1c Benjamin Franklin Perforation Top Bottom 11-73, Sides 11-72.

trying to post an actual solution to original poster's question, keeps getting me a nasty "PROHIBITED" block, first time I've ever seen this. So, apologies as I will attempt to post in-turn the simple 4 parts of my original reply, 1. small jpg of Search results, 2. 5 or so lines of Text, 3. small jpg of Article page 1, 4. small jpg of Article page 2.
(Maybe I will stumble on the 'offending' segment, to elaborate for everyone's benefit... I've lost a half hour already to this 'bug' er 'feature' of the Submit Reply pathway.)

I think I found what Am Teck seeks, in less than one minute using Search of The United States Specialist, monthly journal of The U.S. Stamp Society (usstamps.org).

(well, I got first two lines of Text in prior post, below image of Search results... here's remainder before I try providing 2-page Article...)
At least, in this article the Scott # 544 (rotary Washington-Franklin) "perf. 11" (valued $3,500 used) is the topic, written by Kiusalas himself who discusses "11-73" at top and "11-72" at sides, as well as related info regarding expertizing. Hope this helps, original appeared 59 years ago this month.

Below are the 2 pages of Article. Hope this helps, original appeared 59 years ago this month.
(Pardon this Aside: The "PROHIBITED" Submit Reply bug occurred simply because I had the name of the catalog (Sc...) IN THE JPG FILE NAMES since I also used '544'!!)

One might think that "PROHIBITED" bug in the Submit Reply pathway was just a nuisance, but as typical for something that should not be (just because I used 'Scott' in the jpg file names), there was collateral damage (in addition to my lost time, now approaching 1 hour). You can see a hint of my being flustered in the repetition I typed in actual "useful reply" chatter.
What wasting time on the bug also caused was, my leaving out this pertinent content (my how I hate that word "pertinent" and here I am using it! yes, a bit of brevity is called-for now, haha).
(1) the "meat" of the "11-73" vs. "11-72" Kiusalas perforations is "buried" in the Left Column of 2nd Page.
(2) Disclosure: How's this for coincidence - I happen to find my own copy of #544 in a huge (1 pound off paper, I believe?) mix of used Washington-Franklins, in the 1990s I think. I finally got around to sending it to APEX ca 2018 where I received a "genuine" opinion.
(It is also the only 1 cent Washington I have ever sent for a paid opinion. I'm one of those who assumes every W/F I have is the "common, cheap" one and have to work very hard to convince myself otherwise, that happened once.)

Hello stampsonmail, thank you for your time, you said it better than me: "(1) the "meat" of the "11-73" vs. "11-72" Kiusalas perforations is "buried" in the Left Column of 2nd Page." this is exactly what I am trying to bring back in this topic.
Regards.

Hello John Becker, sorry if you feel offended, this thread had been locked before. I do not mind locking it again, even deleting it if the moderator decide so. From the beggining this post is pure informative and technically cibled for the 11-73 issue only. I am not asking for the identification of the stamp, so no need to share the full picture.
In all case, I do appreciate in advance the efforts of anyone (I know that there is professionals in this topic in the forum) who could add any trivialty on this subject more than that is already known.
Regards.

Am Teck, what would be a proof for you that the 11-73 in your stamp was an official BEP perforation and not a "Kiusalas fake", so for what information exactly do you ask here in this topic?

Perhaps it would be interesting to learn also where you asked outside the forum, did you ask any library, archive or stamp organization for articles, what articles do you have already and so on.

hello littbarski, the threads would not have looked so damaged if it was reperforated. counting bullits from left, zoom on the 6th and 10th.
still seeking and asking in every possible place.....
regards

My comment was about information, not about stamp analyzing. What information do you search that would be a proof to you?

Do you search official BEP information or an explanation by Kiusalas?

And what articles do you have already?

Hello littbarski, what is published is available to all. At that time the archiving was not as accurate like nowadays, adding to that the case studies made by indepentants.....I am seeking for anyone who knows about a study case made, anyone who made an extensive research like I am doing, any professional who knows or faced such issue.....

This thread seems to be going around in circles. We don't have a complete scan, and there is obviously no information available that the OP wants or accepts. I don't normally do this, except in extreme cases, but

* * * Topic locked by Moderator until the OP offers a more meaningful discussion of what they want and how the community can satisfy their need * * *