Talk:Columbian Issue

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philately Mid‑importance

	Philately portal 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 articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Columbian Issue appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 19 December 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Columbian Issue, the first U.S. commemorative postage stamps, included the first female portrait on American postage — Spain's Queen Isabella I?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/December.

Wikipedia

Untitled[edit]

This is a fine article, just needs a bit of tweaking. First, it needs a bigger-format picture at the top, otherwise somebody clicking on it thinks, "oh, just boring text", not realizing there are plenty of pics. commons:Category:Stamps of the United States has several larger images, though none are ideal. Second, I think the subsectioning for values breaks things up too much - as weird as it sounds, I think plain paragraphs with bolded denominations, or even an enumerated list, will look better. It would also let us keep TOC for main sections, but not take up nearly an entire screen with denominations (it's not like anyone will ever click straight to a particular one). I don't have my Brookman handy, it would be good to add a comment as to why such a large set was decided upon. Stan 14:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Commons images for the Columbians are painfully lacking (one decent 2c and 10c picture, a 2c mislabelled as 3c, and the worst-condition 1c and 10c I've seen in some time). What I'd really like to see is the image of one of the better Columbian covers (the huge package piece with four $5 and a rainbow of lower demons would be lovely), but I'm uncertain if the free use afforded us for US postage applies to covers from established collections... As an unrelated note, anyone have a good closeup of the broken hat? My scanner is like the 2c Columbian in a way: old, and very useful in its time, but really not worth much anymore. Serpent's Choice 05:57, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My general approach to the "lead" image is that it should be somehow "most representative" of the article's subject and secondarily "most attractive", which in this case suggests a XF unused 2c as the ideal. Cover images are highly desirable supplements, to give flavor of how the stamps were used. As mundane objects, I think scans of covers can only get copyright from either cachet or stamps, so any Columbian cover is going to be PD. It would be a courtesy to tell people when you're collecting images, so they're not surprised to see their item on the front page of WP some day. :-) Stan 15:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Columbian Issue. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:41, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]