A couple observations: As @paddyman98 noted, machine damage caused during the strike. Most of the time, the MD seen on a coin affects the smaller and outer devices. But sometimes, it can affect the profile of the bust or the profile of the reverse design (Monticello, Memorial, etc.). Seeing it in this area might be less common, but it has the familiar ‘shelflike appearance’. Look at the outer device in IGWT. Notice the stems of each letter/device are narrower at the outer rim and thicker at the base of the letter going towards the center of the coin. When you see this, and when you notice thinning in the upper arms of devices, it’s pretty clear that through attrition, die wear, and polishing that the die was aging. The most severe differences in thinning usually indicate an LDS condition. When you see material flow and spread about the devices (arms, stems, bars, bowls, etc. all look squishy), then you are VLDS. The devices on your coin show narrowing but aren’t all squishy looking yet. The coin looks to be coined from an LDS die. This could factor in on your diagnostic. Often times DDD appears with MD, so when something looks odd to you, consider what might be going on with your coin. You may have your answer. For this date: Billions of 1964 and 1964 D nickels were minted in 1964, 1965, 1966 and 1967. Those dies were pretty worn out, so while there are tons of these nickels in circulation, finding EDS/MDS versions are infrequent, especially with regards to the steps. There were several DDO and DDR varieties for the date, so look at your coins closely, especially those in a higher mint state (AU/BU coins show up the doubling best as you might imagine).
Did you try to look it up on the websites members have linked to help you? In case you didn't bother to save them, go to: Www.doubleddie.com Www.varietyvista.com A better question would be, "I think I see (hub doubling characteristic) but couldn't find it on variety vista" Continually, posting pics without an indication of at least trying to learn leaves the impression that you're just holding out a handful of change and saying "please do the research for me, I can't be bothered because I'm too busy looking for valuable errors". I know that's probably not the case, but that's the impression you're beginning to leave. It takes a while to learn and understand errors and many members have invested time in helping you. Show us that you are starting to learn and that the time and effort wasn't wasted
