For the last one (id=19 -Huygens) the coins in these set are all containg the metal symbol; but when there are sets with one or more coins wiithout those metal-symbols; should we have to make another set? in that case we can getting eight(8) different sets!!
Not sure what you mean with “containing metal symbols” (as the set has not been approved yet … but it sounds like you are describing sets where wrong coins have been added. Those would be errors, and as with coins/banknotes, would also not list error sets :-)
When you was looking at he coin(s) you could see what I ment.
But NOT looking you don't know what you are talking about.
There is NO error! Only different minting.
We don't even know on which coins we should look at… so it's normal that nobody know what you are meaning…
The set you created is not visible until it's approved so we don't know which coins it cointains:
Anyway, I hope that Admins will check all the questions in this topic and they will set-up a clear rules for set section.
Wanted to add that set of Germany 2002 D Starter Kit with the issue of 11.600.000 pieces and i can add ma maximum of 1.000.000 pieces, can that be modified?
For me, this Starter Kit makes more sense in Sets new section than a Coincard for a single-type coin that only comes in this type of packaging. It's the same as collector coins that come in boxes (if the Coincard is present, the box must be present).
Sets should be restricted to one presentation type with a minimum of two coins. In the case of Coincards, only coins that, in addition to Coincards, are also presented in other ways (or that also have coins of that type and year for circulation), as is the case with San Marino, Vatican, and other 2-Euro commemorative coins, should be accepted.
Creating a special page for this Coincard doesn't add anything; it's just repeating what already exists: a coin that is ONLY issued on Coincard, whose photo is already in Comments and is commented in the year line.
Wanted to add that set of Germany 2002 D Starter Kit with the issue of 11.600.000 pieces and i can add ma maximum of 1.000.000 pieces, can that be modified?
Is this a coin set, though? 🤔
I agree with the others, it best to wait for clear guidelines before adding stuff.
It's official, it's UNC and issued by National Bank, so why not?
I’m adding a set that includes banknotes, but the mint is automatically set incorrectly. As seen in the photo, it points to a location in France, but the correct mint is Korea Minting and Security Printing Corporation.
When I added a coin set before, it showed the mint correctly. Is this issue because the set includes banknotes?
Because it's a slippy-slope, any official bag of unc coins could be considered ‘a set’.
I would say starter kits are a bit different. They are a one-time occasion, contain one or multiple complete circulation issues, should be issued in limited amounts in obviously marked packaging and probably their overall number should be small (not many countries issue(d) them).
I agree also that no sense to creat a set for the individual coin issued in card, PNC or box. This can be like today - simply commented in comment section and no need to double it.
However as Xavier wrote few days ago: "We define sets as official packaging from the mint containing one or several numismatic items. It contains only new items (not repackaging of older coins). Sets include proof sets, mint sets, coincards, rolls, etc."
So I guess coincards are included… and rolls too, so mint bags probably also.
Let's wait for the guidelines for sets. We waited for sets section years, I can wait couple of weeks more ;-)
I agree also that no sense to creat a set for the individual coin issued in card, PNC or box. This can be like today - simply commented in comment section and no need to double it.
However as Xavier wrote few days ago: "We define sets as official packaging from the mint containing one or several numismatic items. It contains only new items (not repackaging of older coins). Sets include proof sets, mint sets, coincards, rolls, etc."
So I guess coincards are included… and rolls too, so mint bags probably also.
Let's wait for the guidelines for sets. We waited for sets section years, I can wait couple of weeks more ;-)
Why only official packaging sets? I would dare you that there are also non-official sets also worthy of Numista.
Why only official packaging sets? I would dare you that there are also non-official sets also worthy of Numista.
LP
I agree with this. I am going to put together a set consisting of coins I want to swap as a unit. It will make it much easier for my swap partner to choose one set rather than selecting 15 individual coins.
Why only official packaging sets? I would dare you that there are also non-official sets also worthy of Numista.
LP
I agree with this. I am going to put together a set consisting of coins I want to swap as a unit. It will make it much easier for my swap partner to choose one set rather than selecting 15 individual coins.
I guess this is one of the reason why only official sets will be allowed - to avoid a mess in the catalogue where everybody create a hundreds of different sets. It would be hard to find the real sets.
Why only official packaging sets? I would dare you that there are also non-official sets also worthy of Numista.
LP
I agree with this. I am going to put together a set consisting of coins I want to swap as a unit. It will make it much easier for my swap partner to choose one set rather than selecting 15 individual coins.
I guess this is one of the reason why only official sets will be allowed - to avoid a mess in the catalogue where everybody create a hundreds of different sets. It would be hard to find the real sets.
Why only official packaging sets? I would dare you that there are also non-official sets also worthy of Numista.
LP
I agree with this. I am going to put together a set consisting of coins I want to swap as a unit. It will make it much easier for my swap partner to choose one set rather than selecting 15 individual coins.
I guess this is one of the reason why only official sets will be allowed - to avoid a mess in the catalogue where everybody create a hundreds of different sets. It would be hard to find the real sets.
So, this is then post mint damage situation, right? 😎
Why only official packaging sets? I would dare you that there are also non-official sets also worthy of Numista.
LP
I agree with this. I am going to put together a set consisting of coins I want to swap as a unit. It will make it much easier for my swap partner to choose one set rather than selecting 15 individual coins.
Why only official packaging sets? I would dare you that there are also non-official sets also worthy of Numista.
LP
I agree with this. I am going to put together a set consisting of coins I want to swap as a unit. It will make it much easier for my swap partner to choose one set rather than selecting 15 individual coins.
That's not what this feature was intended for
Of course it isn't. I was making a point about non-official sets.
Just 10 options: you understand binary, or you don't.
Catalog Referee Coins, Banknotes & Exonumia: Uruguay, Cuba, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Peru, Paraguay, Costa Rica, Venezuela, Panama, Ecuador, Zamunda, Parva Domus and more.
I'd advocate to include coincards with single coins as well in the set-system. Even though I do not collect them.
You sometimes have coincards with 2 (or more) coins/items, for example in Netherlands (example). Once we have an overview of all sets and can search within sets, it would be nice to be able to search within all you coincards, both those with 1 or more items. I don't see a reason to make a distinction between them.
Coinrolls (also included in the possible items) also only contain 1 cointype, though multiple times.
Just call me Bram
No new swaps for the moment, still too many half-ongoing swaps to clean up!
- include field for type of “set”: blister, coincard, box, roll, bag, …
- official original selling price
- depending of type selected, name the required pictures
- add automatic sorting (by value) or allow to sort in edit mode instead of having to add all items again …
- be able to search in the already present sets
Guidelines: - description of possible set types
- naming of sets
- what type of pictures to include for every type of set (different between coincard, blister set and roll), importtant to keep some consistency, but not so easy to make rules that apply to all possible sets (might need a separate discussion)
Bugs:
- links to documentation centre contain wrong text (literature, weight instead of quantity, …
Just call me Bram
No new swaps for the moment, still too many half-ongoing swaps to clean up!
I would discourage from using phrases like “current”, as they might not be current in two years.
Thank you for the feedback — were you perhaps referring to this part?
I fully agree with your suggestion regarding avoiding terms like “current.”
That said, the official title of the set is “현용은행권세트” which, if translated directly, becomes “current banknote set.”
Do you think it would be better to revise it to “banknote set” for clarity and future-proofing?
while it's not the official title, the phrase “Banknotes of Korea” is printed on the cover of the set in English, so it might also be suitable as a title.
I would discourage from using phrases like “current”, as they might not be current in two years.
Thank you for the feedback — were you perhaps referring to this part?
I fully agree with your suggestion regarding avoiding terms like “current.”
That said, the official title of the set is “현용은행권세트” which, if translated directly, becomes “current banknote set.”
Do you think it would be better to revise it to “banknote set” for clarity and future-proofing?
while it's not the official title, the phrase “Banknotes of Korea” is printed on the cover of the set in English, so it might also be suitable as a title.
Adding the year issued to the title would give context while keeping the official title. Something like “2025 Current Banknote Set” or “Current Banknote Set issued 2025" or “… for 2025”.
I would discourage from using phrases like “current”, as they might not be current in two years.
Thank you for the feedback — were you perhaps referring to this part?
I fully agree with your suggestion regarding avoiding terms like “current.”
That said, the official title of the set is “현용은행권세트” which, if translated directly, becomes “current banknote set.”
Do you think it would be better to revise it to “banknote set” for clarity and future-proofing?
while it's not the official title, the phrase “Banknotes of Korea” is printed on the cover of the set in English, so it might also be suitable as a title.
Adding the year issued to the title would give context while keeping the official title. Something like “2025 Current Banknote Set” or “Current Banknote Set issued 2025" or “… for 2025”.
That’s a good idea — I’ll resubmit it as “Current Banknote Set 2025(in smaller text).” Thank you!
- include field for type of “set”: blister, coincard, box, roll, bag, …
- official original selling price
- depending of type selected, name the required pictures
- add automatic sorting (by value) or allow to sort in edit mode instead of having to add all items again …
- be able to search in the already present sets
Guidelines: - description of possible set types
- naming of sets
- what type of pictures to include for every type of set (different between coincard, blister set and roll), importtant to keep some consistency, but not so easy to make rules that apply to all possible sets (might need a separate discussion)
Bugs:
- links to documentation centre contain wrong text (literature, weight instead of quantity, …
Some really great ideas there BramVB. 😁
My addition would be to add Sets to the Numismatic Catalogue page as an extra item at the top.
As to single coins on coin cards, I would say they should not go in Sets. They have already been added to individual coin pages so why double them up?
Regarding Bags .. I think Starter Kits are ok as they are a one off item. But Mint bags which can be re-issued multiple times over multiple years I would think No.
This is a great discussion and I'm sure Xavier is reading it all and will take all the good ideas onboard.
Regards Mike
Master Referee - See my profile for what I collect.
As to single coins on coin cards, I would say they should not go in Sets. They have already been added to individual coin pages so why double them up?
If you mean stuff like you did in the Australian catalog then no, they shouldn't have had their own line in the first place because year lines are for coins/notes etc. and not for packaging.
Scenario 1 Single item is issued in one finish once or once per year in a box or coin card etc.? → no set entry necessary, because describable in year line and page comments. ✔ 2002 | 50.000 | BU - Green/Train/Occasion 1 coin card ✔ 2003 | 50.000 | BU - Red/Car/Occasion 2 coin card
Scenario 2 Single item is issued is issued in one finish into circulation but also in a coin card? → set should be created.
✗2002 | 1.000.000 | [business strike, usually no comment]
For the last one (id=19 -Huygens) the coins in these set are all containg the metal symbol; but when there are sets with one or more coins wiithout those metal-symbols; should we have to make another set? in that case we can getting eight(8) different sets!!
Not sure what you mean with “containing metal symbols” (as the set has not been approved yet … but it sounds like you are describing sets where wrong coins have been added. Those would be errors, and as with coins/banknotes, would also not list error sets :-)
When you was looking at he coin(s) you could see what I ment.
But NOT looking you don't know what you are talking about.
There is NO error! Only different minting.
We don't even know on which coins we should look at… so it's normal that nobody know what you are meaning…
The set you created is not visible until it's approved so we don't know which coins it cointains:
Anyway, I hope that Admins will check all the questions in this topic and they will set-up a clear rules for set section.
Hi im new here, so forgive me if I'm ignorant. I'm trying to figure out how to add all the many sets I've acquired. Is there a common page, for example, all the US sets that are currently published?
Also, autocorrect can't correct stuff I type in this box for some reason, and I have to fully click on my trackpad to move my cursor in the text box. These are seperate things though to the topic at hand though, but I thought I would mention it anyway.
Hi im new here, so forgive me if I'm ignorant. I'm trying to figure out how to add all the many sets I've acquired. Is there a common page, for example, all the US sets that are currently published?
Also, autocorrect can't correct stuff I type in this box for some reason, and I have to fully click on my trackpad to move my cursor in the text box. These are seperate things though to the topic at hand though, but I thought I would mention it anyway.
Sets are rather new to Numista and still a work in progress (e.g. no search function yet except listing on the individual coin pages). As far as US sets, I have created 58 Proof and Mint Sets. All 58 are still awaiting approval. I don't know what the hold up is.
I also created some Australian ones, 1 Proof, 1 Mint, 1 Baby Proof & 2 Baby Mint Sets. More as an experiment to see how to do them and how they would look once done.
There are many more I could do but will wait until a couple of the bugs have been ironed out and guidelines are in place. A search function is important to have so we can more easily see what is already uploaded and approved.
Once we get to that point I'm sure it will be an awesome addition to Numista.
Regards Mike
Master Referee - See my profile for what I collect.
I thought of that workaround but decided not to because they are sold (and usually resold) as one set so having both mints together is more accurate. Also, I just noticed today that the bug report has been accepted so I'll wait.
Ok fair enough .. I do collect the USA Mint Sets, another member on here gets them for me. The ones he sends to me are in separate packaging though. Do they do a big combined set as well?
Mike
Master Referee - See my profile for what I collect.
US Mint sets (sold by the Mint) have always contained coins from both Denver and Philadelphia Mints. After that I guess they're sometimes sold separately. Sometimes there's no way to separate the mints such as
Dollar coins D and S mints
Dollar coins P, D and S mints
I figured sets from other countries may have the same issue so it has to be fixed.
Edit: If by separate packaging you mean separate envelopes then yes and no:
Hi im new here, so forgive me if I'm ignorant. I'm trying to figure out how to add all the many sets I've acquired. Is there a common page, for example, all the US sets that are currently published?
Also, autocorrect can't correct stuff I type in this box for some reason, and I have to fully click on my trackpad to move my cursor in the text box. These are seperate things though to the topic at hand though, but I thought I would mention it anyway.
Sets are rather new to Numista and still a work in progress (e.g. no search function yet except listing on the individual coin pages). As far as US sets, I have created 58 Proof and Mint Sets. All 58 are still awaiting approval. I don't know what the hold up is.
Yeah I saw that it's a new thing, which honestly suprises me. Hopefully they approve them soon, so people don't waste time accidently adding them themselves. Has anyone worked on doing canadian mint/proof sets? I also have a bunch of those
Can't speak for the Canadians but the way they like their mint offerings I'd say they will have them very soon. Who else would produce 12 different packaging for the exact same standard circulating coin? Well, maybe the Australians. 😉
Hi im new here, so forgive me if I'm ignorant. I'm trying to figure out how to add all the many sets I've acquired. Is there a common page, for example, all the US sets that are currently published?
Also, autocorrect can't correct stuff I type in this box for some reason, and I have to fully click on my trackpad to move my cursor in the text box. These are seperate things though to the topic at hand though, but I thought I would mention it anyway.
Sets are rather new to Numista and still a work in progress (e.g. no search function yet except listing on the individual coin pages). As far as US sets, I have created 58 Proof and Mint Sets. All 58 are still awaiting approval. I don't know what the hold up is.
Is there a reason there is still only one US set approved? I'm wondering if there is a bug in having sets show up for those who can approve them.
Thinking you probably didn't read back. Several people have submitted sets to be added to the main catalouge, but it seems to be taking a strangely long time for them to get approved. Maybe I'm missing something, I am new here after all.
Two weeks - strangely long time? Yes, you are new here but you'll learn. 😉 Seriously, Sets are quite different than adding a new individual coin or modifying an existing coin page. The guidelines have not been completely defined and written yet and my guess (only a guess) is that referees are reluctant to approve submitted sets until the requirements are fully developed. Better to hold off than having to do massive rework later.
This is an awesome feature and something that I'm sure I will eventually make use of. I've currently got several mint and proof sets that I've added as individual coins. I did however take photos of the sets for my collection page. I just wish I knew this feature was coming before spending months doing that :P
"All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost; The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost." - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring
This is an awesome feature and something that I'm sure I will eventually make use of. I've currently got several mint and proof sets that I've added as individual coins. I did however take photos of the sets for my collection page. I just wish I knew this feature was coming before spending months doing that :P
US? What years? Here's one of the Mint sets I'm waiting to be approved:
This is an awesome feature and something that I'm sure I will eventually make use of. I've currently got several mint and proof sets that I've added as individual coins. I did however take photos of the sets for my collection page. I just wish I knew this feature was coming before spending months doing that :P
US? What years? Here's one of the Mint sets I'm waiting to be approved:
And a Proof set:
Another:
I haven't submitted anything at all to the new system, but I have shared my collection pages. I think there might be a couple of silver proof sets not updated on this spreadsheet, but pretty much everything with a green box I have.
I just made individual collections and then added each coin and just put the image for the entire set on each coin.
"All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost; The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost." - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring
Nice. I have created Sets for probably all of those (83 of both Mint and Proof).
Awesome, that will make migrating over a bit easier for me :), It's a shame I'm late to the party or I could have helped out more.
Is there a way to see/search for the ones that have been approved yet? I don't see any links on the Catalog pages.
"All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost; The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost." - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring
There is no Sets search function yet. If they exist there will be a link on the coin page. Look at any US 2025 coin page that are part of the Proof set and there will be a link to https://en.numista.com/catalogue/set.php?id=12 (not mine). There are still some issues with creating set that are keeping me from creating more.
Hello everyone, as a referee for several issuers, I'm receiving requests to create this new section. As I mentioned earlier, I won't be creating or validating any Sets myself until there are clear, common guidelines to follow.
I'm receiving requests for Sets, each one different, with titles in other languages, some without photos, and requests for coins that come in boxes, others in Coincards (I don't know if this will ultimately be included in the Sets section), etc.
I ask that either the option to create Sets be suspended until a Guide is drafted or a Guide is presented that we can all consult, discuss, and finally approve. Otherwise, referees will soon have hundreds of requests to approve, without a common criterion, and to the frustration of users who see that their requests aren't reviewed in a minimally decent amount of time.
Coin referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea, Marshall Islands, Moldova, Liberia and Spain
Banknote referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea and Spain
We define sets as official packaging from the mint containing one or several numismatic items. It contains only new items (not repackaging of older coins). Sets include proof sets, mint sets, coincards, rolls, etc.
Or the referee is privy to other information that has yet to be included in the guidelines that don't exist.
Just my personal opinion, but I think Sets should be a minimum of two items. One item in a card that is non-circulating should just go on its own separate page. Which is what i think it has to do to get a Numista N#xxxxxx number. That number is then used on the Set page so wouldn't we be just duplicating things for a single item?
At the same time I am ok with whatever way we finally decide to go. 😀
Cheers Mike
Master Referee - See my profile for what I collect.
Just my personal opinion, but I think Sets should be a minimum of two items. One item in a card that is non-circulating should just go on its own separate page. Which is what i think it has to do to get a Numista N#xxxxxx number. That number is then used on the Set page so wouldn't we be just duplicating things for a single item?
At the same time I am ok with whatever way we finally decide to go. 😀
Cheers Mike
I am new around here so my opinion means little, but I agree. I think a set indicates more than one item.
I have a few coins in cards that are sealed and I get the appeal of having the item page show the original card, but the coins get removed as well, and it would like you said just be a duplicate. But I also don't think its too big of a deal if it's part of a larger system with how the feature has to be coded into the site.
An idea I had for single item's, since most of them list the SET version in the date section here, and they have the photo, could it not be possible to simply have the option to add the carded coin as a variation here and then give us the ability to upload custom images for each year/variation to the site? I was also thinking this would be a better place to list that the item is part of a set, maybe. each year, then under it the set version with the link back to the set page? It would look cleaner imo than having two long lists on each item page.
Anyhow just some thoughts, I'm happy with whatever direction this goes. :)
"All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost; The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost." - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/set explains, that the term “Set” is a number of things of the same kind that belong or are used together. There may be more exact definitions of the term “set” on the planet, or maybe not, maybe it doesn't matter anway. Or maybe the MW is wrong? Or maybe Numista should change the term “coin set” to be more (if I may use this lovely nowadays term) “inclusive” of single items, starter kits, numbered pieces, not numbered pieces, official or non-official sets (well this may be a new identifier on Numista), single issued gift sets (that no one really owns), maybe even some more exotic set types no one is even aware of, and so on. This is really ground breaking guys… Why complicate things?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/set explains, that the term “Set” is a number of things of the same kind that belong or are used together. There may be more exact definitions of the term “set” on the planet, or maybe not, maybe it doesn't matter anway. Or maybe the MW is wrong? Or maybe Numista should change the term “coin set” to be more (if I may use this lovely nowadays term) “inclusive” of single items, starter kits, numbered pieces, not numbered pieces, official or non-official sets (well this may be a new identifier on Numista), single issued gift sets (that no one really owns), maybe even some more exotic set types no one is even aware of, and so on. This is really ground breaking guys… Why complicate things?
😎
I think you might be on to something here :P
I personally think it makes sense to limit set pages to Official Mint Issued sets of at least 2 or more items, at least at the beginning.
That's why I was suggesting just allowing each of the year/variation lines to have the option for a custom image and then things like my 2025 Canada Polarbear in the numbered card can just be added to the single coin page with a photo/note.. nice and clean.
But I also don't think it's the end of the world if my single coin numbered polar bear is in a set page all by itself.
I'll just be happy in the future to not have to add each coin individually when I purchase a proof/mint set. :)
"All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost; The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost." - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring
Maybe you all missed my comment, “Or the referee is privy to other information that has yet to be included in the guidelines that don't exist.” Input now will just get lost in the noise.
Maybe you all missed my comment, “Or the referee is privy to other information that has yet to be included in the guidelines that don't exist.” Input now will just get lost in the noise.
No privy actor here. As many have seen and experienced, this is not the way to introduce new functionalities. Numista has extremely vibrant forum community where such - lets say - bigger matters could be discussed well in advance, gathering knowledge, experience, insight and especially clever ideas well ahead of the final implementation (just like on token and medal types was done). And it would still be flawed or insufficient in some small things, which is not important at that time anymore. Now it is what it is. Genie is out of the bottle, there is a large bone to chew on, users are happy or not, things seem not to move forward (although they probably are, but with more pressure on admins if this would be done other way). So no privy mega master mind here, just some daily worker…
It will be easiest for everyone if people add editing with link sources, page catalog references, or simply clear documented infos. But it is better to write “i own”, “as indicated”, “added reference”…
Would sets in coin folders and albums be included as well as proof and mint sets?
Do you mean like Dansco Albums that people have completed? I don't think that would be necessary from a catalog perspective, but it would be really neat to be able to create albums in your collection. Right now it's possible by creating sub collections and using the location identifier though.
I have no stake in any of this but I agree with Xavier's original post that it should only be from the mint that created the coins. At least here in the US there would be literally thousands of 3rd party “sets” of state quarters. So many grifters were plating and painting over them and creating “one of a kind” sets that the market is flooded with them.
"All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost; The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost." - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring
Would sets in coin folders and albums be included as well as proof and mint sets?
Do you mean like Dansco Albums that people have completed? I don't think that would be necessary from a catalog perspective, but it would be really neat to be able to create albums in your collection. Right now it's possible by creating sub collections and using the location identifier though.
I have no stake in any of this but I agree with Xavier's original post that it should only be from the mint that created the coins. At least here in the US there would be literally thousands of 3rd party “sets” of state quarters. So many grifters were plating and painting over them and creating “one of a kind” sets that the market is flooded with them.
100% in agreement. And a single proof or other coin in a Box is NOT a set. By Definition, a set is 2 or more. And I believe should be from one country.
“We define sets as official packaging from the mint containing one or…”
I know what I posted before on this subject. No need to remind me but I have changed my mind. Is this a “set" just because it's in official mint packaging?
Should we create a “set” for each of the 2023, 2023S Proof, 2023S Reverse Proof, 2024, 2024S Proof, 2024S Reverse Proof, 2025 just because they all were available from the mint in individual packaging? Isn't it better to just add those pictures to the coin page?
Thanks for your opinion. This will mean a single coin will be on the site double, on the coin page and the “Set” page. 🤐
Life is simple: If you ask 10 people, you will get 10 opinions. If you simply do, then 5 might compain and it is easier to work with these 5 compaints. In other words, it is easier to say sorry, than please.
Thanks for your opinion. This will mean a single coin will be on the site double, on the coin page and the “Set” page. 🤐
Life is simple: If you ask 10 people, you will get 10 opinions. If you simply do, then 5 might compain and it is easier to work with these 5 compaints. In other words, it is easier to say sorry, than please.
Truth! ha, Honestly it's not going to keep me awake at night if a few coins have pages for their OGP sets and a page for the loose coin. I can totally see how people who are very avid collectors of the original package sets would love to be able to include all their sets even the single coin proofs in their collection pages.
I'm mostly just dreading going back in and converting all my proof/mint sets to the new format. It's at the very bottom of my to do list.
"All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost; The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost." - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring
Can someone, at least in the case of individual coins issued ONLY in Coincard, Box, or any other packaging, make the decision as to whether they are included in Sets or not?
When I refer to individual coins issued only in Coincard (or other packaging), I'm referring to a coin with a unique date and issued only in that format. I'm not referring to coins that are part of a type with multiple years and multiple possible packaging types. That should be another debate to consider.
Many users are investing their time creating individual coin pages, and if it is ultimately decided that these coins are not included in Sets, it will be a lot of wasted time (and the referees' time rejecting all these requests).
Let's be logical: creating a specific page for a coin that is ONLY being issued in Coincard makes no sense; it's duplicating information.
At most, after Comments, you could add a section: “Packaging:” and include Coincard (or Box…) and images of the corresponding packaging.
Coin referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea, Marshall Islands, Moldova, Liberia and Spain
Banknote referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea and Spain
‘Can someone, at least in the case of individual coins issued ONLY in Coincard, Box,
or any other packaging, make the decision as to whether they are included in Sets or not’?
My vote - NO
A set is, surely, more than one. The packaging of one coin is not a set.
Will also wait to see what the decision of Xavier is on the subject -
and at the same time when oh when will these new sets become searchable …
Totally agree with you ZacUK … One coin in a coincard that already has a page should not get a duplicated Set Page. You can't even create a Set Page unless the coins you are adding to it have a N# Number. To get that N# Number you must create a Coin Page to start with.
I know it was mentioned many posts above that coincards with one coin could become a Set but I think it wasn't thought through very well. To me a Set is Greater than One.
Also YES, when can we have a search function for SETS please!
Mike
Master Referee - See my profile for what I collect.
If a single coin of a certain finish comes in a mint packaging and only in that, it should not need a set page. If a single coin of a certain finish (let's say BU), comes in multiple different packagings like:
Presentation box
Coin card A
Coin card B
there could be an argument to give them set pages to clear the year lines from all these unnecessary packaging entries (mostly found in Australia and Canada). So we go from 2002 - 10.000.000 - UNC
Just my point of view here. If I may use the word “item”, this represents all coins, notes and Exonumia, which are accepted at Numista.
A single item is issued as a single piece, no matter the various packaging types and no matter of its intended use.
Remark: Items issued only in sets with other items, but not as a single item, should therefor not be allowed to receive N# number. This may interfere with many of the world catalogues reference systems (maybe also Krause's), but this is something the top brass will have to take into the account. People like to get search results based on all consecutive numbers (with no holes). Maybe the Catalogue issuers were wrong in such cases (if these exist).
Alarm system should be in place if an item (which is already published on Numista as a single item) is known to be issued only in a set, so that the single page gets shut down. There should also be a contingency notification protocol for users, that have in their possession only one or more such items, but not a complete set.
This grey field gives, for what I believe, gives most of the itches to admins on how to resolve this.
A set of items is an officially issued enclosed union of two or more items. Set includes:
- items issued also as single one (all pieces with existing N# number),
- items issued as a single item (none of the pieces with existing N# number - see remark above),
- combination of items, where at least one of the items was issued also as a single item (in other words at least one or more pieces with existing N# number).
I am intentionally using the wording item, since there are many sets, which along the coins also include medals or banknotes. So its only natural to allow adding sets for Exonumia too. Based on sets contents, another data field could be added (only coins, only tokens, only notes, combinations, etc).
Can we take a democracy moment? Voting was done before on some matters. Plea for voting may be sent to all active users, voting is open for fixed period of time. That's it from me… bye
Just wanted to thank all involved in trying to get the “Set Collection” a cuasi-reallity in Numista.
It is surprisingly better and more complicated than what I originally conceived.
I think the major complication (advantage?/ disadvantage) is trying to tie the set to the coins inside the set.
No need in my case: For me the set is an individual “item”, with all the coins inside the set simply described, but NOT counted in my coin collection. A coin inside the set does not change my willingness to have it individually.
Tying the sets and reflecting them in the coin collection seems to be complicating the view of the sets and the counting of coins in the coin collection
Based on the KISS principle,
I imagined the “Sets” to be just as the Exonumia pieces are described and maintained. Just like Krause lists them:
Country, Set, date, Issue, description and photo of contents, etc.
To enter my collection of sets would simply be to go in the Sets section, Country, and year by year clicking in the right box.
If you enter a set into your collection all the coins in that set are entered into your collection. The coins already in your collection that are part of that set don't get removed.
When you enter a set, the coins are included in your collection.
I'm saying: It is great but, seems to be complicating unnecessarily the connection between “coins” and “sets”.
I have no need to include the coins in the sets into my collection of coins. I treat them as different items.
For me a set is a set (with all the coins, described but NOT counted in the collection).
It may be easier for our extraordinary programmers not to connect them, and treat sets as independent Items.
I haven't started registering the sets in my collection because it doesn't look elegant yet; it is convoluted (you have to go to a coin, to get to a set), and it looks like an appendix to coins. I'm sure I'll do it eventually…
I'm saying: It is great but, seems to be complicating unnecessarily the connection between “coins” and “sets”.
I have no need to include the coins in the sets into my collection of coins. I treat them as different items.
For me a set is a set (with all the coins, described but NOT counted in the collection).
What is most important is the content not the packaging ('set'). For me I acquire sets only because it is most often the easiest and cheapest method to get a complete year set in relatively uncirculated condition. The useless, unwieldy, plastic and cardboard just ends up in the recycling. Sets are for easier data entry and a way to link items for people who want to keep them together and maybe swap them.
If this has been covered already my apologies, I skimmed and didn't see anything.
But I'm curious how are the value estimates for the items added as part of a set calculated. For example, this is on a coin page where I have added the proof and mint sets, is numista now counting the full price of the set for each coin, as it's showing that on each coin page currently? or is it averaging it out behind the scenes and only displaying the cost of the set for the coin page?
"All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost; The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost." - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring
If I correctly remember, it was already reported that in some cases something is wrongly calculated for the sets value. Try to scroll up this topic to the first few days after implementation of sets.
If I correctly remember, it was already reported that in some cases something is wrongly calculated for the sets value. Try to scroll up this topic to the first few days after implementation of sets.
This was fixed (mostly). The entire value is added once to the coin collection value. If the set also contains something like a mint token/medal then the full value is also added to the token/medal collection value. This is still an open issue.
I see that there are sets from Andorra approved by the general referee of Euro coins, without photos and with titles that don't have a Numist's Guide. Surely, if they need to be modified later, it will be up to the specific referees for each issuer to do so...
Coin referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea, Marshall Islands, Moldova, Liberia and Spain
Banknote referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea and Spain
Rsirian1, fyi I added the 2025 unc mint set with photos, unless you also did and we are both waiting on approval.
I think photos should be a requirement for any submission at the bare minimum. But thats just my 2cents.
I have limited photos of a lot of the sets in my collection that I could contribute if needed, and given some time I could set up a camera and re-capture as well.
"All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost; The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost." - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring
There are many US sets (not ones I created) without photos. Are photos required? Are there guidelines for sets yet?
of course photos should be required … it is essential to know what set we're talking about
Xavier promised some guidelines and we should also wait for at least a basic search engine before doing any more set additions, there are possibly already dozens of duplicate sets waiting for approval …, no need to waste time if we don't know how to add a correctly filled out page 😉
Just call me Bram
No new swaps for the moment, still too many half-ongoing swaps to clean up!
then it would have been better. Under current settings how is
anyone to know if a Set has been created?
If I have say a Royal Mint 1975 coin set - if I create a new page
today, how would it be known if I am wasting my precious time when
in a few weeks it gets rejected, as there are 7 other members
having also tried to create exactly the same set? :( :( 😵💫
This will be nice when it's eventually implemented. Currently the only way I know is to look on a coin that belongs in the set and see if it shows a set listed on the coin page.
"All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost; The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost." - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring
