Revert United States Virgin Islands to Danish West Indies [επιλυμένο]

Recently the Danish West Indies was changed from being a sub-issuer to being a ruling authority. In my opinion it seems more inconvenient for the issuer to be officially named United States Virgin Islands when they have never and (likely) will never issue any coins (or banknotes) under their name. Every single coin/banknote under the issuer is from the Danish West Indies, so for the Danish West Indies to only be the ruling authority and not the issuer itself makes little sense to me. Some collectors might have coins/banknotes from the Danish West Indies, yet not know that its modern successor is the US Virgin Islands. I would therefore assume it might make it more difficult and confusing for more inexperienced collectors to add their items to their Numista profile as a result.

Only place this does not apply is for Exonumia, where there exist items from the US Virgin Islands. I do not think that justifies the confusion caused by this inconsistency elsewhere. Both for coins and banknotes only the Danish West Indies issued coins/banknotes. The Standard Catalog of World Coins recognizes Danish West Indies as an issuer, and I see no good reason for us to take another stance on this. If needed US Virgin Islands should be added to Exonumia only, opposed to affecting the two other (and presumably more used) catalogs.

In my opinion, as the referee for coins from the United States Virgin Islands (formerly Danish West Indies), I think it should once again be upgraded to being a sub-issuer. I also think it is worth considering relocating it to be a sub-issuer of Denmark instead, for practical and logical reasons. Swedish Pomerania is under Sweden despite being part of what is today Germany and Poland, so by the same logic, the Danish West Indies should also be under Denmark despite being part of what is today the United States. The Danish West Indies had nothing to do with and was independent of the United States government, so it seems impractical and contrary to common sense to put it under the United States instead of Denmark.

I therefore propose the following:

1. Revert the change and restore the Danish West Indies as a sub-issuer rather than a ruling authority.
2. Consider relocating the sub-issuer to be under Denmark instead of the United States, due to the lack of relevance to the United States regarding all coins and banknotes issued by the Danish West Indies.

On a completely unrelated note; when I tested the coins from the sub-issuer does not show up on the map, opposed to coins from Hawaii which has been working very nicely ever since it was introduced.

We already found a solution for that. Not exactly a revert but an improvement about periods of issuers. Will solve your issues :-)

Danish West Indies should be under ‘Denmark’ - along with the Faeroe Islands & Greenland.

Aidan.

I agree that the best place for the Danish West Indies to be located is under Denmark as a sub-issuer.

Issue very specific here in terms of DB is that DWI issued coins and USVI has Exonumia items. We do not want to have same territory duplicated in the DB even if it changed of name; but the tech solution we suggested is to display only the name on which an issuer issued coins if it didnt under its most recent name. It will solve your issue. Its planned in Xavier's roadmap. 

Sounds good 👍

I don’t understand how that is the most practical nor ideal way to organize it. There are several issuers (locations) that only exist within the Exonumia section, for example Kingdom of Atlantis N#98830.­ To me the most obvious and user-friendly solution is to have a sub-issuer Danish West Indies and a separate location for US Virgin Islands within Exonumia. US Virgin Islands does not belong within coins and banknotes and most likely never will since it is unrealistic that any territory of the US will ever mint their own and separate currency. I don’t even understand why we have gone to such great lengths to accommodate for in total 4 fantasy currencies minted in 2015 and 2022 when even the majority of Exonumia we have within the issuer originates from the Danish West Indies. This alternative would even avoid any duplication within the database. This is the equivalent to Portuguese India Exonumia being distinct from India Exonumia. They are to separate entities even if they today are the part of the same territory. US Virgin Islands should be its own Exonumia location and Danish West Indies should be its own sub-issuer under Denmark for all three categories. User-friendliness plays an important role here. When it comes to functionality, I cannot imagine it being any easier to manually correct and adjust an issuer name like that, instead of just using our already implemented functionality to divide them into two different issuers/locations as appropriate and in the same fashion as we do with any other colony.

Criticism aside, I’m glad at least something is being done even if not in the way I would prefer the most.

I can't even find Danish West Indies if searching the catalog. Doesn't make sense.

Thats funny so many changes lately  always it is clear (by the voting system) that the majority of users do not want or accept the criteria, so why this impetus to  turn Numista worse?

Please read my answers…

“tech solution we suggested is to display only the name on which an issuer issued coins if it didnt under its most recent name. It will solve your issue. Its planned in Xavier's roadmap. ”

T0r

Swedish Pomerania is under Sweden despite being part of what is today Germany

There is just a shortcut in Sweden section. Pomerania is correctly sorted in German states. 

Shortcuts are used in very few cases to help users find their coins, but we do not want to extend too much its use, as it would make the issuers list quite heavier

Xavier released mentionned new feature yesterday :-)
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/index.php?e=danish_west_indies_period&r=&ct=coin&im1=&im2=&tb=y&tc=y&tn=y&tp=y&tt=y&cat=y&ru=&ca=3&no=&v=&i=&b=&d=&u=&a=&dg=&m=&f=&t=&w=&mt=&g=&se=&c=&wi=&sw=&ie=

Compendium

Xavier released mentionned new feature yesterday :-)
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/index.php?e=danish_west_indies_period&r=&ct=coin&im1=&im2=&tb=y&tc=y&tn=y&tp=y&tt=y&cat=y&ru=&ca=3&no=&v=&i=&b=&d=&u=&a=&dg=&m=&f=&t=&w=&mt=&g=&se=&c=&wi=&sw=&ie=

Now we have a coin catalog!

Thank you to make the collectors life easier

T0r

I don’t understand how that is the most practical nor ideal way to organize it. There are several issuers (locations) that only exist within the Exonumia section, for example Kingdom of Atlantis N#98830.­ To me the most obvious and user-friendly solution is to have a sub-issuer Danish West Indies and a separate location for US Virgin Islands within Exonumia. US Virgin Islands does not belong within coins and banknotes and most likely never will since it is unrealistic that any territory of the US will ever mint their own and separate currency. I don’t even understand why we have gone to such great lengths to accommodate for in total 4 fantasy currencies minted in 2015 and 2022 when even the majority of Exonumia we have within the issuer originates from the Danish West Indies. This alternative would even avoid any duplication within the database. This is the equivalent to Portuguese India Exonumia being distinct from India Exonumia. They are to separate entities even if they today are the part of the same territory. US Virgin Islands should be its own Exonumia location and Danish West Indies should be its own sub-issuer under Denmark for all three categories. User-friendliness plays an important role here. When it comes to functionality, I cannot imagine it being any easier to manually correct and adjust an issuer name like that, instead of just using our already implemented functionality to divide them into two different issuers/locations as appropriate and in the same fashion as we do with any other colony.

I'm very pleased that something has been done so you can at least search up the Danish West Indies utilizing the search tool. However, I still feel it goes against logic with the current organization. Now the Danish West Indies is a sub-section of a sub-issuer that does not exist within coins and banknotes. For other sub-issuers I believe this is a great solution, however, for the Danish West Indies specifically I think we're still completely wrong. Danish West Indies should be under Denmark and separate from US Virgin Islands, and as a result US Virgin Islands should cease to exist as a sub-issuer for coins and banknotes. The reasoning and how exactly this should be done I detailed previously.

It does seem like we'll have to agree to disagree, though. Either way I'm grateful that it is now at least searchable. 

It was already searchable though.

Only difference relies in the appearance in the country list itself, and title of the page.

I agree that when a sub issuer is the only one to have coins or banknotes, it should appear as a main issuer in the country list. Its another development though.

Much better than it was :)

Hibernia

Much better than it was :)

🙏😄

😀👍

Should be under ‘Denmark’, not under the U.S.A..

Aidan.

BCNumismatics

Should be under ‘Denmark’, not under the U.S.A..

 

Aidan.

We do not place past territories in current countries issuers

Hello,
An adjustment has been done so that the United States Virgin Island doesn't appear in the list of issuers for coins.
The Danish West Indies are now listed directly under the United States, as the territory is currently part of the United States (similarly to Hawaii).