This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Philately Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philately, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of philately and stamp collecting on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhilatelyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilatelyTemplate:WikiProject PhilatelyPhilately Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Virginia Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Virginia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Virginia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VirginiaWikipedia:WikiProject VirginiaTemplate:WikiProject VirginiaVirginia Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is the third topical philately article I've written for mainspace. I'm still learning about the process. Any commentary, guidance or assistance would be greatly appreciated. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 10:07, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks nice upon cursory examination. Made a correction in a caption and upgraded an image. Short on time this morning. Will look into it further later. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 16:26, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Love the topic. Thank you!!! PurpleChez (talk) 19:52, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the sizes need to be adjusted, relative to the sizes of other stamps in the same table or section. I adjusted the Monroe stamps and recommend that this be the size/scale that be used throughout the article for the sake of article consistency. Many of the images are too small and need to be enlarged a bit, imo. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 16:44, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Generally speaking, I like the larger images. Some of the multistamp rows of four or more stamps such as the Monroe example may have to be broken up into two rows in order to fit on a PC Outlook browser...those of four with two horizontal commemoratives among them is a maximum, maybe? I'm not sure what the convention should be at larger size. I really like the collage at the intro. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 18:04, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not familiar with the PC outlook browser, but I can tell you most viewers use Firefox, Chrome, IE or Netscape so I'd recommend not making changes just to accommodate the few who have browsers that are deficient in their viewing capabilities. Besides, almost every browser will let you decrease or increase the overall size of text and images by pressing 'Ctrl -' or 'Ctrl +' respectively. Howverer I would agree that five is the limit for any row of images. I'm planning to go to the local library today or tomorrow to check on some books and while I'm there I'll see how this page looks on library computers with their typically smaller screens. Btw, single stamp presentations might do better if they were placed to the right of the text, rather than below it, centered and standing alone in the middle of a field of snow. Poor little stamp looks lost and lonesome. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:46, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Have moved a couple of single stamp presentations to right of text. Seems to work better. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 15:22, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. much improved. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 19:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In the World Wars section the stamps aren't exactly connected to Virginia's history. While there may be a statue of the flag raising at Iwo Jima at the Quantico base in Virginia, the Iwo Jima stamp itself is modeled after the famous photograph of and commemorates the actual event. While Marine officers were trained in Virginia, the Merchant Marine (not the Marines) commemorative honors them. Though troops from Virginia participated at D-Day, along with troops from around the country, the U.S. Army Commemorative, depicting U.S. Troops entering Paris after its recapture, has nothing to do with Virgina's history, save any incidental connections typical to all the states. And while Hampton Roads, Fort Pickett, etc served as points of departure for troops on their way to Europe they are not depicted on any stamps connected with Virginia's actual history. I would strongly recommend removing theses stamps as they have virtually no connection to Virginia's history and will leave readers wondering as it has for me. IMO this article should only lend itself to people born and/or raised in Virgina, people who served in Virginia's state government or were intimately connected with the State of Virginia somehow, places in Virginia, like Monticello, and events that occurred in Virginia, like the Battle of Appomattox, etc. I'm confident that if the article was ever submitted for a GA review it would receive the same constructive criticism. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 15:22, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to make the connection in the text of how Virginia history connected to the national history pictured in those stamps, the History of Virginia on stamps. Seems the effort did not hit the mark based on your remarks. I think I see your point, it is a more rigorous editorial take. But since the actual Marine Corps Memorial featuring a statue inspired by the iconic photograph is located in Arlington, Virginia, and the replica stands at Quantico, it is pretty solid... the Arlington cemetery tomb of the Unknown Soldier stamp can be moved up from Landmarks to join the Marine Memorial for World Wars. Merchant Marine is pretty solid because the Hampton Roads ports was such a major embarkation point in both World Wars, comparable to New York ports authority, to commemorate the non-Navy ships is to commemorate the ports where the ships were built, fitted and loaded with men and supplies for the European Theater of Operations -- the Hampton Roads, Virginia. Seems harsh, but I think I see your point. Because most of one of the two American divisions landing in the Normandy surf were from Virginia National Guard units made up of Virginians, the National D-day Museum is located in Bedford, Virginia. But I get your point, if additional narrative cannot make a stronger connection, several stamps should be removed. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 19:58, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Today I purged several related stamps not specifically referencing people, places or events in Virginia; and added narrative to strengthen existing connections, moved single stamps right, enlarged a few images to the standard, added Bill of Rights as Madison is seen as the Father of the Bill of Rights, links to George Mason USPS stamp... TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 15:23, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Over the last two days, looks like a total of five tangential stamps removed, two duplicates shown in a second category removed, leaving a reference mention.

Six new images added, one Bill of Rights, two of for John Marshall, two in other famous Virginians, one in landmarks. Five additional links are made for USPS stamps, each to their unique page at Arago. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 18:45, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As Iwo Jima is not in Virginia, and as I understand it the troops involved were not from Virginia, I tend to agree that the link to Virginia is fairly loose. There must be numerous statues, works of art etc in Virginia referring to events that took place elsewhere. I think the closer you stick to strong Virginia links the better the article is. After all, one can presumably link everything to everything else if one tries hard enough to construct a link. Philafrenzy (talk) 17:42, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In the title heading The Virginia Dynasty and John Marshall, Marshall is listed, but not Jefferson, etc. Seems it should just read as The Virginia Dynasty. Why is Marshall listed and no one else?
Article is shaping up nicely, but I still think there are a number of stamps that a far too tangential to be regarded as those that depict Virginia's history. Esp the famous Iwo Jima stamp. Again, any association of this event (which occurred in the South Pacific) to Virginia's state history, is remote and incidental. Again, soldiers from Virginia participated in the event, as did soldiers from all over the country, but the event itself has noting to do with the State of Virginia and it's history. The stamp honors and commemorates the event and the men who fought and died during this event. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 15:18, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The "Virginia Dynasty" in the literature refers to the three presidents of Jefferson's party who held office for six consecutive terms. Marshall was appointed from the opposite, Federalist party to the judiciary, serving over the course of the six Democratic-Republican presidential terms. So there is a distinction to be made, unless it is too long for WP style guidelines. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 16:29, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did you like the earlier Jefferson stamp better? I only replaced it as a duplicate in the President's section. If we are going with the 1936 Prexies set only, the brown 1856 Jefferson is better than the yellow 1903. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 16:47, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

reply on Iwo Jima below in its own section. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 16:47, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Marine Corps War Memorial, also known as the Iwo Jima Memorial, is located in Arlington, Virginia, and a replica is located at the Marine Base at Quantico, Virginia. The Memorial is noted in the stamp write-up at the National Postal Museum, and reflected in the narrative here. The connection of the image to Virginia is well established.

I've cleaned up the narrative in the section somewhat to be more pointedly related to the stamp. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 16:29, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The memorial is in Virginia, yes, but the stamp commemorates the event and is modeled after a photo taken at that event. Iwo Jima is no doubt celebrated and honored in many forms around the country. If we were to find a painting of the Iwo Jima flag raising in city hall in New York City, that would not make the event part of New York's history. The sculpture in Virginia is modeled after the photo, as is the stamp. Both sculpture and stamp commemorate the event, the history, that occurred in the south pacific. The event is not connected to the History of Virginia simply because some of the men that fought and/or died there were from Virginia, just as they also were from New York, Illinois, California, etc, etc. If we were to create an article about 'New York history on stamps', would it be appropriate to feature the Iwo Jima stamp simply because some of the men that fought there were from New York or because a painting of the flag raising hangs in NY city hall? Oh well, I'm not going to press it any further. I'd strongly recommend raising the bar considerably on what stamps I'd include in this otherwise very nice article. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 01:12, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've dropped five stamps where I could see your point, which I see as a reasonable cautionary one, are there any other candidates to be dropped? TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 10:48, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Philafrenzy saw the connection as weak also, I removed it, leaving the text, without a link to an image, if that passes muster. Thanks for your patience. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 19:04, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Should the President stamps be limited to one each from the 1938 Prexie series, or is the wider display appropriate? At some level the "See also U.S. presidents on U.S. postage stamps" takes care of the multiple images for reference. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 16:02, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I sort of hate to lose the CSA stamps... TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 16:29, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Without an editorial change in direction, I will continue to add descriptive narrative to support the multiple stamps shown for each of Virginia's presidents. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 10:51, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an image that certainly belongs on this page.

-- Gwillhickers (talk) 03:18, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Virginia flag. If there are more, they can be used to represent the original thirteen at Territories of the United States on stamps in addition to the links to USPS stamps there.

The link is to a USPS stamp. The convention I have adopted is to cluster them at the bottom of a section, noting them with a bullet, narrative and sometimes with an Arago cite. In this case of the Williamsburg colonial capitol,

• The Virginia colonial capitol building at Williamsburg is pictured in the 1988 USPS stamp commemorating the bicentennial of the ratification of the Constitution, which is available for viewing at Virginia ratification stamp from "Arago: people, postage & the post", online at the Smithsonian Institute's National Postal Museum.

I now count ten such references in the article to date, --- each one is arguably eligible for USPS fair usage on this page, --- in the same way as those which were orphaned by Werieth at topical philately articles concerning 'Civil War', 'Territories' and Puerto Rico on stamps (six of the thirteen in the last dust up, a flag, a Columbus, and four Puerto Ricans a) passed away and b) Puerto Rican U.S. citizens honored as distinguished Americans on stamps ...). TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 10:20, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I added a new first section, "Commonwealth of Virginia" featuring the state flag, with a link to the USPS stamp featuring the state bird and the state flower. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 11:12, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Best of luck with the article. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 15:22, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your point about tangential stamps is becoming clearer. By an extended logic, we would include flags of WV and KY, and the Northwest territory making up OH, IN, IL, MI and MN. But beyond the separation of Virginia claims at the Northwest Territory to be noted, and the state separation of KY and WV, noted, that is all that is directly related to Virginia history. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 20:14, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know about, Kentucky, Ohio, etc, relationship to Virginia but wasn't West Virginia part of Virginia up until the Civil War? Are you saying the above WV stamp is too tangential and the Iwo Jima stamp is not? Not sure I'm following. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 14:33, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, WV is the most recent state from Virginia territory. Before that was Kentucky in 1792, before that, the territory ceded to the national government in the Northwest Territory is the most tangential, since there was an intermediary, the USG, before subsequent states were admitted.

I've asked Philafrenzy for his input on the Iwo Jima stamp --- unless he thinks its a great idea to keep it, you have persuaded me to drop the image --- although I would like to keep the text. Graduating Marine Corps officers from the Quantico Basic School go to see a performance of the silent drill team at the Marine Corps War Memorial in Arlington, Virginia. There is a chance I am taking this too personally, having been one of those graduates, --- I'd like to hear back from Philafranzy. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 15:13, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• What about the other stamp for WV, already used in the article? Since WV was once part of Virginia's territory, State and its history, the above stamp would seem appropriate to include here.
• Maybe if a prominent Virginia politician was involved in the decision to attack Iwo Jima the stamp might be better placed. As it is, there's little to nothing to tie it to Virginia's history, imho. In any case, a salute to your service in the Marines! -- Gwillhickers (talk) 15:38, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Philafrenzy saw the connection as weak also, I removed it, leaving the text, without a link to an image, if that passes muster. Thanks for your patience.

The West Virginia flag was adopted in 1929, well after the separation with Virginia, so no I would not be inclined to place it alongside the centennial for West Virginia (1963 issue) in the Civil War section. Kentucky's flag was authorized in 1918, approved in 1928, the same rationale to exclude would apply. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 18:16, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, 1929 would make it sort of 'after the fact' in regards to Virginia's history. Best not to include. -- What? Me patient?? Don't count on it. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 23:10, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

After consultation with MASEM, three solutions or combinations present themselves.

A. Save for the External Link section we typically don't use inline external links on article pages (but this does depend on situation). But the easiest solution here is to convert the link into an inline citation which retains the line within the citation and there's no restriction against inline cites.

B. An editorial note at the end of each section might do it, with description ending in a note, and the note including citation and link to the image page at National Postal Museum. Note: Stamps which are restricted by USPS fair use copyright may be seen at Arago: people, postage & the post, National Postal Museum online. Click on the footnote number to see the link at the end of the footnote for each stamp.

C. Another alternative to avoid the EL in the body is to have a list/formatted section in the "External Links" section, that would start off "Stamp pages at the NPM:" and then list each link with the stamp in question within that section, so it is clear its not just a reference and easier to follow.

I'm trying to think through the combinations. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 18:50, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I believe there's a limit to the number of E.L.s allowed in an E.L. section, and there's another policy that mentions too many E.L.s to the same web cite, and yet another policy about using E.L.s in the body of the text, as I once outlined before. There is also a policy about using the external links section for citations/references. Once again, there's no policy that says you can't have several NFC images on the same page, only that any one given NFC image may be used on one designated page, and only when there is no free content image that can be used in its place. It's unfortunate that a couple of individuals have you apparently weary about even including this NFC stamp on the page here, esp since most of their arguments about using post 1978 USPS NFC images were unfounded in actual policy. e.g.There is no free image that even exists for any post 1978 stamp. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 00:23, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So the goal is to have no external links in the body of the text, there is a caution against using too many external links in an external links section, the restriction on citations is a reference to making references in plain text, so that they are still comprehensible, function as a citation, whenever a link is broken and the bot removes them. Since the link to Arago for the image is additional information to the citation itself, that should satisfy the requirement. The convention mentioning the footnote link in the article for each USPS stamp ought to pass muster.

I am persuaded that the NFC, USPS Virginia ratification stamp would be a good test case in this article. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 11:41, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links can be used as sources with no issues if they are listed in a bibliography and linked to by citations in the text that employ ref links, as we've done in the Thomas Jefferson article / bibliography. This is why I have been removing them from the text in that article over the last few months, along with cleaning up and organizing that once grand-mess of a bibliography. Yes, as I said, that Virgina stamp I linked to is no doubt one of the most appropriate nfc images you could ever include in this article. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 17:35, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Virginia ratification stamp is now mentioned in a para at "Big ideas and landmarks" section, with an external link to the Arago stamp image in its footnote. This might be a place to feature it in this article.

• The Virginia colonial capitol building at Williamsburg is pictured in the 1988 USPS stamp commemorating the bicentennial of the ratification of the Constitution. An image of the USPS stamp may be seen at the link to Arago online in the footnote.[note] “25-cent Virginia”, Arago: people, postage & the post, National Postal Museum online, viewed April 27, 2014. An image is available online at Arago, Virginia ratification stamp.

The same stamp would be appropriately displayed or mentioned in the "Revolution and Constitution" section. Because the Old Courthouse at Williamsburg, Virginia, is pictured in the earlier Constitution Ratification 1938 issue there, I thought the actual display of the stamp for a one-time usage in the article of a NFC stamp would not be in this section. Instead, I've written a passage at "Revolution and Constitution".

• Ratification of the Constitution by Virginia was celebrated on June 25, 1988, at Williamsburg, Virginia, on its 200th anniversary. The dedication ceremony was held at the Capitol building featured on the stamp with a horse and carriage in the foreground. Virginia was substantially the largest of the thirteen states, with territory cutting west through to the Mississippi River. Without approval of Virginia and New York which likewise cut the other state territories in two, the agreement of the others would have had little effect. Virginia was home to leaders supporting the Constitution such as George Washington and James Madison, and those opposing such as Patrick Henry and George Mason. Only after a promise for a Bill of Rights did Virginia narrowly ratify. James Madison introduced the first nine, and the tenth was introduced by another Virginian, Richard Henry Lee. For an image of the USPS stamp, see the footnote link.[note] “25-cent Virginia”, Arago: people, postage & the post, National Postal Museum online, viewed April 27, 2014. An image is available online at Arago, Virginia ratification stamp.

The next question would be whether the one NFC stamp could be used in more than one article on Wikipedia. If it cannot, then using it here would mean the Virginia ratification stamp could not be used eventually in the original thirteen group of ratification stamps at Territories of the United States on stamps. The ratification bicentennial set as a whole pictures colonial icons associated with each state of the original thirteen, so they are appropriate representations for "statehood" stamps, since their statehood commences not out of a U.S. territory, but at ratification out of their accepted colonial boundaries as of the Treaty of Paris, 1783. Vermont, the 14th state, independent but once claimed by both colonial New Hampshire and colonial New York, has its own statehood stamp. Only the original thirteen and Utah statehood are presently not represented in that article. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 16:43, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can always link to the NFC Virginia stamp on this page should it be mentioned in other articles. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 17:37, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

An internal link is easier to navigate, but BE BOLD would direct me to try all thirteen at 'Territories of the U.S. on stamps" versus only one here. Nevertheless, below is the workup for one here...and there...which seems to fail in the template. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 18:17, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard. Uploading media files: Old guided form. Where is the media from? --- It is a picture of a postage stamp, or of currency. click:

• step 1. choose an appropriate file name. [Virginia ratification 1988 U.S. stamp.jpeg]

• step 2. pick an appropriate entry from the license selector. : copyright tag {{None-free USGov-USPS stamp}} for images of U.S. stamps issued in 1978 or later.

"This image is of a postage stamp. The copyright for it may be held by the issuing authority, and there may be other restrictions on its reproduction. It is believed that the use of postage stamp --- to illustrate the stamp in question (as opposed to things appearing in the stamp's design) --- on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profitWikimedia Foundation, --- qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Other use of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement. See Wikipedia:Non-free content for more information."

• step. 3. supply a description and a “fair use” rationale. — Must a. exact source of the image. — must b. full name of the author or the copyright holder; — must c. the name(s) of the article(s) in which this image is to be used; and — must d. an explanation (called the “fair use rationale”) of why the use of this image in those specific articles is allowable without permission from the copyright holder. --- See WP:FUR, Free use rationale: necessary components.

Summary as proposed:

Non-free media information and use rationale true for History of Virginia on stamps

Description	Virginia ratification bicentennial stamp, 1988, featuring the first state capitol building at Williamsburg, Virginia and a horse and buggy in the foreground.
Source	Arago: people, postage & the post, National Postal Museum online
Article	History of Virginia on stamps
Portion used	entire stamp [WP:FUR]
Low resolution?	Sufficient resolution for illustration, but considerably lower resolution than original.
Purpose of use	Visual identification of a USPS stamp in an educational article about an a USPS stamp represented by the image, illustrating the topic of the article.[WP:FUR]
Replaceable?	No free version of USPS stamps available.[WP:FUR]
Other information	© United States Postal Service. All rights reserved. There is no possible commercial disadvantage to the copyright holder by using this image of a stamp in a Wikipedia article because the stamp's value is in the physical stamp, not the design.
Fair useFair use of copyrighted material in the context of History of Virginia on stamps//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:History_of_Virginia_on_stampstrue

Step 3. c. calls for name(s) of articles(s), so an NFC stamp upload is assumed to be usable on multiple pages according to the policy guideline. Yet the template only admits to one article for each NFC.

Much of the push back earlier seemed to be generated by editors who had not read the licensing tag info for USPS stamps. "to illustrate the stamp in question (as opposed to things appearing in the stamp's design) --- on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profitWikimedia Foundation, ---

• "...qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Other use of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement." TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 18:10, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the template I was under the impression that an NFC image can only be used in one article, but as you point out step 3 calls for name(s) of articles(s). Apparently a template must be filled out for each article the stamp will be used in. If you just add one article name to the template you will get a blue link. You've gotten a big red link above because the template is assuming the two article names is one long article name. Just add one article name and you'll get a blue link. I've taken the liberty and have done this above. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 00:10, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP official policy for Non-free content criteria, WP:NFCC: #7. One-article minimum. "Non-free content is used in at least one article." ---

• implies there may be usage in more than one article. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 08:39, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Just to recap a previous consult with an administrator, there seems to be a simple misunderstanding between

a) misconstruing the reasonable fair use restriction limiting multiple instances of the same image on Wikipedia ---

• references above imply there be some reasonable number(s) permitted in WP policy ---

and b) an unreasonable, editor-imposed restriction apart from policy, against any multiple non-free content stamp images used in the same article on Wikipedia.

WP:NFCC #3. Minimal usage. a. "Minimal number of items [per image]. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one [non-free use] item can convey equivalent significant information." —

• but each USPS stamp is separately unique, described in relation to the topic, the History of Virginia on stamps --- the prohibition in this case would be where there were minor differences between perforated and coil issues of the same Virginia ratification stamp issue, then the two would not be permitted side by side in the same article. There should not be two similar non-free content photos of a drummer in an article on a band.

b. "Minimal extent of use. An entire work is not used if a portion will suffice. Low- rather than high-resolution/fidelity/bit rate. This rule also applies to the copy in the File:namespace." —

• in this case, low resolution to capture the entire stamp image in a .jpeg file suffices.

As a part of the topic, History of Virginia on stamps, there are several other Virginia landmarks stamps to be included here which are uniquely on USPS stamps, such as Montpelier on the James Madison, and the Appalachian Trail on the CCC commemorative. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 07:17, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFCC #1. No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose. — There is no free equivalent of a USPS stamp for a USPS stamp beginning in 1978. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 08:38, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFCC #8. Contextual significance. "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increases reader’s understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.” ---

• Simply denigrating visual information as “pretty” is reductio ad absurdum, without force or logic. Visual information (image) of a visual medium (stamp design related to a commemoration or honorific) conveys understanding in a way written description does not, a picture is worth a thousand words.

WP:NFCI. Guideline examples. “The following list is not exhaustive but contains the most common cases where non-free images may be used … #3. Stamps and currency: "For identification of the stamp or currency, not the subjects depicted on it." —

• in the case of the Virginia ratification stamp, the entire image of the stamp is used to identify the stamp, and to relate the stamp analytically to Virginia's ratification, an event in the History of Virginia commemorated on stamps. It is not used in the article to identify the colonial Capitol building. There are free use photos of the colonial Capitol building which would convey the visual information necessary to the reader’s understanding at an article on the Capitol, but a written description is not equivalent to the image of a stamp issued to the public.

Likewise in prohibited images, #8, "A Barry Bonds baseball card [may not be used], to illustrate the article on Barry Bonds. [But] The use may be appropriate to illustrate a passage on the card itself; see Billy Ripkin article." —

• in the case of the Virginia ratification stamp, the stamp image illustrates a passage on the stamp itself, not the colonial Capitol building.

All the direction and examples concerning contextual significance is absent any requirement for a literary controversy surrounding the stamp itself as a prerequisite to including visual information in the encyclopedia which would significantly increase reader's understanding of a visual topic, the History of Virginia on stamps. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 08:38, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it and stand by your edit already! -- Gwillhickers (talk) 16:01, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• The licensing tag {{Template:Non-free USGov-USPS stamp}}, allows for use of USPS stamps "to illustrate the stamp in question (as opposed to things appearing in the stamp’s design)" — in this case, the Virginia ratification stamp is to illustrate the stamp’s commemoration of the 200th anniversary of Virginia’s ratification of the Constitution, not the colonial Capitol building. The licensing tag notes that although the image qualifies for fair use under U.S. copyright law for educational purposes, “Other use of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement.”

• There is no free equivalent to a USPS stamp beginning in 1978. WP:NFCC #1. There may be multiple page uses of one image, there may be multiple fair-use images of different subjects on the same page. WP:NFCC #7, #3. The stamp is issued to the public, so it has notability. WP:NFCC #4. Visual information (stamp image) of a visual medium (stamp design related to the article subject) conveys understanding in a way a written description alone does not, a picture is worth a thousand words. WP:NFCC #8.

• Guideline examples of the most common cases where non-free images may be used include — Stamps and currency. “For identification of the stamp or currency, not the subjects depicted on it.” WP:NFCI Guideline #3. Likewise in the prohibition of baseball card except “the use may be appropriate to illustrate a passage on the card [stamp] itself.” WP:NFCI Prohibited images #8.

• Absent is any requirement for a literary or artistic controversy concerning the stamp, only that the image be used to illustrate the stamp itself as described in an adjacent passage on the article topic. The proposed image of the Virginia ratification is used to illustrate the commemorative and critical analysis of the commemoration, not the colonial Capitol building pictured. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 09:48, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For purposes of critical commentary all that need be said is that such a stamp was issued to commemorate the 200th anniversary of Virginia’s ratification of the Constitution. This is an important part of Virginia's history and leaving this space void would be "detrimental" to the overall understanding of Virginia's history, per NFCC#8. Again, there is no free equivalent, which thus satisfies NFCC# 1. Of course you can add other narrative as you feel necessary. Still can't believe an editor has to go through so much BS to use an image that is allowed for educational use, doesn't compromise anyone's interests and doesn't "harm" the foundation. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 17:08, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Werieth has closed the discussion at the initial RfC. Update later. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 21:59, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is an RfC concerning USPS stamp usage, at WP Media copyright questions. It asks, Is stamp non-free content use explained by WP:NFCI Guideline #3? Please join in.

I understood that that was the proper venue for a general discussion, versus discussion of a particular image. An editor, Werieth, has suggested he will close the RfC as he objects to it being placed there. If so, I will try another venue. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 17:53, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The RfC at Media copyright questions is closed by Werieth. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 22:01, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The RfC is reopened at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 63#RfC: Is stamp non-free content use explained by WP:NFCI Guideline #3? with a lead taken by Jheald in favor of the Virginia ratification stamp as employed here. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 22:54, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note. Several of the stamp images I've upgraded in this article, just now and recently, already existed in higher resolution here at WP. e.g.The 50c Arlington Amphitheater stamp image exists in the US Regular Issues of 1922–31 article and the Mount Vernon issue could have been found in my Gallery of Uploads. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 00:00, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Where do I look to compare, I'm just looking for the larger pixel size for higher resolution in the descriptive notes?

Before I upload an image which I reformat from .tiff to .jpeg on my Mac to come under the 100 limit I see on some upload pages, I check to see if I can find the stamp at Wikimedia Commons, using the name used at NPM and I try another I make up, with and without "stamp" ... then proceed in a new upload if I'm not successful there first. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 08:59, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the images I have uploaded have the name of the subject/person somewhere in the name of the file. e.g. File:George Washington2 1861 Issue-10c.jpg. As you must know, there are some file names for stamps that don't give you much of a clue about the stamp, so I don't think there's one approach to finding a given stamp. For Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln there are categories (in Wikimedia commons) that help. e.g.commons:category:George Washington on stamps. There are also decade categories commons:category:Stamps of the United States 1860-1869 (...1870-1879, ...1880-1889, etc, etc). There are also single year categories, but these included stamps of all countries. e.g.commons:category:1945 stamps, so if you know the year the stamp was issued you could search through one of the corresponding categories to see what we have. Isn't there a way for you to save an image as a jpg right from the start, or must you always convert from tiff to jpg? No default settings you can set? -- Gwillhickers (talk) 14:56, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unsure about that, I'll explore. Life was easier with an onsite tech support or two at the high school. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 16:34, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

African-Americans are 20% of Virginia’s population, of the fifteen treated under ‘Other famous Virginians’, 20% of the category would be three stamps.

It happens (1) Booker T. Washington is free-use, but (2) Carter G. Woodson (founder of Black History Week, holding a volume of black history, legacy: Black History Month), and (3) Arthur Ashe (tennis great, stamp portrait from Sports Illustrated cover) are NFC stamps. That leaves five (four NFC stamps) in the section NOT pictured after these two NFC images are used, use of these two stamps of six NFC stamps in this section would be "limited use" by NFCC #3a.

They would be the second and third NFC image among 25 NFC image stamps mentioned in an article with a scope of 110+ stamps. Any ideas concerning uploading these two images is appreciated, please review the "contextual significance" NFCC#8 for each stamp. It is my understanding that following their publication here, they should be reviewed at NFCR to avoid edit war disruption. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 13:11, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In a topical philately article History of Virginia on stamps with a scope of 130 stamps, four images are displayed from those issued by the USPS since 1978. One is not copyrightable by the USPS because they reproduce art without altering the image, in the First Bull Run stamp. In the Arthur Ashe Sports Illustrated cover, the illustration is not recognizable to the reader without the image provided. The Virginia ratification stamp has been reviewed at Non-free content with nine support, one oppose and three comments.

Two new uploads File:Woodson 1984 U.S. stamp.1a .jpg and File:Ashe 2005 U.S. stamp.1a.jpg represent under 5% of the article scope (NFCC#3a limited usage) to commemorate an important Virginia event or notable Virginian personage, each meeting all ten NFCC criteria for WP usage, including NFCC#8, “contextual significance”. Note, contextual significance as policy is independent of the guideline NFCI#3 which does not require context, and the guideline NFLISTS#2 which suggests critical commentary is preferable to simple description of the stamp artwork, without forbidding other context such as historical analysis as provided for in each case here. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 16:49, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]