what would you consider this?

[Will Bozarth]

I purchased an autographed card, signed by Keith Wayne (Tom from Night of the Living Dead. died in the early 90s), from John Russo (co-writer for Night of the Living Dead, author). I also included a letter, asking John a question regarding one of the "ghouls" in the film. He sent my letter back to me with a brief answer handwritten it. He didn't sign his name.

I guess my question is: Should I consider this an autograph even though he didn't sign his name?

[mufcdd]

No signature = no autograph.

In my opinion of course. Its a handwritten piece but not an autograph.

[khackdrums]

I would not consider this an autograph success. That doesn't mean it's not a great success overall, because it is!

Khackdrums

[chriscollector]

autograph [???t??gr??f -?græf]
n
1.
a. a handwritten signature, esp that of a famous person

[Will Bozarth]

Very good. Now, the subject asks "what would you consider this?". Maybe you can copy/paste the definition of what you'd call it.

[chriscollector]

^???? What don't you get? An autograph is a signature!!!!!!!! Unless the persons name happens to be a word in one of his sentences you are S.O.L. If anyone would consider this an autograph I would only wish to see their "collection".

[Will Bozarth]

I'll repeat:

what would you consider this?

[chriscollector]

^?????????? I REPEAT NOT AN AUTOGRAPH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's nothing more than someone handwriting, and unfortunately w/o their signature on it, it has no real proof of who it came from. It's a hand written note.

[jdp3577]

I'll repeat:

what would you consider this?

Id consider what you received a reply to your question, not an autograph

[packrat]

It would simply be an unsigned letter. Without the signature it would be hard to tell who wrote it. You could send it out for verification but that would most likely prove to be too expensive.