LUCIE RIE STYLE YELLOW GLAZE STUDIO POTTERY - (not Peter Wills)

This is a studio pottery bowl which vaguely reminds me of Lucie Rie's bowls.  This has an incised signature to the base - not sure which way up but looks a bit like YILSO or YOLSY?  Any ideas please?

Peter Wills who pots in South Wales.Nice item.
https://www.20thcenturyforum.com/t5123-peter-wills?highlight=wills

That's great - thank you for the identification.

It might be by him, but I'm not reading 'Wills' on the base

http://www.studiopottery.com/cgi-bin/pp.cgi?item=1690

If you look in the Marks book Naomi, he also uses a scribbled version of his signature almost exactly like this.

Examples of his incised 'Wills' signature. The first one is a match for the example in the Marks book. They are all fairly consistent, and nothing like the one above

I have several Peter Wills pieces. When I looked at this I thought Peter Wills straightaway. Then I looked a the mark, and was puzzled because it was different. So I had to check in the Fournier Marks book. There are actually six versions of the Peter Wills marks in the book.One of them in particular looks very similar to the one on this piece.

This is part of his entry in BSPM book. The one on the far right is his incised mark which matches the 3 photos I posted above. Unfortunately it doesn’t match the mystery mark 

Just caught up on the additional replies and thank you again for all your help with the identification.

But.... But one of the two others does. It does say impressed. But with codicil of 'there are a number of variations in a range of sizes'
Which lets in a lot of marks.
Moreover the this piece is dead ringer for a Wills piece. I am looking at its twin now!

I’ve checked the 2nd and 3rd Edns of BSPM. James had added 3 more versions of the marks to the 3rd Edn. If he’d meant incised then he would have added it, so when he says ‘there are a number of variations in a range of sizes’ he’s only referring to the impressed stamps. 

Just for completeness, these are the other three marks in the book. 

We will have to agree to disagree Naomi.

Why not ask him?
The link to his website is still working, so he seems to still be active.

Hi - I will see if I can contact him to check.

I have sent him an email so will see if I get a reply

UPDATE - I have emailed Peter Wills and after providing detailed photos and dimensions / weight of the piece he has confirmed it is NOT by him so unfortunately the search continues! Here is an extract of the email correspondence from Peter:

"I've been looking at the mark in quite some detail. I've printed it off so as to rotate it and look at it from all angles to see if I can make any sense of it. It is most definitely is NOT my signature. However I sometimes write glaze codes on bases, usually with a signature but not always. So I was trying to see if this fitted any of my more obscure codes..which I don't think it does.. the more obvious ones (to me) I would know in an instant.

Other things that also do not seem to fit with my way of working is: the foot is flat, mine are usually rounded, it also looks to be turned a little off centre (but that could be the picture?), the incised writing is through a white glaze into yellow underneath. I can't imagine that I would have had the yellow glaze there under the white and the white doesn't look like any of my white glazes.... On top of that the inner surface of the bowl, I think has been turned, not something I would do as a rule and there is no band of colour or oxide on the inner surface; which is something I do generally do!!! Still without seeing and handling I'm still going to stay at 99.9% not mine.

I think that must be the most intriguing (and difficult) identification I've ever been asked to look at!

Peter"

"So 99.9% sure now that it isn't a piece of mine. The weight alone is a give away as at over 3lbs (in old money) that's more than the weight of clay I'd use to start make a similar sized piece. (And of course after throwing, turning and then firing its weight would be significantly decreased for that starting point.) There are a number of other things too that don't add up to a piece of mine. What is intriguing though is a detail within the foot-ring. There is a dip and then a raised line concentric with the inner wall of the foot-ring....now this is something that I do and I've not ever seen anyone else do this....it was that more than anything made me hesitate..... funny old game this pottery and it's identification."

If he was a little unsure to start with, it's no wonder others were.
I'm sure the info contained in that reply will be of great use to others in the future.

It's always worth asking the actual potter (when possible) about things. You often get loads of extra useful info as well.

Although the search for an ID goes on!

Yes It was definitely a good idea to contact the potter so thank you for suggesting this.