Repaired Thin For GB 1840 Two Pence Blue?

For those who do not scrutinise hard enough, you may not be able to spot it. I suspect this stamp to have a repaired thin. The seller may or may not realise it. I would advise buyers of old classics to be wary of repaired thins which may not be obvious.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/ulk/itm/392367043950

Is it possible that it is a paper flaw ,done while manufacturing the paper ?

Before making this post, did you attempt to contact the seller to ask him to make a closer examination of this stamp?

Didn't contact the seller, as I have no intention of buying. In any case, he listed this as VF. My purpose of this post isn't to put the seller down, but to raise the issue of repaired thins and to warn others to always do their due diligence before buying stamps on ebay or online for the matter.

That doesn't seem very fair does it? Would you like to have one of your lots publically posted to a forum such as this before being contacted privately to reexamine it more closely? Just saying ....

John Becker, the stamp listed on ebay is already in the public domain. If I take something in private and post it on a public forum, then it would be a different matter. Would you have had a different reaction if I pulled out a stamp from any public auction catalogue (eg. Kelleher) and and post it here for discussion?

In my opinion, it achieves a greater service to everyone (and the hobby) if folks would contact the seller and give them an opportunity to improve the listing. Then you could post a positive review of the listing, demonstrating not only 'what to look for' but also a 'greater good' if the seller improves their listing.

The flip side of the coin on this is that contacting ebay sellers can sometimes result in retribution from malicious jerks. So I do not blame anyone who avoids contacting sellers with listing questions if this is their reasoning.
Don

I did write the person, and got a very reasonable response:

Thank you, alub.
The positive results of talking to people directly first!

It serves better as an educational tool if one just copies and pastes the image, with an explanation of one's reasons. It certainly qualifies as fair use, and avoids "naming and shaming" a seller who simply may have overlooked a well-executed repair.

I will probably leave out the link to the seller in future, but as mentioned, the intention of my post was not to denigrate the seller in any way. I simply thought it was helpful to put the link down so that people visiting this thread would know where the stamp was taken from.

Just inform the seller first - simple

Peter

now that the contact have been made, but I agree with Pennieblackie, the flaw in the paper is something i've seen before, held against the light this will look like the stuff you use to repair holes in plasterwalls, or eraser ink(or whatever it's called) from back in the days when typewriters were used.

it couldn't be a flaw from the production of the paper, you could find woodfibers and sand in the paper of this age, but not something like this.

By the way (as I read this term often here at SCF), "fair use" is something that many countries do not have in their legal system.

I guess it is only me that sees the heavy inking around the spot of the repair which clues me that the defect was there before the ink was placed on the stamp . But the others here jump to a different opinion when only viewing a scan . I have to have the stamp in hand to be sure what is going on .

floortrader, I will agree with you. We should be cautious about condemning the property of others in a public forum.