That's the problem with coin dates.
Some coins are minted like in the year 2018 and also sold at the end of 2018 but have 2019 on them.
Others are minted in 2018 have that date but are issued only in 2019.
What do you put as the date?
For me it would be ND (2019) + comment in the comment box in this here case if the information is correct.
I have not entered this coin, I was just asking why does it put the date of 2019 if the coin says 2018. I believe that, although the coin was issued in 2019, Numista's criterion is that if the coin has a date, you should put the date indicated in the coin, that is, in this case, 2018.
Coin referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea, Marshall Islands, Moldova, Liberia and Spain
Banknote referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea and Spain
Απόσπασμα: "oynbcn"I have not entered this coin, I was just asking why does it put the date of 2019 if the coin says 2018. I believe that, although the coin was issued in 2019, Numista's criterion is that if the coin has a date, you should put the date indicated in the coin, that is, in this case, 2018.
"If the year shown on the coin is different from the year(s) when it was minted, select “no date” (ND) and enter the actual year(s) of minting in the two fields."
Απόσπασμα: "oynbcn"I have not entered this coin, I was just asking why does it put the date of 2019 if the coin says 2018. I believe that, although the coin was issued in 2019, Numista's criterion is that if the coin has a date, you should put the date indicated in the coin, that is, in this case, 2018.
Hi Oscar,
it sounds logical to me as well to use the end year of the period indicated on the coin.
On the Indian commemorative coins unfortunately the numista definition is quite often used as well. Nobody really cares, when the coin was minted, because that's written NOWHERE on the coin, but the end of the period IS.
Well, I understand and share Ole's opinion, the criterion should be to keep in any case the date of the coin when it exists.
In any case, there are places like in comments or at the end of the year line, where the actual year of issue could be specified.
As an example of what in my opinion should be done, the coin of the link is dated 1790 and was issued between 1840 and 1843 (written in comments). https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces6603.html
Coin referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea, Marshall Islands, Moldova, Liberia and Spain
Banknote referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea and Spain
Απόσπασμα: "oynbcn"Well, I understand and share Ole's opinion, the criterion should be to keep in any case the date of the coin when it exists.
In any case, there are places like in comments or at the end of the year line, where the actual year of issue could be specified.
As an example of what in my opinion should be done, the coin of the link is dated 1790 and was issued between 1840 and 1843 (written in comments).
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces6603.html
You should request a change in the guidelines. According to the current guidelines that coin should be listed as ND.
You and I and the guidelines agree that the "Struck in 1840-1843" should be in the notes on the year line -- I just created a change request for that.
Hello, it is very good to have a guide to edit the catalog, but sometimes common sense and logic must be above any norm.
Let me explain: there are countries (such as France or Austria) that issue their Eurosets in December of the previous year, that is, that month they issue the Euroset of the following year. Should we really put in the coins ND and the date of the year of issue instead of the date of the coins? NO.
Another example, the circulating Belarusian coins dated 2009, https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces84227.html
entered into circulation in 2016, should we put ND 2016? NO, simply put a comment of the date of entry into circulation.
If the coin has a date, we should put that date and in comments or at the end of the year line indicate the year of entry into circulation if this is different. If we start to put in all the coins the dates of entry into circulation or issue on the coins instead of the year that appears in them, we can go crazy trying to look for them in the catalog because when we get a coin, we will ALWAYS look for it by the year that appears in it.
Απόσπασμα: "stratocaster"Hello
In my opinion, the guidelines work well. The date that is inscribed on the coin can be searched in the lettering field.
The implementation of this previous suggestion should also help to distinguish between the circulation and issuing date:
https://en.numista.com/forum/topic95824.html
No this guideline does not work well. it will just confuse people. Using the date minted on the coins is most appropriate.
Απόσπασμα: "oynbcn"Hello, it is very good to have a guide to edit the catalog, but sometimes common sense and logic must be above any norm.
Let me explain: there are countries (such as France or Austria) that issue their Eurosets in December of the previous year, that is, that month they issue the Euroset of the following year. Should we really put in the coins ND and the date of the year of issue instead of the date of the coins? NO.
Another example, the circulating Belarusian coins dated 2009,
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces84227.html
entered into circulation in 2016, should we put ND 2016? NO, simply put a comment of the date of entry into circulation.
If the coin has a date, we should put that date and in comments or at the end of the year line indicate the year of entry into circulation if this is different. If we start to put in all the coins the dates of entry into circulation or issue on the coins instead of the year that appears in them, we can go crazy trying to look for them in the catalog because when we get a coin, we will ALWAYS look for it by the year that appears in it.
More examples where common sense has been used:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces99231.html
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces130341.html
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces117214.html
I was about to mention the Russian 2018 World Cup coins before I checked those links!
This type was actually issued (and presumably minted) in 2016 (the date of issue on the page is currently erroneous; should be 21.12.2016), though due to the holiday season very few examples reached collectors before the new year. (I got mine in February 2017.)
Quote: "oynbcn"Hello, it is very good to have a guide to edit the catalog, but sometimes common sense and logic must be above any norm. Let me explain: there are countries (such as France or Austria) that issue their Eurosets in December of the previous year, that is, that month they issue the Euroset of the following year. Should we really put in the coins ND and the date of the year of issue instead of the date of the coins? NO. Another example, the circulating Belarusian coins dated 2009, N#84227 entered into circulation in 2016, should we put ND 2016? NO, simply put a comment of the date of entry into circulation. If the coin has a date, we should put that date and in comments or at the end of the year line indicate the year of entry into circulation if this is different. If we start to put in all the coins the dates of entry into circulation or issue on the coins instead of the year that appears in them, we can go crazy trying to look for them in the catalog because when we get a coin, we will ALWAYS look for it by the year that appears in it. More examples where common sense has been used: N#99231 N#130341 N#117214
I was about to mention the Russian 2018 World Cup coins before I checked those links! This type was actually issued (and presumably minted) in 2016 (the date of issue on the page is currently erroneous; should be 21.12.2016), though due to the holiday season very few examples reached collectors before the new year. (I got mine in February 2017.)
So you agree to use the 2018 as the coin's year, but you want the issue date to be 21.12.2016? That corresponds to what OYNBCN and I also want
As many users says, I think that the year showed on the coin is the date we must use in the year line. Another good example of a new coin added to Numista catalog, 10,000 Pesos from Colombia:
Year on the coin: 2019
Year on year line and title: 2019
Comments: "While this coins was minted in 2019, it was issued on October 4th, 2021."
I think this is the correct way, but obvously I'm not the one that decides this kind of issues. I'm pretty sure that following the "official guide" path would only lead to a more confusing and less practical catalog.
Coin referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea, Marshall Islands, Moldova, Liberia and Spain
Banknote referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea and Spain
Απόσπασμα: "oynbcn"As many users says, I think that the year showed on the coin is the date we must use in the year line. Another good example of a new coin added to Numista catalog, 10,000 Pesos from Colombia:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces307310.html
Year on the coin: 2019
Year on year line and title: 2019
Comments: "While this coins was minted in 2019, it was issued on October 4th, 2021."
I think this is the correct way, but obvously I'm not the one that decides this kind of issues. I'm pretty sure that following the "official guide" path would only lead to a more confusing and less practical catalog.
Απόσπασμα: "oynbcn"As many users says, I think that the year showed on the coin is the date we must use in the year line. Another good example of a new coin added to Numista catalog, 10,000 Pesos from Colombia:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces307310.html
Year on the coin: 2019
Year on year line and title: 2019
Comments: "While this coins was minted in 2019, it was issued on October 4th, 2021."
I think this is the correct way, but obvously I'm not the one that decides this kind of issues. I'm pretty sure that following the "official guide" path would only lead to a more confusing and less practical catalog.
Also totally agree. We all assume coins are struck in the year that's written on the coin, but there's little proof about that and those Russian coins proof it's certainly not always true. In stead of doubting every date on every coin, it's far less confusing to just use the date on the coin, whether it's actually true or not.
Απόσπασμα: "oynbcn"I think this is the correct way, but obvously I'm not the one that decides this kind of issues. I'm pretty sure that following the "official guide" path would only lead to a more confusing and less practical catalog.
This is actually following the Numista guidelines, so I am not sure what the problem is here? The date when the coin was minted is shown on the coin.
Again I am a bit puzzled because this is what the Numista guidelines say as well...
Απόσπασμα: "Essor Prof"We all assume coins are struck in the year that's written on the coin, but there's little proof about that and those Russian coins proof it's certainly not always true. In stead of doubting every date on every coin, it's far less confusing to just use the date on the coin, whether it's actually true or not.
I think this is a valid point that Idolenz mentioned before as well. I think we can mention this in the guidelines too, that coins may be minted before or after the year shown on them. There is a common practice to do this, which you can see here: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces88029.html
I didn't think it occurs often enough to make it necessary to have this in the guidelines, but since it generated this discussion, it's probably useful to have this documented in the guidelines too.
Η κατάσταση άλλαξε σε Ολοκληρώθηκε.(Jarcek, 20 Ιουν 2022, 10:59)
The date when the coin was minted is shown on the coin. 