It's weak but not what they usually refer to as the weak D. The ones I've seen as a weak D are almost gone completely. Appears there are many variations of that coin. At coin shows I see some that show the D as plain as yours or even clearer and they are called weak D's. And then too I've seen some like that and are called just a weak D and some are very weak D's. I suspect they are called whatever a dealer wants to call them to sell them to someone that wants to fill a hole. Sort of like the 55 poor man's double die.
I have never seen a definition of just how weak the "D" has to be to be called a "weak D". The ones I have seen certified range from you have to twist it right just to get a hint up to the point where you can actually see that there is something there with the naked eye (but you would have trouble making it out). I seriously doubt yours would qualify.
Sorry, but I don't think this would qualify. Unfortunately, I don't have a pic, but on the one I have, the 'D' is way less visible. I'd be curious to hear what The Penny Lady has to say about this one.
I collect Lincolns and can tell you that I have never personally seen any 1922 with a "D" that strong classified as a "weak-D." Personally, I agree that there should be more consistency with how we numismatists judge these things - everything is so subjective, much like many aspects of grading. Not that this is an "official" guideline, but the "classic" wead-Ds tend to have a mintmark which upon first glance (with normal 20/20 sight) is almost not noticeable.
BTW, yours is definitely not a weak "D" because it is not Die #1, #2, #3, or #4. See http://lincolncentresource.com/1922Ddievarieties.html.
I agree with the class on this one. Just a curiosity question. It just appeared more worn than my other 22's. Thanks all
