This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I have nominated €2 commemorative coins for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 04:11, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:Leu. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:44, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

2009 Charlton Catalogue of Canadian Coins I believe the mintage of the 1998 set: mintage is/was 661 not 527 1999 set: mintage is/was 495 not 434 2001 set: mintage is/was 448 not 336 2002 set: mintage is/was 344 not 700

N.B. I bought many of the $200 Gold coins directly from the Royal Canadian Mint (RCM). One of them the 1998 White Buffalo had a Certificate of Authenticity (COA) numbered higher than the number minted 11,187 versus 7,419. When I enquired of the RCM I was told thet the COA number does not reflect the number struck nor the order of striking. I thought that their comments were relevant in light of the importance some collectors place on a low numbered certificate. I am also surprised that the COA number can be higher than the mintage as this would provide something of a small window for fraud/counterfeit. Gpbaile (talk) 18:18, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Could an editor take a look at the quality scale tag for Talk:American_Silver_Eagle and possibly move the article up to a higher quality scale? Currently it is tagged as "Start-Class" but has been edited a lot since then. — Diiscool (talk) 20:47, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I have changed it to B class, but anyone is allowed to rate an article; it doesn't have to be from the project. Reywas92^Talk 21:35, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

The special permission from the Bank of England to display File:Pound sterling banknotes fan.png, File:Bank_Of_England10.png, and File:Bank Of England20.gif are due to lapse in 4 days on Feb 3rd (and in the case of the first image, has already lapsed). Can someone in the know go about getting permission renewed for another year? --Cybercobra (talk) 07:04, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

User (smile) wants to forge a rare historical coin. He has a new press die of reasonable quality but shies from using modern alloys. Instead, he takes a not-so-rare historical coin of the same size and same hallmark as the target, smooths the surfaces, and uses it as blank medium. The metal is genuine, the coin is fake.

Is there a short English name for this kind of forgery? TIA, NVO (talk) 21:24, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi everyone! €2 commemorative coins is up for review as a featured article, with the review here. It has been moved to the FARC section, which is where editors enter keep or delist declarations. Currently there is a split over the quality of the referencing. Interested editors are invited to comment, especially regarding the questioned sources, so that this article can finish moving through the process. Thanks! Dana boomer (talk) 16:29, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

a question has been raised in an A-class review of Order of Saint Hubert (Bavarian) about the value of Ducats and Reichsthalers vis a vis the US dollar. A gold ducat = 5 florins 10 kreuzer in the part of the Holy Roman Empire considered in the article. The reviewer wants to know what that equals in today's currency. The gold imperial ducat was 60 assay. Can anyone help with this? Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:13, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

It depends on bullion value verses wage and what that wage could buy. Also the type of economy, technology, social structure would come into play. So it is very hard to get s definitive answer for this one. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 05:22, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I have done some new articles for the Hong Kong dollar, if somone has time can you please go over it. Thanks Template:HK currency and coinage, Enlil Ninlil (talk) 05:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

is a 1966 10 cent worth more than 10 cents —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.187.19.89 (talk) 03:41, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Uncirculated it is worth more, but in Australia any other grade is face value. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 05:19, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

What is the copyright status of UK coins from over 50 years ago? Some are tagged as {{PD-UKGov}} and on Wikimedia Commons; others are tagged as such but are said to be in copyright and fair use in the US, though if they are PD-UKGov, they are out of copyright in the US also according to the template and links; then some are only tagged as fair use. —innotata 14:41, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

As far as I know, because this wiki does not obey national boundaries, what ever country the currency comes from those laws from that country apply to their use. So the U.S law would be null and void on this issue, on this site. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 06:23, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually, Wikimedia projects do obey boundaries, to some extent, and they are based in the United States. As regards media, they must be public domain the United States: if they are PD elsewhere but not in the US, they are fair use. Media also must be PD in their source country for Wikimedia Commons, but not necessarily for Wikipedia. In this case, this e-mail linked from the template seems to state clearly that works in expired crown copyright are PD worldwide. I think this should be clear enough for most of the coin images in question to be moved to Wikimedia Commons, but I would like to confirm this; I now think Commons's village pump would be a better place to bring this up. —innotata 14:18, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I think commons:Commons:Currency#United_Kingdom is clear enough to be certain that any simple scans are permissible. —innotata 14:26, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Here's somewhere people from this project can help: File:Englishpenny1967.jpg is not free, but it can be replaced by a penny from over 50 years ago. —innotata 14:45, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

There are lots of other Elizabeth coins we don't have, the halfpenny for instance. —innotata 14:50, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Well Innotata, the e-mail you provided seems to indicate that the where the material originated from, those are the laws that need to be followed. What is the wiki policy on this? I will find it. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 06:18, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I think pages like Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights are what you are looking for—just search for "copyright" in the project namespace here and on Wikimedia Commons. —innotata 20:49, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Yesterday I was lucky enough to attend the Backstage Pass event at the British Museum. It was part of a wider project of engagement with Wikipedia (see WP:GLAM/BM) that has seen them take on a temporary Wikipedian In Residence, User:Witty lama. They see Wikipedia as sharing many of their aims, and they want to encourage involvement by Wikipedians with the museum, and vice versa. They have even offered 5 prizes of £100 at the BM shop for featured articles on BM topics - in any language. The museum has huge holdings of coins and medals, so you should be able to find something to write about - one of the many hordes of coins for instance.
Most Wikipedians probably don't know that the BM has curators dedicated to answering phone/email questions about their specialist areas, and most of their department libraries welcome visitors doing bona fide research - and they now seem to recognise that editing Wikipedia articles, especially about items in the BM's collections, counts for those purposes. I know that the first question most people will have is "Can we have images of all their stuff?" and I'd just ask people to be patient on that front. Let's just say that the museum are well aware of our hopes there, there are staff who see advantages to the museum in doing something, and it's being discussed at the highest level. On the other hand it's a very complex area that needs to be handled diplomatically. Literally in some cases - foreign governments can get very touchy about the dissemination of images of artifacts relating to their cultural history, and the museum needs to respect those concerns.
So for the moment the focus is on using the BM's huge resources of books, expertise etc to improve article content, and hopefully that will include articles being peer-reviewed by BM staff. Some of them are quite nervous about doing stuff on Wikipedia, a mixture of fear of professional ridicule, nervousness about the technical aspects, stories of rapid reverts of good-faith edits and just general culture shock - it's a very different world to the one they come from. So I'd ask everyone to look after any BM people that you see around the place, Wikipedia can gain a lot from their involvement and it would be a shame if they're discouraged for any reason. As I mentioned above, WP:GLAM/BM is the clearing house for the BM's involvement with Wikipedia, and I suggest that further questions/comments are directed there. Le Deluge (talk) 14:26, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

There is a move request at Japanese yen involving former project titleing guidelines. Discuss at Talk:Japanese yen — AjaxSmack 03:18, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi, everyone. Please comment here: Talk:Indian rupee sign - Richard Cavell (talk) 02:11, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

There is a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Featured_picture_candidates#Categories_of_nominations_that_are_defacto_banned that may interest you. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 13:48, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

The peer review is here, goal is to get it to FAC early next month. We do not presently have any Featured Articles on coins, since the article on the 2 euro commemorative coins got demoted.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:08, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

After a successful peer review, I have nominated it for Featured Article. Feedback is welcome, and the nomination may be found here. Thanks in advance.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:53, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi all, see Talk:1949_Ambato_earthquake. Does one of you perhaps know how to determine an exchange rate of a currency that is not in use anymore? The flow of prose in this article would benefit from some sort of context about how much 250,000 Ecuadorian sucre are - better still, how much money that was in 1949, or how much it would be today, adapted for inflation. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Pgallert (talk) 17:47, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello everyone,

I added a lot of external links to specific resources located at http://www.usacoinbook.com/ , only to have them all deleted. This is one of the best US coin resources around. For instance, I went to the "Three Cent Pieces" Wikipedia article and added this page as an external link: http://www.usacoinbook.com/coins/three-cents/silver-three-cent/ . Is this legal? I would like numismatic members to check out this awesome site. Wickland (talk) 08:23, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps we would have been more receptive to this if you weren't WP:SPAMMING the articles with a for-profit coin sales website that lists coin prices rather than something encyclopedically useful. Reywas92^Talk 16:09, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

It's not an entire for-profit website. Did you even LOOK at it? You might understand what I'm talking about if you read my post and look at the link I provided. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wickland (talk • contribs) 18:28, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Also, these "coin prices" are numismatic values of coins. For example, if you view the external links at this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half_dollar_%28United_States_coin%29 you will see this: http://www.coinfacts.com/half_dollars/kennedy_half_dollars/kennedy_half_dollars.html It shows all the same information that the link I provided has (except theirs is 4 years outdated) and they don't have the "Red Book" of prices so people can see what their coins are worth.

These "coin prices" are not storefront dealer prices, they are encyclopedic guides for collectors to find what their coins are worth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wickland (talk • contribs) 18:42, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the comment about existing links. I have removed the EL sections from a couple of articles. Most of them might merit some scrutiny. --John (talk) 19:00, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I understand now, I will stop posting links to this site in Wikipedia. This site seemed like such a great resource so please take a look at it and use it as a reference if you like it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wickland (talk • contribs) 19:18, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

This is not an encyclopedic reference, just "numismatic values", as you call it. It's pretty clear that you are simply trying to advertise your website, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. Thank you. Reywas92^Talk 19:52, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Also posted at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#Reproduction of Australian Banknotes & Coins, discussion here.

I've started a template Template:Non-free currency-AU-Note with information about a general permission for reproductions of Australian banknotes, using information from the Reserve Bank of Australia. I've placed it on File:100_Australian_dollars_front.jpg, but can't get to the commons banknotes File:AUS$20 Mary Reibey.jpg and File:AustraliaPNew-5Dollars-(20)05-donatedowl f-1-.jpg at the moment. I imagine there are many other images of Australian Banknotes on Wikipedia - we could start with Banknotes of the Australian dollar.

I've also started one for Template:Non-free currency-AU-Coin with information about applying for permission to reproduce Australian coins. Since the Mint reserves permission, a free-use rationale is required. Some of the existing ones are incorrect as they assume that a photographic (2D) representation is not copyrighted by the Mint.

I've tackled most of the coins on Coins of the Australian dollar, but I'm not sure about pre-1969 coins, which the Royal Australian Mint doesn't own the copyright on. Who does? twilsonb (talk) 05:30, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

For the AU Coins copyright question, some users (e.g. at File:1966_australian_50_cent_piece_circular.jpg) seem to think that the Mint's lack of ownership pre-1969 implies that no-one owns the copyright. Seems tenuous to me... twilsonb (talk) 05:34, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I was wrong - copyright before 1960 has expired - see Template:PD-Australia. twilsonb (talk) 13:55, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, Crown Copyright is 50 years. In practice, any predecimal Australian coin is PD in Australia, as there was no originality in changing the date from 1960 to 1961, unless I am mistaken all post-1960 predecimal Australian coins were to designs made before 1960.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:13, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

I have encountered a number of articles on orders, decorations and medals which have been tagged to WP:NUMIS. My understanding is that while specific orders, decorations and medals fall with the field of exonumia, they are nevertheless out of scope for WP:NUMIS as they are covered by WP:ODM. Notwithstanding, defining articles such as Medals and Order (honour) have sponsorship by both projects. A potential grey area is early medals/medallions issued occasionally before the modern versions became prevalent (ie before they were issued with ribbons). By my calculation, there are about 110 articles on specific ODM that have a WP:NUMIS banner which will be removed if the Project is leaving these to WP:ODM. If WP:NUMIS wants to cover all ODM, this will result in duplication for the entire list of ODM articles which is currently running at over 2300 tagged articles and rising. My thinking is it is better left for WP:ODM as a complementary. Before I start doing any wholesale changes, I am seeking WP:NUMIS' view. Cheers, AusTerrapin (talk) 15:13, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello, would anyone know what File:Byzantine golden coin.jpg is? Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:34, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

On the left side there is ΑΛΕΣΙΩ ΔΕΣΠΟΤΗ (Alessios) on the right ΤΩ ΚΟΜΗΝΩ. (= Alessios despot, of the Comnenians) May be Alexius II or III. For the title look at despot. If is right was struck when he was the heir-apparent to the throne. --Carlo Morino aka zi' Carlo 15:37, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Numismatics for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 03:35, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Numismatic articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Sunday, November 14th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

If you have already provided feedback, we deeply appreciate it. For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 16:35, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Check the table at Multi-speed Europe#Overview of degrees of integration by country. Bosnian column, eurozone row: "(fixed rate 1998 / adopting in 2013)". What is this supposed to mean? There is no source given & I have not heard of anyone else claiming that BAM will be replaced by EUR anytime soon. There is another comment at Talk:Bosnia and Herzegovina convertible mark#suceeded by euro which suggests that the BAM article contained a similar statement at some point. Is this information really correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.247.11.156 (talk) 22:12, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

I've been doing work on various Category:Currency templates (eg {{JPY}} and {{AUD}}. So far the templates have pretty much existed separately from each other. Would it make sense to bring them altogether under the Numismatics project?  Stepho  (talk) 04:54, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I was checking some of the Wiki articles about U.S. coins, and I came across the article for Standing Liberty quarters. The article is obviously collector-oriented. I'm pretty new at Wikipedia and I don't pretend to be an expert at all, but shouldn't the articles just present the facts about coins (or any subject really) without going too deeply into the subject of collector value and rarity? I would have edited the article, but I wasn't sure if I should remove some of the SLQ collector-oriented information or not.-RHM22 (talk) 03:18, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

The "type" set should include 1836 & 1839 silver dollars as both were released to circulation. On the other hand, the 4 dollar gold piece was not released to general circulation, unless you count the 1879 pieces which apparently were distributed to various congressmen. In that case, you should indicate a one year circulating issue. The coiled hair stella did not circulate at all, so I agree that there should not be two types of $4 gold pieces. Artworks144 (talk) 23:37, 6 December 2010 (UTC)