Traditional & Postal History Judging Worksheet

Exhibit No: ________________  Frame Nos: ____________________

Exhibit Title: ______________________________________________________________________________

Treatment and philatelic importance       30
Does the exhibit have an adequate introductory statement and are all its claims accurate?
Does the exhibit include all material indicated in the introductory statement?
Is the development of the exhibit balanced and easy to follow?
Does the exhibit show originality?
How easy could the material of this exhibit be duplicated?
How much individual effort would normally be expected in assembling this exhibit?
Did the material in this exhibit originate purely for postal purposes or was it created for collectors?
How significant or important is the exhibit in the philately of the country, area, or time reference shown?
How significant or important is this exhibit considered to be on a world-wide basis?
Philatelic and related knowledge, personal study and research 35
Is the exhibitor’s choice of material and its arrangement appropriate to what is being shown?
Is there material that should be shown that has been omitted or vice versa?
Are the exhibitor’s remarks about the material clear and consistent, and advance the development of the exhibit?
Are the remarks too long, too brief (or non-existent], or appropriate to the material?
Is the exhibitor’s analysis of the material superficial, average, or exceptional?
Are the remarks accurate and do they show careful consideration of reference sources?
Is the exhibitor’s identification of the material accurate?
If new discoveries are shown, how significantly do they add to the philately of the area involved?
If a new discovery is claimed, is it likely to meet with general acceptance of other experts in the area?
How well is the information related to the new discovery developed?
(New research is often not possible and a lack of new research should not penalise an exhibit.
Published works by the exhibitor may be taken into consideration.
More personal study may be expected in lesser known areas.
[Felicitations may be considered for exhibits that show outstanding philatelic research or originality.]
Condition and rarity 30
How high is the quality of the most important material in the exhibit compared with that available?
Is the general level of condition of the material in the exhibit very high, average, or low compared with that available?
Is repaired material identified as such, and if so, is the item necessary to the exhibit?
Are there items in significantly better or worse condition than the remainder of the exhibit?
If material is available in better condition than that shown, how difficult would it be to upgrade?
How high is the quality of the most important material in the exhibit compared with that available?
What is the general category of rarity of the prime material in the exhibit? This includes, on a decreasing scale:
1st Strongest weight is given to primary items, including basic stamps and the “top” varieties and covers
2nd Secondary weight is given to items including proofs, record multiples, and “notable” covers
3rd Supporting items include varieties of secondary material, “normal” covers, and markings
4th Ancillary material includes items on piece, and minor varieties of secondary material and stamps
These categories include material that, though not “rare”, has a high difficulty of acquisition
Presentation 5
Is the method of displaying the material neat, clean, and aesthetically balanced?
Is the text easy to read and follow?
Are the pages and titles tasteful without taking away from the material on them?
Total 100