Debris could be anything,including fragments of material. Is fragment the proper term here? I would think debris would cover a larger spectrum seeing as we have no idea what it could be.
It was probably compacted grease and debris that fell from the die and was struck into the coin before falling away. I've seen similar debris struck through Lincoln cents from other years. These are usually one-of-a-kind errors that are rarely duplicated which makes it hard for the error collector to research. ~ Chris
Struck Through Debris just stops all the speculation, like "A fragment of what?" Just plain "Struck Through" makes folks ask "What".
Wouldn't that be a Struck Through Debris Fragment? How would you know it is just a fragment and not the whole Debris? Make no sense at all.
Ok.. Then how about just simply Struck Thru And that's the way the TPG's put it on the label. Now go figure that one out!
Not necessarily! We've seen numerous examples of an interior die break like the "Hornets Nest" posted here by various members. ~ Chris
I don't think you will be able to prove it. Here is an example of an IDB that would be easily repeatable, and we don't need two specimens to support the theory. Here is another error that is one of two known. They were both found in $100 Mixed P&D Mint bags. I still own this one, and the other sold on eBay for $555. ~ Chris Oops! Corrected $50 to $100. cpm
. I quite agree with this. The TPG's know better that to try and name the unknown. The OP's coin is a "Struck Thru" Error. There are cases where the object can be named as it is so obvious.
Your 1st photo looks too have debris above the surface. It looks similar to this KHD. It does not have Debris on the coin, and is not a Struck through Debris error. This coin was struck with a die that was damaged from being previously struck through Debris. Your other two photos look incuse like a Struck Thru.