Subject: ANN00029qi
Comments
-
by nosenabook
I'm going with 1969 but wonder if it's really 1959
Posted
-
by nosenabook
Changed my mind, went with 1959, but it might be 1969. More magnification would make it clearer. Maybe.
Posted
-
by GNishida scientist
1959 looks correct to me.
Posted
-
by darryluk
CASENT has it as 1959. and my magnifiying glass kind of agrees
Posted