Canadian Quarter Error Date Addition Request

Hello, 

For the coin above, 1969 is listed as a Nickel date alone, however, like the dime error variant of that date, a type in 80% silver (Heritage Auctions link below) exists. This request is to create an error date in the circulation 80% quarter page that reflects this.

N#3863

N#368

https://coins.ha.com/itm/canada/canada-elizabeth-ii-mint-error-struck-on-incorrect-planchet-silver-25-cents-1969-ms64-prooflike-/a/271934-36302.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

I just opened the yearlines, you can add the year.

Hello, 

A referee has finally examined the proposed edit and denied it stating that “I prefer not to put it as info because it doesn't appear in any catalog" and “I was informed that the grading companies do not verify the authenticity of the coins but only give the grading so we do not know if this is a real coin transmitted by the Royal Canadian Mint”. I messaged the referee and explained how grading companies have to guarantee their products for modern coinage (part of the reason they are even used by some) and that some ancient categories are not given the same guarantee (1969 is not an ancient date). I also explained how a coin not being catalogued does not deny its existence. There a number of uncatalogued coins which still exist. This is in fact more common for error coins. However, we know 1969 errors have existed, so the point is a bit mute. They did not respond after two messages, and thus, I am coming back to forums as there is no way to appeal the addition of a date. Who do I approach further. 

Thanks, 

Rajbarage.

Hello,

I'm confused. 

Error coins are not to be listed in the catalog. They can be mentioned in the comment field. That is what the guidelines state.

rsirian1

Hello,

I'm confused. 

 

Error coins are not to be listed in the catalog. They can be mentioned in the comment field. That is what the guidelines state.

 

 

 

 

There are however a number of errors listed in the catalogue with their own date range. I remember going over the catalogue but I don't remember this rule, will look over.

Rajbarage

rsirian1

Hello,

I'm confused. 

 

Error coins are not to be listed in the catalog. They can be mentioned in the comment field. That is what the guidelines state.

 

 

 

 

There are however a number of errors listed in the catalogue with their own date range. I remember going over the catalogue but I don't remember this rule, will look over.

Oh, there are.  I was recently asked if one that already existed should be removed I answered, “Either that or modify the guidelines to address when exceptions are allowed. Otherwise every country/referee can do whatever they want however they want.   Inconsistencies in a catalog make them less reliable.”  

Here's the guidelines on mint errors:

Variations of a coin

Variations are random or unintentional differences in the physical appearance or properties of a coin that occur during the minting process, after the production of the die. For example, mint errors, random alignment or edge orientation, slight variations of the planchet in weight or size, different colouration of the alloy, etc. These are common for ancient and medieval hammered coins. Error coins are also variations.

In the Numista catalogue, the variations are not listed as mintage lines. They can be mentioned in the comment field. By exception, mules are listed in the catalogue as separate types. 

Two famous ones are the US 1943 Bronze penny and the US 1944 Steel penny.  My comment above also applies to these.

rsirian1

Rajbarage

rsirian1

Hello,

I'm confused. 

 

Error coins are not to be listed in the catalog. They can be mentioned in the comment field. That is what the guidelines state.

 

 

 

 

There are however a number of errors listed in the catalogue with their own date range. I remember going over the catalogue but I don't remember this rule, will look over.

Oh, there are.  I was recently asked if one that already existed should be removed I answered, “Either that or modify the guidelines to address when exceptions are allowed. Otherwise every country/referee can do whatever they want however they want.   Inconsistencies in a catalog make them less reliable.”  

Here's the guidelines on mint errors:

Variations of a coin

Variations are random or unintentional differences in the physical appearance or properties of a coin that occur during the minting process, after the production of the die. For example, mint errors, random alignment or edge orientation, slight variations of the planchet in weight or size, different colouration of the alloy, etc. These are common for ancient and medieval hammered coins. Error coins are also variations.

 

In the Numista catalogue, the variations are not listed as mintage lines. They can be mentioned in the comment field. By exception, mules are listed in the catalogue as separate types. 

 

Two famous ones are the US 1943 Bronze penny and the US 1944 Steel penny.  My comment above also applies to these.

Alright, but this also applies to off-metal types? The 1969 quarters were only meant to be minted in Nickel, but the error is in metal composition (80% silver, as with earlier issues). This has previously been added to Dimes of the same date that were also minted in silver instead of nickel, and for the 50% quarter issues struck in 1969 also by accident. The same is present for the nickel half dollars into the 1970s. 

From your reply, the American Cents are part of the exception? 

The guidelines don't allow for any exceptions other than mules.  If off-metal strikes (mint errors) are to be allowed by the guidelines the guidelines should state that. 

I'm not trying to be difficult. I don't think what's allowed and what's not allowed should be ambiguous and be dependent on the particular referee for a particular country at a particular time.  

Off-metal strikes, especially older precious metal ones are not automatically errors but made deliberately for dignitaries or rich collectors. An off metal strike error would be if the wrong planchet was used from different coins made in parallel (but even here it could be intentional by some bored employee or under the pretence of selling oddities). Don't know in witch category this one would fall. Were there silver coins made at the same time with what seems the same diameter? 

Idolenz

Off-metal strikes, especially older precious metal ones are not automatically errors but made deliberately for dignitaries or rich collectors. An off metal strike error would be if the wrong planchet was used from different coins made in parallel (but even here it could be intentional by some bored employee or under the pretence of selling oddities). Don't know in witch category this one would fall. Were there silver coins made at the same time with what seems the same diameter? 

This is considered an error, see this: 

https://coins.ha.com/itm/canada/canada-elizabeth-ii-mint-error-struck-on-incorrect-planchet-silver-25-cents-1969-ms64-prooflike-/a/271934-36302.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

For this post the request is to add a 1969 year line to this coin N#368 which was only minted in 1965 and 1966. Something like this I guess:

I believe the guidelines say that the error coins (wrong material) may be mentioned in the comments of the coin that was intended to be made.  N#3863

Ah so not wrong coin planchettes but old ones, that explains the right diameter. How could this accidentally happen when they weren't used any longer for a few years?

Who knows? Somebody threw in a bunch of silver planchets in with the nickel planchets.

Idolenz

Ah so not wrong coin planchettes but old ones, that explains the right diameter. How could this accidentally happen when they weren't used any longer for a few years?

Its happened a number of times in Canada, and sometimes in the States. The mints weren't exactly perfect and in the new coinage rushes, it isn't inconceivable that some were left over and minted on later. This happened in Canada into the 1970s with the half dollar. 

Rajbarage

 

This happened in Canada into the 1970s with the half dollar. 

As detailed here:  Lovely absurd in Canadian metal of 50 cents