1924-S Standing Liberty Quarter. You Vs PCGS

got to have that ear slit to pull the FH designation. I think everything else is there for it

There are many different opinions on what constitutes a full head. I think "full head" is a poor description. The issue is whether the coin has a solid strike or a soft strike. There are several complicating factors:
Type
Die polishing. Al three mints tortured their dies. like this coin, die polishing lines abound in the series, and are visually unappealing.
Die state. Badly worn or mismatched dies abound in the series.
Whizzed coins, attempting to make sliders pass as UNCs

Here is what I look for. This list isn't original. I stole it years ago, modified it, and have no idea where it originally came from.

Head:
All three leaves are distinct and complete
Hairline is complete, and distinct from forehead and face, all the way to the jaw
Ear hole or ear slit is visible

Shield:
Inner shield has vertical and horizontal lines
Outer shield has all rivets
Exception: Abraded shield polished die varieties generally lack both attributes

Hand:
Liberty's right hand is complete

Gown:
Fold over Liberty's left leg (our visual right) is complete
Bottom of gown below Liberty's left leg has all four buttons visible

Feet:
All toes visible on the right foot

Gates:
Substantial detail exists in the wooden gates

Reverse:
Eagle's wings have several distinct feathers on the edge of the wing. The eagle's right wing (our visual left) is the key problem area.
Eagle has visible breast feathers. Very few have more than a few breast feathers.

Very few coins have truly full strikes. The goal is to find strong strikes. They exist for several dates, but are almost nonexistent for other dates.

I told you guys about them toes .

There is a heavy scratch on the obverse, NE to SW across the shield, gown, and stomach. On the reverse, there are two NW to SE scratches from the eagle's left wing (our visual right).

IMHO, the reverse scratches alone wouldn't detail the coin. The obverse scratch is more problematic, but I don't think it is enough to detail the coin. PCGS must have felt that the combination of scratches was enough to detail it.

Thanks. I have to believe those look far worse in-hand. On my screen this piece is magnified at least 10X and I still don't see anything that should bodybag this coin.

Beautiful coin. So how do you distinguish die polishing lines from scratches caused by cleaning? Thanks

@BGLI, it's sometimes difficult to discern die polishing scratches from post mint/cleaning scratches from pics, but in hand it's obvious.

Die polishing scratches will be raised on the coin. Because the scratches are incuse on the die itself, they become raised once the coin in struck. Cleaning scratches are obviously incuse on the coin.

Die polishing also will not typically pass over devices. Because the fields of the die are polished, the lower portion of the devices are unaffected. You'll notice on the OP's coin that the scratches come right up to the devices, are not visible on the devices, and are then visible on the other side of said devices. Occasionally you will see minimal die polished on low relief, large surface area devices, but are primarily isolated to the fields. Cleaning scratches will pass over fields and devices.

Edit: Coinfrog beat me too it! Too busy typing.