Coinbuf

Sometimes the conservation may reveal an old cleaning that the crud, haze, or artificial tone was hiding.   Thus a coin that has been conserved is not immune to receiving a details grade after the conservation.

Better, but still not in sharp focus, that is not a knock as coin photography is not easy.   But I still do not see any significant die doubling, it for sure is not DDO-1 or DDO-2 as both of those have large spreads that would be very easy to see.

Thank you for the better photos. Now that they are not blurry, I am not seeing any form of doubling on obverse of this cent. What are you seeing that makes you think this is a DDO? You might have to provide clear closeups of what you are referring to. I would say if you are seeing some slight form of secondary doubling with the coin in hand, it most surely would be some form of limited strike/mechanical doubling.

This thread got me to thinking, and a long time ago, I made a purchase at a coin shop of the cent I am including in the picture below. I bought this cent because it had a different look to it than the regular copper plated ones I am so used to seeing, and the shop had it in a sleeve with a handwritten tag calling it a "Yellow Jacket". Perhaps this topic is what they were referring to. I labeled the slab with my own tag when it came back because it just looks different. I submitted this straight not thinking it could be a mint error. Now, I might have to dig this out of my SDB and give it another hard look, and maybe resubmit it and see what happens.

Your link takes us to a page not found, perhaps HA decided to pull the item.   As far as the reason it was not an error in WWII is that was done intentionally vs the modern day brassy cents which are not intentional.   As the modern brassy cents are not intentional, they would have to be considered a variety or an error; it would seem that NGC decided placing them under the error umbrella is the proper choice in their opinion.

1888 Liberty Seated dime in a green label PCGS holder giving a grade of "AU 53", while the PCGS database says, "PR 53". The coin has proof characteristics notwithstanding the weakness on Liberty's head, and the die variety exists in both proof (F-101) and circulation strike (F-101a) format. I bought it out of a dealer's "cheap slab" box for all of $45 in 1994.

Where do you see any object that is retained on this ASE??  I see some discoloration/tarnish/gunk/staining that looks like residue from spilled coffee over a rubber band that was used to hold together a group of ASE's.   But I do not see any strike through of any type, retained or otherwise.

Welcome to the forum, sadly I can only echo what has already been said, this is not an error just a coin that was unintentionally or perhaps intentionally mutilated.

Welcome to the NGC chat board.
   Unfortunately, your 1983 cent is an example of a coin that was altered after it left the mint to superficially resemble a coin that had been multiple struck. The secondary image being backwards, incuse and having a date (1976) from some years earlier reveals it to have been squeezed between two other struck coins, likely in a vise. See https://www.error-ref.com/squeeze-job-or-vice-job-or-garage-job/.  Compare this with images of coins that were actually double struck at https://www.error-ref.com/multiple_strikes_on-center_off-center/, https://www.error-ref.com/mutiple-strike-in-out-collar/, https://www.error-ref.com/mulitple-strikes-flip-over/.
   Mint errors are an advanced topic in numismatics (coin collecting). It is very unusual to find any coin with a significant mint error in circulation. Unless you have some knowledge about coins, including how they are made, it is easy to be deceived by fabrications like this one. If you are interested in learning about U.S. coins and how to collect them, please so advise, and we can direct you to appropriate print and online resources.

Welcome to the Forum.
You have a mutilated cent, not an error, return the coin and get your money back if possible. 

Where do you see any object that is retained on this ASE??  I see some discoloration/tarnish/gunk/staining that looks like residue from spilled coffee over a rubber band that was used to hold together a group of ASE's.   But I do not see any strike through of any type, retained or otherwise.

Where do you see any object that is retained on this ASE??  I see some discoloration/tarnish/gunk/staining that looks like residue from spilled coffee over a rubber band that was used to hold together a group of ASE's.   But I do not see any strike through of any type, retained or otherwise.

Netherlands East Indies 1/4 Gulden 1941P 
I'm pretty sure that was correct. I don't go out of my way for foreign coins but this was a neat find in a penny roll.
Considering I don't have one and it was in good shape for the most part and has good luster still. Not sure about the value but I'm assuming only a few bucks mainly due to silver content sadly. Any opinions or knowledge welcome.

 

1877-CC 10C VF20
 

It is really a shame this one had such a rough life. Not very common. NGC has only graded 9 total.