Refinished vs not?
Obviously, as others have suggested, if there's a B within the shroud, this Triple Lock was originally blued, so this would be a later renickel. If an N is present, then not so easy.
That which suggests original finish:
Middle lock insert in frame not renickeled. Often this is missed when refinishing (e.g., bluing or nickel inaccurately applied to this piece.
Most markings fairly crisp.
Side plate appears to generally fit well, although seam more evident than I would expect, but this could just be pattern of wear.
Where screws are located, no dishing beneath heads.
No obvious rounded edges.
That which suggests refinish:
Reference to side plate, perhaps not from pattern of wear but from refinish.
On side plate the word "TRADE" appears to be exceptionally weak and seems to contain nickel. Suggests buffing and renickeling.
All markings on side plate appear weaker than expected. Could be wear, an optical illusion, or evidence of refinish.
Wear pattern to nickel finish more typical of refinish and wear vs wear to original pattern. This is, by no means, foolproof. I don't know how to explain it, but, in my experience, renickeled guns wear differently from wear pattern exhibited by original nickel finish.
Left side of trigger appears to contain nickel. This would not be historically correct. Right side does not; could be just an optical illusion.
It would be much easier to determine if I had the gun in hand, but I believe that this one is not refinished as most discrepancies are likely explained By photographic technique or optical illusion.
