More rigour required with user entries.

OK, I love Numista and have few complaints except one that dominates all others - Why on earth do we have to spend time googling varieties that may or may not exist because no supporting evidence is provided at submission.

Case Example:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces1683.html
WTF is Type I and Type III obverse for 2007? Diagrams anyone? Photos anyone? This example should never have been allowed to proceed without supporting documentation. Yes, it may be referring to another denomination, if so, link it!!! Wikipedia has a section for sources, why not Numista?

I am sure there would be plenty of users (including me) willing to act as vetting agents for submissions. Numista should be a be all, and end all, not a "Yeah, maybe, go and google it.!" Good luck.

J'ai toujours plaidé pour ça.... Un des problèmes vient de KM, car dans 99% des cas il n y a pas une documentation, et numista a transferé 1 à 1 de KM!!!!

Απόσπασμα: "Sjoelund"​J'ai toujours plaidé pour ça.... Un des problèmes vient de KM, car dans 99% des cas il n y a pas une documentation, et numista a transferé 1 à 1 de KM!!!!
​

​Tu avais déjà répondu à cette question en 2018, la référence est sur cette page

Le topic en question est ici