i have also several of the MZPP stars, but here is just for example one group with documents.
Interesting is, that receipient has 2 MZPP stars, number after number. Also Victory over Japan and several other medals.
Recently a star was offered on our favorite auction site in that range. My question is, not owning one from that range but noticing the photos Alex has, the dimple on the reverse under the H&S didn't start showing up until after 100,000 right?
Hello,
According to data that was posted some time ago (this specific info seems to have disappeared now, but I have a printout) on Alex Filer's site (I guess I can't post hist URL since there is a marketplace there now) all the Red Stars before 261059 had flat Hammer/Sickle area on reverse.
More precisely, he observed concave H/S area in the ranges:
261059 -761519
small star
flat edges
flat reverse
concave H/S
small MM below arm
curved up MM
italic SN
476090-1148972
large star
flared edges
flat reverse
concave H/S
small MM below arm
straight MM
italic SN
1067928-2587644
small star
flared edges
flat reverse
concave H/S
large MM below arm
straight MM
italic SN
1153487-1329763
large star
flared edges
flat reverse
slightly concave H/S
large MM below arm
straight MM
italic SN
1031661-1546817
large star
flared edges
flat reverse
concave H/S
large MM below arm
straight MM
italic SN
All other Red Stars were "flat" according to his info.
When asking questions about a specific fake, why don't you post some scan, so all those who are interested can get the pictures in addition to the sound only version.
Well, $720 is a nice price for something that didn't correspond to known features of that range.
Hey, I'm not going to call it a fake, I "got into trouble" for that recently. I just wanted to ask the question since "I" had never seen one that low with a dimple.
jefflgarrison Wrote:Hey, I'm not going to call it a fake, I "got into trouble" for that recently.
??? I'm not aware of this "trouble" if it involved one of our moderators. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your cryptic statement. The only way you could was if you were asked to back up your claim with facts. Facts which support an argument regarding authentication should always be included in your initial post anyways.
Art Wrote:??? I'm not aware of this "trouble" if it involved one of our moderators. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your cryptic statement. The only way you could was if you were asked to back up your claim with facts. Facts which support an argument regarding authentication should always be included in your initial post anyways.