Coins X Exonumia

I will start a new thread because the main Numista new changes are getting a lot of crossed messages.

To improve the catalog, things should be like before, coins with some degree of officiality totally separated to round items.

For instance:

This Lundy coin have a background history and some degree of officiality, it is a somekind expensive item sought by collectors:

N#18004

This is a rip-off to take money from collectors:

N#42692

There were some research behind and they are not both the same fantasy piece, but now they are in the same box.

This will happen with a lot of coins/exonumia

How to fix?

Separating a menu for coins (and more official coinage) and a menu for all the exonumia.

Now if I want to search only official coins I have to keep clicking a bunch of places and figuring out what is what

Geison

Now if I want to search only official coins I have to keep clicking a bunch of places and figuring out what is what

 

 

Yes but only once. Your selection stays put until you change it.

rsirian1

Geison

Now if I want to search only official coins I have to keep clicking a bunch of places and figuring out what is what

 

 

Yes but only once. Your selection stays put until you change it.

I (and many more) collect only official coins or coins issued by places with partial recognition, micronations or places that used the coins or recognize the emission, not just tottally fantasy pieces like can lids written a name on it.

So, somtimes now we have to click fantasy (to check if I had that Seborga, Lundy,  Artsak, Sahaara, etc) and unclick in the next search, because we don't want to see coins of Atlantis.

Now the micronations section looks like a personal sales catalog of Joseph Lang, who made tons of coins of “exotic places” just to lure collectors.

Before the Numista Armageddon we had two kinds of Micronations: Those who had some background history in its emission and the fantasy pieces, that is why we could find Cocos Keeling in the main catalog and also the  Cocos Keeling collectors rip-off in the exonumia catalog. 

Now there is a problem because looks like everything is in the same box of “Fantasy”, what is, IMHO, a childish name for some coins that had or have a historical context, even with people dying because of it.

Btw, Xavier said there will be changes… Waiting for it.

Another points:

 - Exonumia discussion forum is now a bit lost, the ordinary collector can not even know what the word Exonumia means, since will just search a coin whatever filter is using. The word is not mentioned anymore

- The novice collector won't even know what these filters are, even expert collectors still discussing what terms to use… token? Local coins? medal? What should I check? 🤪

Sorry my long complaining Manifesto, even knowing is a free site with tons of efforts of the team group. But sometimes is good to know the opinion of the community.

This may be duplicating what's just been said…

Just noticed that we still have an Exonumia section in the Forum, but no Exonumia option when we try to sort through the catalogue.  Any chance or adding Exonumia to the catalogue sort option rather than removing it from the Forum please?

Hello,

I'm happy to discuss the categories and make adjustments if there is consensus for a better solution.

The logic to have fantasy coins next to official coins is that the difference between them becomes more and more narrow.

Some official mints produce numismatic products that have little in common with coins, even if they are officially coins
Example: N#380384

Some countries issue coins in currencies that don't even exist:
N#6752

Some private companies buy the right to use the name of a country on their products so that they can be considered as official coins:

N#276352

Some people produce things that are very similar to coins without bothering buying the right to use the name of a country:

N#12524 

Some groups of people claim to be a country and produce coins in the name of that country:
N#44500

Some people dont' bother claiming a country and still produce coins:

N#98310

Contemporary coins are messy. We should embrace this mess and do our best to make sense of it.

It's so easy to buy the name “Niue” and put it on any crappy product; I would not stick to that to determine what is a coin or not.

We should probably discuss too whether we want to keep the 3 forum categories for coins, banknotes and exonumia. Let's have a different forum thread for that.

Thank you for the honor of your answer. I will show your statement in our group of 250 collectors to see what people think.

I'll just throw this as a suggestion to make Numista different from other platforms in making the catalogue more didactic than you ever find online. I suggest to have a major, easy, division between two categories: monetary and non-monetary objects (as I said in another thread). 

If it's used in transactions to obtain goods or services, it's monetary. If it's only an advertizing piece or a souvenir or a display item (e.g. Niue's clown-coins), then it's non-monetary. Then of course the rest of the sub-categories would have to be distributed accordingly.

Any item that falls in both categories would belong by default to the monetary object category.

Just a suggestion!

Why do I say “didactic”? Because users will quickly learn to know the difference and, hopefully, learn to spend their money wisely — especially inexperienced collectors.

Also, my suggestion has to do with function, not with outward form. A circulating dollar coin has more in common with a criculating dollar note than with a fantasy “dollar” coin, even of the same diameter and metallic composition.

Also known as “Coins” x “Exonumia”.

I guess only removing micronations from the fantasy menu will work for ahwile for most of the coins. 

Each case should be discussed, as Xavier said, it is complex.

But much that is currently in “coins” would fall in “non-monetary” according to my categorization. 

Likewise, mush that is currently “exonumia” would fall in “monetary”. The Hudson's Bay tokens, for example, and many many other objects actually used to obtain goods or services.

I don't expect my idea to be adopted, but I though it could help to refine the definitions and categorizations of what is currently in the catalogue — hundreds of thousands of objects.

I think it is necessary to separate what has a certain aspect of recognition — someone claiming authority fort the emission of the coinage, whether internationally recognized issuer  or not. That authority could be a family, dinasty, higher in command, government. 

Due to collectors' habits, these coins are sometimes more “desirable” because they could carry a background story. This aspect becomes evident as some coins have higher prices, while others do not. For example, people are willing to pay a lot for a Sealand coin, but most collectors wouldn’t even take a Westeros coin for free.

It is not the site's role to determine whether a nation is official or not; that is a matter for politics.

Those coins would stay in the Pretend Issuer section (Proposed by Xavier) and count as an issuer in the page map of the user.

Any coin could be subject of study and research, as we have done before in multiple forum threads.

Actually, my suggestion could be harmonized with what you say, because some types of coins would fall in the non-monetary category. Depending on how one selects all objects called “coins” he/she could include or exclude all non-monetary coins.

I don't expect my idea will be adopted. I use Numista to enter all my items, but for Canadian money (circulating coins and tokens and banknotes) I have an Excel document adapted to my needs which is my main checklist. Leaving modesty aside for a moment, it's so efficient (with links up and down to and from an index on each page) that I hope to make it available widely once I feel it's fully edited.

I also started a New Zealand list where I removed all non-circulating years of their circulating coins. It's very clean. If you collect only circulating coins, you see exactly what you have and what you still need to get, without those dead “proof” / “sets only” / etc. lines.

I see now Artsakh was fixed, separating the official with the fantasy

Could be fixed also Lundy? So much research was done to sort them in the past, now Joseph Lang, the infamous coin seller is poping everywhere.

I see the hyperlink already have the separation but they are all mixed together:

Geison

I see now Artsakh was fixed, separating the official with the fantasy

Could be fixed also Lundy? So much research was done to sort them in the past, now Joseph Lang, the infamous coin seller is poping everywhere.

 

I see the hyperlink already have the separation but they are all mixed together:

They're only mixed together if you select “face value” as the sort order “type” will separate micronation/fantasy.

inc7007

Geison

I see now Artsakh was fixed, separating the official with the fantasy

Could be fixed also Lundy? So much research was done to sort them in the past, now Joseph Lang, the infamous coin seller is poping everywhere.

 

I see the hyperlink already have the separation but they are all mixed together:

 

They're only mixed together if you select “face value” as the sort order “type” will separate micronation/fantasy.

 

Actually will only draw this line if listed by type,  face value, ruling authority, date and reference will list all mixed together.

For those who only collect official coins, that is terrible.

But how does Numista determine which micronations or limited-recognition states qualify as having genuine sovereignty? (They  were  separated before,  with research made  for each one on the forum)

That is a big statment, so Seborga, Sealand, Christiania, etc… are/were crazy liers? Who is the authority to say that?