Sandon

This is clearly a private ink stamp. If you still think that it isn't, you might want to ask on the PMG (Paper Money Guaranty) chat board, https://boards.pmgnotes.com/.

The mintmark location for all Walking Liberty half dollars dated 1917-1947 is on the reverse to the left of the rock on which the eagle is perched and beneath the pine, as shown on the reverse of this 1938-D: The mintmark location for 1916 and some 1917 issues is on the obverse beneath "IN GOD WE TRUST'. That indispensable resource, the "Redbook", indicates mintmark locations for all U.S. coins. Do you have one?

I see no "baby ducks" below the flying duck either on your photos or on an Arkansas quarter I examined under a 10x loupe. What you're likely seeing is an optical illusion, such as when one sees the shapes of angels or dragons in clouds.

It's not just the "2" but the whole date and the lettering as well! Note, for example, how much smaller the top loop of the "8" is on the small date than the bottom loop, while on the large date the loops are nearly the same size.

Here's an NGC Coin Explorer photo of a 1982 small date:

It's also a large date.

Your coin is a 1982-D large date, which is abundantly common in brass (95% copper) composition. See the following "infographic":

Technically, proof is a method of manufacture and not a grade, so a well-worn coin that could be proven to have been manufactured as a proof would still theoretically be a "proof", but in this case there would be no way to identify it as such. NGC has never certified a proof Buffalo nickel below the grade of "58" nor PCGS below the grade of "55". See Buffalo Five Cents (1913-1938) | Coin Census Population Report | NGC (ngccoin.com) and https://www.pcgs.com/pop/detail/buffalo-nickel-1913-1938/83/0?t=5&pn=1. The 55-58 grades are close to unworn, so the original surfaces would be largely present. A "squared off rim", assuming that it could be determined to exist on a well-worn coin, would not be conclusive, as circulation strike coins may also have square rims.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Please note that a repunched mint mark ("RPM") is classified as a die variety, not a mint error. Before the early 1990s, mintmarks were hand punched into dies. If the punch moved between blows, the mintmark appeared repunched on the coins subsequently struck from the finished dies. I also can't see an RPM in your current photos and agree that the defect on the "1" may be either post-mint damage or a minor strikethrough. A strikethrough is a mint error but one this small probably wouldn't be worth a premium. NGC VarietyPlus, which catalogs the die varieties that NGC is willing to attribute, lists a total of six RPM varieties for 1957-D Lincoln cents. Lincoln Cents, Wheat Reverse (1909-1958) | VarietyPlus® | NGC (ngccoin.com) Most RPMs don't create much market value, but they are fun to collect.

The coins whose obverse photos you have posted, including those you have circled, are of ordinary, circulation strike (and circulated, some well-worn) Buffalo nickels, of which tens of millions were made in each of the pertinent years at the Philadelphia mint alone, or in the case of the 1936, nearly 119 million at the Philadelphia mint alone. Both of the 1936s you circled have rims that have been flattened by wear; they are not "square edges", which means that the rim is nearly perpendicular to the edge instead of being slightly beveled as is the tendency on circulation strikes. You have to view the coins from the edge to check for this characteristic. They are not proofs or "Special Strikes", and none is worth more than a few dollars. (We can't tell at what mints the coins were made without seeing the reverse, where the mintmarks are located beneath "FIVE CENTS".) It is difficult to explain how proofs differ in appearance from regular coins without your being able to see the actual coins in person, but I will try to using photos. A brilliant proof Buffalo nickel of 1936-37 looks like this 1937 in my collection, NGC graded PF 66, with the characteristics of an extremely sharp strike and a mirror finish: Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries. For high resolution images of 1936 "Satin Finish" proofs, which are similar in quality but have a duller finish, see https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1936-5c-satin/3994 (photos and comments). The extremely rare and controversial 1927 "Special Strike" coins are similar in appearance to the 1936 Satin Finish proofs. See https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1927-5c-special-strike/3987, 1927 5C SP | Coin Explorer | NGC (ngccoin.com) The finish would not be observable on a coin as worn as the 1927 in your photo, and even if by some miracle your 1927 had originated as one of these purported experimental strikes (as opposed to one of the 37,981,000 regular coins struck for circulation), there would probably be no way to tell. In comparison, here are photos of an ordinary circulation strike but nice uncirculated (PCGS graded MS 65) 1936, with bright frosty mint luster and a full strike but some die wear: The provenance of such coins is also important. The mint sold the proofs of 1936 (4,420 of both types versus 118,997,000 circulation strikes) and 1937 (5,769, all brilliant, versus 79,480,000 circulation strikes) directly to collectors, and the vast majority have been carefully preserved and passed down within the families of the original owners or have been traded among collectors and dealers, always identified as proofs. Most have likely been certified by grading services and are sold through coin dealers and auction houses. They rarely just "turn up" unattributed. While some have been "cleaned" or mishandled, very few have any wear. Any proof that was "spent" and had as much wear as most of the coins in your photos would likely no longer be identifiable as a proof, even by an expert. Collectors and dealers saved many uncirculated rolls and bags of these coins, especially of the later dates, so the odds are that even any coin without circulation wear without clear proof characteristics is a circulation strike, not a proof. You must stop laboring under the conception that you can easily or regularly find rare, valuable coins without paying market prices for them. Respectfully, you appear to lack basic information about coins or understand what the rare pieces you have purported to find are supposed to look like. In one of your previous topics ("1988-D Lincoln Wheat [sic] Cent"), I directed you to some forum topics that identify print and online resources that will help you in gaining an understanding of what can be a rewarding pastime. Please refer to them. (Do you even have a "Redbook" and a grading guide? Have you ever been to a coin show?)

@Ross soltess--Welcome to the NGC chat board. No, the coin you posted looks nothing like one of the so-called "SMS" coins. It's just an ordinary, somewhat mishandled 1964 Kennedy half dollar, one of over 273 million minted, even assuming that it was coined at the Philadelphia mint, which we can't tell without seeing the reverse. Perhaps that's fortunate, as your holding it in your bare hands isn't doing it any good and would be devaluing to a rare coin. It's only worth its silver value, currently around $9. In the future, please post questions you have about particular coins as new topics, not as replies to someone else's old topic, and include clear cropped photos of each side of the coin.

I recommend keeping the coin in the NGC Registry, as you should receive notice if someone else on the Registry attempts to transfer the coin into his or her own set and inform NGC and that person that you claim ownership of the coin. I assume that you reported the suspected theft to the Postal Service and, if you insured the package, have filed a claim. In addition to contacting PCGS as recommended by @Ali E., you may want to report this matter to the Numismatic Crime Information Center (NCIC) at https://numismaticcrimes.org/.

I think that there are die chips on each of the digits of the date, including the top of the "1", and on the indicated letters. The depressed area on the "5" appears to be a nick. Die chips are generally regarded as indicative of die deterioration and do not add value to a coin, but some collectors find them interesting. Die chips on and around date elements and letters are very common on coins from the 1950s and early 1960s, such as "BIE" cents and "bar" nickels of that era. See, for example, the following:

I think that @Fenntucky Mike found the ad that I recalled. Note that the seller is describing the bags from which the embedded fragment as taken as canvas and from "historical [!] U.S. Treasury, Federal Reserve, and Early Bank Bags" but not as the bag that housed the coin in the holder or as even having ever held silver dollars. In other words, they are promoting trash as treasure.

@Stan Gioia--As you were previously advised, your inquiry should have been posted as a new topic, not as a reply to someone else's topic about a different coin from months ago. (Please don't create a new topic about this coin at this point.) Nevertheless, you have already received generally good advice, notwithstanding that you don't want to hear it, and seem to want to persist until someone finally gives you what you would regard as the "right" answer. Although @cobymordet and @powermad5000 are correct that one often couldn't tell the difference between a 1982 brass (95% copper) and copper-plated zinc cent just by looking, in this case I'm pretty sure I can tell. Your coin has a number of small, raised plating blisters on Lincoln's body and in the obverse field that are indicative of a copper-plated zinc cent. If I had received this coin in change, upon seeing these blisters I would have made no further inquiry about its weight or composition and gotten on with my life. Per the Coin World Almanac, the standard weight for a brass cent is 3.11 grams, with a legal tolerance of plus or minus 0.13 gram. A weight of 2.82 grams, if correct, would be substantially below the minimum weight for a brass cent of 2.98 grams, and it would not be reasonable to believe that the small area of reverse corrosion or encrustation that I can see would account for the lower weight. (If anything, the encrustation could have slightly increased the coin's weight.) If you want to keep on wasting your time and especially money, you can submit this coin to NGC, ANACS, ICG, and/or CAC Grading and continue getting the "wrong" answer, but I assume that you have better things to do.

I agree that this worn 1964 Jefferson nickel does not exhibit evidence of having been struck from a doubled die and that the thickened lettering with ghostly outlines is likely due to die deterioration, a form of "worthless doubling." Coins struck from doubled dies generally exhibit crisp, clear doubling, with both images on about the same level and "notching" between the images. You may find the following resources helpful: Double Dies vs. Machine Doubling | NGC (ngccoin.com) https://www.doubleddie.com/144801.html and links therein on mechanical doubling (a.k.a. strike or machine doubling), die deterioration doubling, and abrasion doubling.

You must understand that the types of occurrences during the manufacturing process that can result in a significant "mint error" are quite limited, while the forms of damage or abuse that can befall a coin after it is struck are infinite. Coins mass produced for circulation receive no special handling. They are struck on high speed presses and ejected in a stream into a container where they are hit by the coins that fall in after them and then are dumped into bags containing thousands or even tens of thousands of coins that are all in contact with each other. (The U.S. Mint has videos of the process on its website at usmint.gov.) The heavy bags are stacked in piles on top of each other and packed into trucks for distribution to the Federal Reserve, which in turn distributes them to member banks. At some point most of them pass through counting and roll wrapping machines. The coins at this point are still "uncirculated", but most of them have picked up numerous nicks, scratches, and other forms of damage from coin-to-coin contact and from machinery. This is why most uncirculated coins taken directly from rolls or bags would likely grade no better than MS 64 by current standards and why most serious collectors are willing to pay a premium for coins in higher grades that have a minimum of blemishes. Once coins enter circulation, they are subject to even more forms of damage, such as from being mixed in people's pockets with other coins, keys, and other objects, from being caught in machinery, dropped, run over by vehicles, used to pry things open, as screwdrivers, to test tools, or even being intentionally altered to resemble mint errors. They are also subject to discoloration and corrosion from substances to which they are exposed. We nevertheless see on a daily basis coins that have suffered various forms of obvious damage that are claimed to be "mint errors". I can't see how a 2000-P Sacagawea dollar (over 767 million minted) with a scrape in the eagle's tail could be seen as "cool" or in any way desirable. If that is what you like, you may collect such pieces, but don't pay more than face value for them or expect them ever to appreciate. I don't know from what books or other resources you have been learning about coins but would recommend those identified on the following forum topics:

Contrary to what you may have seen on certain websites, it is in fact virtually impossible to find any coin of value in circulation. I have been collecting and studying U.S. coins and checking change for nearly 53 years and have never found anything worth more than a few dollars. I know only one collector who ever found anything of significant value in change, a cent overstruck by nickel dies received in change at a grocery store, duly authenticated, and likely worth several hundred dollars. This is at best a once in a lifetime occurrence. What you should be doing if you want to be successful as a collector is to be learning from reliable print and online resources and attending such venues as coin shows and coin club meetings where you can examine a variety of collectable coins and speak with knowledgeable collectors and dealers. Please refer to the following forum topics for guidance:

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Based on your photos, which are somewhat blurry, your 2005-D cent has a normal mintmark for that year. What characteristic do you believe is out of the ordinary? Please note that since the early 1990s, mintmarks have been included in each year's master dies and are no longer punched into individual dies. Such die varieties as over-mintmarks, repunched mintmarks, and different styles or sizes of mintmarks used in the same year no longer occur.

Most coins of the Soviet Union aren't worth much, but, as with all other coins, the answer for a particular coin depends on its denomination, type, date, mint, condition, and sometimes additional factors. You can get approximate retail values and other information for world coins at World Coin Price Guide and Values | NGC (ngccoin.com), which can also be found under the "Resources" tab on the NGC home page. Note that there is a larger "spread" between wholesale and retail for coins of countries like the USSR that aren't widely collected in the U.S. This is incorrect. Precious metals are generally heavier by volume than base metals. The World Coin Price Guide generally states the weight, composition and current bullion value of a precious metal coin. The bullion ("melt") values of U.S. and world precious metal coins can be found at U.S. Silver Coin Melt Values | Silver Dollar Melt Value | NGC (ngccoin.com).

Welcome to the NGC chat board. The legal tolerance for a 1982 brass (95% copper, 5% zinc) Lincoln cent was plus or minus 0.13 gram from the standard weight of 3.11 grams, so any weight from 2.98 to 3.24 grams would be in the normal range even for an uncirculated coin. Your coin is a large date, which is common in either brass or copper-plated zinc composition. The U.K. 20 pence coin is composed of a predominantly copper copper-nickel alloy that has a yellowish color when uncirculated. The yellowish-brown color appears normal for a circulated example. You should never hold a coin that you think may have collector value in your bare hands, except by its edges if you must, as the oils in your skin may discolor and devalue it.

I saw an advertisement for these recently but haven't been able to find it. As I recall, the small bit of cloth embedded in the holder is supposed to be from a bag that once contained silver dollars but not necessarily an original mint bag or a bag that once contained the coin in the holder. In my opinion, this is just a creative way to use what would otherwise be trash.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. I very much appreciate your post and am sorry that you apparently had to learn certain truths the hard way. You still, I think, have much to learn and in that regard, please allow me to respond to some of your statements: Both coins and coin collectors have existed for several thousand years. Third-party grading services that encapsulate coins have only existed since 1986, some fifteen years after I began collecting and studying U.S. coins. Not everyone who is competent to authenticate, grade and otherwise evaluate coins is employed by a third-party grading service, and there are some dealers (true "professional numismatists") and collectors who are more capable than most of those who are employed by such services. Third party-grading and authentication is supposed to eliminate the implicit bias that sellers might have to overvalue coins and buyers to undervalue them, especially when small differences in grade or other factors may lead to substantial differences in a coin's market value. No coin is "absolutely worthless" just because it hasn't been encased in a hard plastic holder with a little paper tag expressing the consensus of opinion of a few graders, each of whom probably examined the coin for less than a minute each. A coin that has no collector value will continue to have none even after the expenditure of substantial monies to have it so encased. Unfortunately, some collectors and even dealers have come to use third-party grading as a "crutch" and not develop their own knowledge, experience and taste regarding coins. The opinions of grading services are just that--opinions--and those who have the requisite knowledge and experience may and frequently do disagree with them. The grading of uncirculated (mint state) coins is based upon several inherently subjective factors. Grading services make outright errors even regarding such factual matters as a coin's date, mint and die variety with an alarming frequency. There is simply no substitute for learning how to grade and otherwise evaluate coins for oneself. Without this knowledge, one can't even make a rational decision about whether a coin is worthy of submission to a grading service in the first place. I think that you are confusing or combining mint errors with die varieties. Mint errors of specific types aren't confined to specific years but occur with regard to the striking of individual coins, such as multiple strikes, off-center strikes, coins struck on defective or wrong planchets or coins struck through foreign matter. Die varieties, such as doubled dies and repunched mintmarks, are based on characteristics of specific dies that may strike hundreds of thousands of coins and can be listed by date, mint and denomination. See Variety vs. Mint Error | NGC (ngccoin.com). You are correct that there are numerous mint errors and die varieties that aren't worth the cost of third-party grading and certification. Here again, you would need to be able to accurately identify the coins in your collection and determine which ones, if any, would be worth the cost. Minor errors and varieties, like other lower value coins, are in fact saleable uncertified if you can honestly and accurately identify them and offer them for reasonable prices. Apart from YouTube videos by hucksters falsely claiming that you can make a lot of money by selling "rare" coins that you can find in pocket change, what resources are you using to learn about coins?

Your 1974-D Eisenhower dollar clearly exhibits post-mint damage, probably from someone testing a tool. Note the raised, displaced metal surrounding the depressions.

Please note that the term "graffiti" is the term used to describe post-mint damage resulting from someone scratching initials, numbers, or "doodles" on a coin. It generally would greatly reduce the coin's desirability and value to collectors. I looked at the photos but couldn't figure out how to zoom in on the images, assuming it is possible to do so, to get any idea of what if any anomaly on the coin you are making reference. If you can post photos on Instagram, you should be able to do so here. Your photos don't have to be of professional quality but should be take "head on", cropped to show only the coin and be sufficiently clear to enable us to offer reasonable opinions on your question. Here are examples, a 2001-P Sacagawea dollar that PCGS graded MS 68 and which exhibits no die variety or mint error: