A little bored this morning, checking in at various websites when I come across this gem on the Hodinkee. Their Bring a Loupe column usually has interesting watches but, as has been discussed here previously, their facts and opinions can be, at times, be a bit dubious. What immediately catches my eye is the picture that accompanies the title. A watch that I had in fact been watching on Ebay. A very nice example of what is sometimes known as a Speedmaster Companion or a Seamaster with Technical dial. https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/bring-a-loupe-march-15-2019 View attachment 749157 This example is slightly more rare in that it has Geneve badging on the dial (a detail not discussed) and has the Seamaster Hippocampus on the case-back. I have a little experience with this reference and its' brother with date window. In fact, I have five (see pic above). What is so annoying about this article is the lack of accuracy. In the title the reference number is there for all to see and it is wrong. Some simple research would tell the writer that the correct ref# for the watch will be 165.002 and if the watch had a date window ref# 166.002. What makes me go crazy is the laziness at Hodinkee. Time and time again their articles have issues that can easily be avoided with the most basic research. The reference # in the title is 135.007. A quick Google image search shows an obviously different watch. Am I being hypercritical?. Are my expectations out of line?. Don't we have an expectation of accuracy when reading material such as this?