File:Best Western logo.svg), it seems that there are similar levels of (un-)originality, so I agree that the Kodak logo falls below the threshold. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:49, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Forgery reference

• Philatelic fakes and forgeries
• 1932 Australia 2d Sydney Harbour Bridge
• 13c US Liberty Bell
• GB 1/- Stock Exchange

Austrian Post

Österreichische Post AG

[[Image:]]
Headquarters	Vienna, Austria
Key people	(CEO) (Chairman)
Products	Mail
Website	post.at

1563 postal routes from Austria

Österreichische Post AG is the postal authority of Austria.

History

The first standardised postal service was set up between Innsbruck and Mechelen, Belgium in 1490. By 1563 an extensive system of mail routes existed connecting Vienna with cities in Belgium, France, Italy, Spain and Portugal. In 1722 In Emperor Charles VI made the postal service a government monopoly and by the mid-18th century passenger carrying mail coach service began.

During the 1800s letter boxes, money orders, cash-on-delivery services were introduced and a pneumatic mail system was setup in Vienna in 1875.

Austrian stamps overprinted "FLUGPOST" for the 1918 Vienna, Kraków and Lviv flights

The first regular international airmail route between Vienna, Kraków and Lviv was established on March 31, 1918 and terminated on October 15. Three definitive stamps were overprinted "FLUGPOST" for this flight and showed that a regular airmail delivery was feasible even during wartime. Many philatelists consider this regular post delivery with airplanes to be the actual start of airmail history.

Postal codes were introduced nationwide in 1966.

Philately

Though not in general use until 80 years later, in 1787 the first postmarks were introduced in 1787 by Georg Khumer, a postmaster in Friesach identifying time and place of use, and Austria's first postage stamps were issued in 1850.

Services

Since 1986 Österreichische Post started Express mail services and is an EMS Cooperative contracted delivery agent within the UPU.

See also

• Austrian post offices in Crete
• Austrian post offices in Liechtenstein
• Austrian post offices in the Ottoman Empire
• List of people on stamps of Austria
• Postage stamps and postal history of Austria
• Postal codes in Austria

External links

• Official website

Some Limerick stuff

A post office was first opened in 1653 as a head office and postal services are now provided by An Post

Mail addressed to Limerick was recovered from raids by the IRA is known, and where possible, returned to the addressee to which a gummed label was affixed stating: Stolen by Raiders and tampered with.

According to the political compass this user is Economic Left (-8.12) and Social Libertarian (-4.41).

A right side table

Blah

Blah

Rare stamps infobox

Red Penny or Blue Penny
A Mauritian Blue Penny
Country of production	British Empire
Location of production	Mauritius
Date of production	20 September 1847
Nature of rarity	Produced outside of UK and with wrong wording
Face value	Red: one penny Blue: two penny

Quote

“ It is always easy set up quotes like this ”

Motorcycle racer infobox

{{{Name}}}

Motorcycle racing Career
Nationality	{{{Nationality}}}
Active years	{{{Years}}}
Team(s)	{{{Team(s)}}}
Grands Prix	{{{Races}}}
Racers (GP)	{{{Championships}}}
Wins	{{{Wins}}}
Podium finishes	{{{Podiums}}}
Pole positions	{{{Poles}}}
Fastest laps	{{{Fastest laps}}}
First Grand Prix	{{{First race}}}
First win	{{{First win}}}
Last win	{{{Last win}}}
Last Grand Prix	{{{Last race}}}

Coloured and framed text boxes

Useful links:

• Commons:Stamps/Public domain

Irish Airmail Stamps Some more text goes here

You Can Put A Title Here This is a coloured text box with a black outline where you can write lots of text here to fill the text area. You can change the outline and padding values as you feel appropriate.

I like to keep my discussion together, so please use my talk page. Thanks!

2 column table w/90% size text

• Left column starts here

• Right column starts here

John Steinbeck stamp image

May 2009 deletion request

In most instance where stamps are not being used correctly in biographic article, removal of the stamp from the article and then marking as an orphan has been efficient but I have no problem in discussion this in depth and even bring it to WP:IfD where more expert editors can weigh in. If no reliable third parties have written about the stamp in relation to John Steinbeck himself then it should not be included and we may even be supporting original research by assigning the stamp some importance in the biography.

The improper use of non-free stamp images has been discussed at various places before and deletion sweeps have been made to remove such uses, including those in some rather high profile people's biographies. These administrator noticeboard discussions prove this is an ongoing problem that needs addressing regularly: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive54#Stamps wrongly claimed as Fair use: serious copyright problem, Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive59#Fair use stamps: revisitied ..., Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive62#Orphaned non-free stamp images and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive165#Invalid fair use of stamps: Admin.2Fbot action required. This January 2008 IfD page clearly demonstrated that even though some editors disagreed with the deletion nominations, many being used in raher well known peoples' biographies; most were deleted because they failed the WP:NFCC#8 criteria.

More recently individual stamp deletion nominations, such as Houdini and Marie Marvingt in addition to recent general discussions Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 40#Postage stamps and Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 40#Stamps where the consensus goes against keeping non-free images in biographic articles without critical discussion.

In this Steinbeck instance, one editor has suggested that because the USPS has never prosecuted anyone that we should not be deleting these types of images. This goes completely against Wikipedia respect for copyright and must be ignored as a complete red herring and the view of the post office in fair use of not, by another editor, is not our concern. We try to respect fair use, hence WP:NFCC and WP:NFC.

1. Firstly, this stamp is clearly copyright because all post-1977 stamps are still copyright of USPS as noted in the appropriate template {{Non-free USGov-USPS stamp}} and per Commons:Stamps of the United States#Copyright-Note up to 1978.
2. The only way this can possibly be used here would be under a fair-use claim but it must pass all WP:NFCC policy.
3. Issue 1). The main reason the fair use rational fails is that if fails WP:NFCC#8 which states; Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. All reader's can easily understand that the USPS issued a stamp to honour John Steinbeck by the inclusion of prose that says so. There is nothing detrimental in not having an image of the stamp and inclusion the image does not add anything except decoration.
4. Issue 2). Non-free criteria WP:NFC#Images #3 states that: For identification of the stamp or currency, not its subject. This is for use within articles about the stamp itself and not in biographies to show the topic or subject on the stamp.
5. Issue 3). There is no critical commentary about the stamp that might allow its use. This is a basic criteria of WP:NFC#Images but needs to be backed by verifiable reliable sources. Simply stating who issued and produced the stamp, and who it honours is not critical commentary.

Remember the burden of proof to provide a suitable rationale is on the editors who want to retain the image in an article and not on the editor nominating any image for deletion. If there were some reasonable critical commentary AND an appropriate rationale this image might not be a candidate for deletion per the enforcement of WP:NFCC.