Fake Canada

It was unexpected to read mistakes and inconsistencies in the article
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces387.html
Lettering:
CANADA
1949
10 CENTS

If we compare it with another one:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces7518.html
Lettering:
CANADA
1988
H
10 CENTS

we would notice that there is the engraver's initial in the field on both coins. But it is given in the second case and is absent in the first one.
Yes, it is easy to restore this inconsistency. What doe we have? https://en.numista.com/catalogue/contributions/voir_demande.php?id=4994633


Exactly. We have that the Numista team, despite of its own rules rejects it, it dared even to point out what to do, and gave no reasons for this very non-polite behavior.

As for the other article, it is as well had many mistakes: wrong thickness - direct measurements of 1989 give far from 1.22 mm, but much closer to 1.16 mm, checking did not prove the statement:
Thickness:
1969-1977: 1.16 mm
1978: 1.19 mm
1979-1989: 1.22 mm

If someone desired to translate Latin, it should be given in unabridged text first, see for example https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces8948.html where the abbreviated GEORGIVS VI D:G:BR:OMN:REX FIDEI DEF. is written in complete form GEORGIVS VI DEI GRATIA BRITANNIARUM OMNIUM REX FIDEI DEFENSOR which is followed by imitation of translation.

Let us glance at the result https://en.numista.com/catalogue/contributions/voir_demande.php?id=4996211 :



Exactly. We have that the Numista team, despite of its own rules rejects it, it dared even to point out what to do, and gave no reasons for this very non-polite behavior.

Now it is obvious that these fakes in description are not mistakes, they are fakes.

In which way the Numista team may return the articles to the standards?

There is nothing "fake" about this entry. Perhaps it doesn't have perfect punctuation but it's far more readable than your posting. If you really do want changes made, moderate your language and start being polite.

He'll never learn!! He's lost inside his own shell. He might be a super numismate, but his behavioral manners are not developped very well. There are a couple of syndromes naming that behaviour.

The fake production is still at the article.
In which way Numista team will correct it?



Written:
Obverse (head): Description with keywords (en)The portrait in left profile of George VI is surrounded with the inscription "GEORGIVS VI DEI GRATIA REX" (George VI, King by the grace of God)

Should be:
Obverse (head): Description with keywords (en)The portrait in left profile of George VI is surrounded with the inscription "GEORGIVS VI DEI GRATIA REX" (George VI, King by the grace of God)

Written:
Reverse (back): Description with keywords (en)The Bluenose under sail, a Canadian schooner from Nova Scotia, a celebrated racing ship and a symbol of the province, is surrounded with the face value and the inscription "CANADA"

Should be:

Reverse (back): Description with keywords (en)The Bluenose under sail, a Canadian schooner from Nova Scotia, a celebrated racing ship and a symbol of the province, is surrounded with the face value and the inscription "CANADA."

Reverse (back): Lettering
written:
CANADA
1949
10 CENTS

Should be:
CANADA
1948
H
10 CENTS

It is well known that after His Majesty a specialist is required to correct his spoilages. Here He indicated that even His vision is so bad that He became completely blind. How else one may dare to reject
when a photo presents
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/photos/canada/715-original.jpg
1948 but the fake production wrote: 1949 !

When the photo itself shows the presence of initial H, visible by naked eye, but His Majesty most probably being blind of His reverent rage did not detected it.

Just style: it is English, thus at the end of sentences a full stop is a must; and lettering the visible by naked eye symbols on a photo.

Admins, please mute this fool.

Quote: "cyprusalexander"​The fake production is still at the article.
​In which way Numista team will correct it?
​

​Should be:
​Obverse (head): Description with keywords (en)The portrait in left profile of George VI is surrounded with the inscription "GEORGIVS VI DEI GRATIA REX" (George VI, King by the grace of God)
​

​​I believe you left out a full stop which in English is a must at the end of sentences. I believe that renders your entire argument fake. In which way will you correct it?

It seems to me that fixing the date in the Lettering section to match that on the coin pictured is a no brainer. You just do it. Adding the Engraver's initial on the reverse meets the guidelines and would be consistent with what is already on the obverse. As far as punctuation, if the page is already open for revision, why not do that too?

I have no doubt that if I submitted a change request for these things it would be approved, no questions asked. I'm not sure if that says more about the referees or the OP, though.

Best part on this is that I did not do anything here, yet I am again targeted.

You are harassing basically everyone around. Just submit a simple request to change the lettering without all that ghiberish. It will go through. As a matter of fact, I just did, with simplest comment: "Small correction of lettering."

Quote: "Some_Nerd"​Admins, please mute this fool.

​This person has been harassing me since 2017. Any changes request from him is automatically rejected now. It's the only way I have found to keep my mental health. I wrote him last year that I will not spend one more minute with him and not to write me anymore. I asked him to write to the other referee for Canada.

English is not my cup of tea, so arguing with him about anything is out of the question anymore , it's too demanding.

I really have alot to do with the french section of the canadian catalog missing information. I will not leave aside the work I think is more important to fix his multiple demands for a period or initial missing on all canadian coin...maybe one day but only after i'm done with the translation and missing information in the french section. I work for my pleasure not for this person, not anymore and never again.

I already suggested, last year, to him to apply to be a referee if he thinks these changes are so important and need to be address in priority.

Thanks for Google Translate.

Je te comprends, I understand you.

Alex from the island is not a very pleasant person, one might even say he's completely nasty!

I didnt like to point out but the lettering field is where this "GEORGIVS VI DEI GRATIA REX" (George VI, King by the grace of God)" should go not in the obverse field. Otherwise what is the point of the lettering field?

Quote: "rsirian1"​It seems to me that fixing the date in the Lettering section to match that on the coin pictured is a no brainer. You just do it. Adding the Engraver's initial on the reverse meets the guidelines and would be consistent with what is already on the obverse. As far as punctuation, if the page is already open for revision, why not do that too?
​
​I have no doubt that if I submitted a change request for these things it would be approved, no questions asked. I'm not sure if that says more about the referees or the OP, though.

​I totally agree with you. And before this post is written the modification was sent. The result is clearly written in the very first post:
The referee wrote comment:
Comment: Stop harrasing us with these changes

It is excellent comment. It shows that the corrections has to be done by the whole Numista community. In the last post the referee confirmed and signed that it is he, who started bulling. Despite of this personal opinion, the article is corrected now.

I'm grateful to the Numista team and the community, which shows effectiveness and corrected everything quickly.

The new unabridged field can now be used for the Latin wording.