Number of members owning a particular date of a coin

11 posts

This message aims at: suggesting an idea to improve Numista

Status: Rejected
Upvotes: 5
Downvotes: 0

» Quick access to the last post

Currently, referees have the ability to see the number of members that own a particular date of a coin. so for instance, Mozambique k98 50 centavos shows:
1980 272 members
1981 6 members
1982 267 members

My quest for the past 30 years has been to eliminate coins that do not exist, that are in the Krause catalog that Numista adopted when it started. Have you ever tried to prove something does not exist? This is why Bigfoot rumors persist.

I would estimate there are 200-300 coins from 1975-2000 in Krause and Numista that are not real and should be removed. If we were allowed to use the above tool, many of these could be eliminated. It also would give a much better indication of relative scarcity of a date than the current Numista rarity index.

The only drawback I see is how fast this info can be retrieved. What do you think.

ERNIE
Hi Ernie,

If you have a list of some coins/years that are doubtful or doesn't exist (besides the KM number), you can send them to me. I'm already working on this to eliminate unproven coins/years.
Sapientiae plerumque stultitia est comes.
Si c'est un grand plaisir d'être reconnu par ses amis, c'est peut-être encore plus flatteur d'être reconnu par ses adversaires.
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken.
Hi Ernie, I'm pretty sure we'll have in our catalogue a lot of non existing dates, but it's so difficult to prove that.
And if we have coins/dates none of our members own it's still no proof the coin doesn't exist. Of course it increases the possibility a lot, but it isn't really proof. Nevertheless, I truly support all the efforts someone makes to make our catalogue as accurate as possible.
And even coins/dates nobody owns doesn't exclude other mistakes. Do you remember the quest about the Irish 2 Scilling 1969 (https://en.numista.com/forum/topic41628.html)? It was a date at least 5 members had ticked (including you). But in the end, after more than 50 forum posts, it turned out all those members ticked the wrong box and the decision was made the coin doesn't exist. A lot of research for only 1 coin.
An additional problem will arise when false years get removed but the people who made the change (referee/member) no longer are active on the site. The next person with some catalog will request the addition of said year, same goes for other changes which go against literature ... it's a vicious cycle 8~
I think that it is fine to remove a year of we don't think it exists. If someone wants to add it again, they don't need to ask the previous referee, they just need to show a picture to prove that it exists. It's not that difficult to add a date. I always ask for pictures before adding dates.
I have been able to do that for Lebanon and Syria, just because I collect their coinage by year and type.

However this will be a challenge as not so many people collect by year and type... but those collectors should be encouraged to update/maintain their country catalogs along with the Referees!
JustforFun...
Quote: "Idolenz"​An additional problem will arise when false years get removed but the people who made the change (referee/member) no longer are active on the site. The next person with some catalog will request the addition of said year, same goes for other changes which go against literature ... it's a vicious cycle 8~
​Should a referee ask for evidence? I have been asked in the past to provide such thing. e.g. Photo of the coin, link to the National Bank, etc.
JustforFun...
Quote: "JustforFun"
​​Should a referee ask for evidence? I have been asked in the past to provide such thing. e.g. Photo of the coin, link to the National Bank, etc.
​Technically a proof shall be submitted with any modification request, so yes the referee would have it when approving/rejecting a request. As nthn mentions, some referees are also asking for pictures on top of it.

But we're all humans so mistakes can still happen :D.
Sapientiae plerumque stultitia est comes.
Si c'est un grand plaisir d'être reconnu par ses amis, c'est peut-être encore plus flatteur d'être reconnu par ses adversaires.
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken.
Quote: "Idolenz"​An additional problem will arise when false years get removed but the people who made the change (referee/member) no longer are active on the site. The next person with some catalog will request the addition of said year, same goes for other changes which go against literature ... it's a vicious cycle 8~
​True, a very vicious cycle X-D
We're discussing the possibility to have mintage modification within file history to help a bit on that. Maybe combining this with some archive accessible to referees could help too. Any thoughts on this?
Sapientiae plerumque stultitia est comes.
Si c'est un grand plaisir d'être reconnu par ses amis, c'est peut-être encore plus flatteur d'être reconnu par ses adversaires.
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken.
The way I'm currently dealing with these reported unproven coins/years:
  • I'm reported some coin/year thought not to exist (anybody can contact me; no matter the reference catalog: KM, Gadoury, RIC, etc.).
  • I check with the referee.
  • I contact each single member owning the coin/year or having a comment for it. And of course reply to each single feedback I receive. (I let you guess the number of PM this implies :8D(8).
  • I ask for reliable proof within 7 days
  • By reliable proof I mean: pictures, links (ebay, wikipedia, etc. are not considered), research papers, museum collections, mint statements, etc.

2 outcomes from then:
  • No reliable proof: the coin/year is deleted. 99% of the time (to date), these are mistakes from members (wrong line, wrong identification, etc.) or results of a line move combined with a bug.
  • Some reliable proof: the proof is shared with referee, on forum, reporting member (etc.) so there can be discussion about it and this can be confirmed. And of course the proof is kept within our archive and can be developed in case more proof come up.

I will create a separate thread specifically for this purpose in the coming days/weeks but for now there are few things that need to be finished/taken care of first.

If anybody has coins/years to report, feel free to let me know. And of course, any other thoughts/ideas/comments are welcome on this!
Sapientiae plerumque stultitia est comes.
Si c'est un grand plaisir d'être reconnu par ses amis, c'est peut-être encore plus flatteur d'être reconnu par ses adversaires.
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken.
This idea is also tracked here: https://en.numista.com/forum/topic72983.html
Status changed to Rejected (Xavier, 9-Feb-2019, 16:15)

» Forum policy

Used time zone is UTC+1:00.
Current time is 23:15.