organised community (for example, Australia, Commune of Nice, Abbey of Saint Gall, Rauraci tribe),
association of such communities (for example, Eurozone, West African States, joint notgeld issuers), or
autonomous mint that regulates currency (for example, the Imperial mint of Basel)
with a claimed right to issue currency.
An issuer may have different currencies, governments and names throughout its history. For example, "Ceylon" and "Sri Lanka" are considered as a single issuer in the Numista catalogue. Only when the territory of an issuer suffers a sudden, significant, and long-term change, resulting in a discontinuity of its currency, then the change result in a different issuer. For example the Soviet Union and modern-day Russia are listed as different issuers.
Do you are working on a new guideline that support what you are already doing?
If we have a way to display flag the correct way why will you write a new rule that make the site less accurate than it was?
What is the benefits to kill Zaïre, it was correctly placed under Congo with the right flag, it was easy to understand, now if I do a control F on the issuer list I don’t find Zaïre anymore, sorry but I don’t understand the benefits of the change.
It's called echoing: making a lot of noise in different places to give the impression an idea is massively supported, whereas if we look closely always same people launched it.
It's called echoing: making a lot of noise in different places to give the impression an idea is massively supported, whereas if we look closely always same people launched it.
I didn't launch this, I simply joined in when you tried to belittle someone else's concerns. These problems have been raised by many different members, not just 1 or 2. You're a new administrator. You musn't feel constrained by mistakes that have beem made in the past.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
Another problem I am facing right now is when I search for Zaire in the coin catalog I have 480 results and can’t find a coin struck by Zaire…Should I browse all 10 pages?
When llooking for Zaire a coin from 2002 is showing up, it feels like a bug to me …
Another problem I am facing right now is when I search for Zaire in the coin catalog I have 480 results and can’t find a coin struck by Zaire…Should I browse all 10 pages?
When llooking for Zaire a coin from 2002 is showing up, it feels like a bug to me …
You righ, is that easy. I look for Zaire and coins that have nothing to do with Zaire show up and you are telling me I should learn how to use the search engine… You are right, why should I ask a search engine to be accurate in 1 look as before when I can do it in 3 clicks now?
When you need to explain how you should make a search it doesn‘t look like user friendly anymore…
It is because we put Zaire as alt name for entire rdc. As Zaire is also used in rulers groups and currencies, i can try to remove it from these alt names and maybe the Search engine will only show entries you look for
But do you even collect coins and banknotes of Zaire?
I don’t understand the purpose of the question but Yes I do, I think my collection is open to everyone so you can double check if you are concerned ;-)
But I do use to make request for mint or micronation that I don’t collect I reckon, should I stop to send request then?
And the result page is the page of “Congo” (because the select box “Issuers” only search issuers) with all authorities/periods in the index, if you select order by “ruling authority”:
Wanted & swap list (euro coins & world coins, exonumia and banknotes circulated) https://goo.gl/AQjfKp - I have euro & world CC coins for swap.
And the result page is the page of “Congo” (because the select box “Issuers” only search issuers) with all authorities/periods in the index, if you select order by “ruling authority”:
So at least 2 clicks instead of 1 and with the wrong flag :-)
I guess you are an experienced collector, please explain that to my 8 years old son who don’t really understand what you mean…
So, we went from an easy selection to a slightly more complex one, what is the benefit?
So at least 2 clicks instead of 1 and with the wrong flag :-)
Yes ("2 clicks instead of 1") and no (with the wrong flag), because you search a period/authority (Zaire) in the box of an issuer/country (Congo).
If you want results only of a period you need search issuer and period of the issuer:
Indomini16
I guess you are an experienced collector, please explain that to my 8 years old son who don’t really understand what you mean…
No, I am not an experienced collector.
Explanation: Zaire is a period of the issuer/country Congo. If you search Zaire in issuer box, you get coins of the issuer. If you search issuer/country=Congo and authority/period=Zaire, you get coins of the issuer in this period.
Indomini16
So, we went from an easy selection to a slightly more complex one, what is the benefit?
You can do a suggestion: mixed the select boxes “Issuers” and “Authorities” in only one, in order to search issuers and authorities.
Wanted & swap list (euro coins & world coins, exonumia and banknotes circulated) https://goo.gl/AQjfKp - I have euro & world CC coins for swap.
As I have said now for many things being introduced to make everything more accurate:
Numista is getting too complicated to stay user-friendly.
Yes, referencing so many items in a unique website brings complexity. It is why we work with other admins on improvements like revamping primary typology (to avoid endless debates about what is exonumia or not) or add specific landing pages for countries, allowing users to better see ruling authorities
Yes ("2 clicks instead of 1") and no (with the wrong flag), because you search a period/authority (Zaire) in the box of an issuer/country (Congo).
If you want results only of a period you need search issuer and period of the issuer:
Indomini16
I guess you are an experienced collector, please explain that to my 8 years old son who don’t really understand what you mean…
No, I am not an experienced collector.
Explanation: Zaire is a period of the issuer/country Congo. If you search Zaire in issuer box, you get coins of the issuer. If you search issuer/country=Congo and authority/period=Zaire, you get coins of the issuer in this period.
That is the point were I disagree, Zaire is not a period of Congo, Zaire was a country that replaced Congo before it was replaced again by Congo.
Third republic is a period in the France.
A country difference from a period are 3 points: 1 - Name, 2 - Flag, 3 - Motto or anthem.
There is currently a discussion of the whole principle of deleting issuers on the referees' forum. I've requested it be moved to the website forum so everyone can contribute but that hasn't happened yet. I think this discussion and others demonstrate why the wider membership deserves its say.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
There is currently a discussion of the whole principle of deleting issuers on the referees' forum. I've requested it be moved to the website forum so everyone can contribute but that hasn't happened yet. I think this discussion and others demonstrate why the wider membership deserves its say.
A good initiative, after all we're around 150,000 active members and letting important decisions be made with a 3 to 2 majority seems a bit farfetched as a base!
Cataloguing isn’t an easy task but you should always look at benefits vs constraint.
When you start looking for a country you have 480 results instead of 40 accurate one, when you go from 3 clicks to 8 in 2 different tabs and when you can’t place a country flag to a certain country then what is the user experience we want to give?
We really want to make it more difficult when the easiest solution exist and was there before?
What is the point?
Ig we only want to make more difficult to find coins, please unify everything in only 1 issuer and manage everything with issuing entities, it will be more difficult and less interactive.
In all other search machines (not numista) when you hit enter, you would get a search for Italy alone going, not here! You get the Carolingian Empire, if you hit enter. Is that logical? You have to try to find Italy with the cursor and not the first Italy, but the second. Very, very user-friendly, isn't it?
We need to find a balance between consistency of the catalogue and ease of use.
I just made two changes to facilitate cases like searching for coins from Zaire.
You can now filter by group of ruling authorities (like Zaire), so you can see all the coins at once rather than searching for each ruling authority in the group separately.
If you type an older name of a country in the dropdown list of issuers, Numista will understand you are looking only for that period and it will automatically select the group of ruling authorities. So you just need to type “Zaire” in the dropdown list of issuers, and Numista will show you the coins from that period only.
Regarding the initial query about flags, the current approach of Numista is to show the latest flag (or at least the latest when coins were still issues - see Afghanistan for example). The idea to change this behaviour is already discussed here: https://en.numista.com/forum/topic128687.html
Status changed to Rejected(Xavier, 23 Feb 2023, 13:11)
Regarding the initial query about flags, the current approach of Numista is to show the latest flag (or at least the latest when coins were still issues - see Afghanistan for example). The idea to change this behaviour is already discussed
I can see already a good first step but I insist, Zaire is not Congo, Congo preceded Zaire and then succeeded to Congo but it’s wrong to display it as Congo with Congo flag:
Absolutely not! What a wrong usage of this notion! Please mind at least reading the very link you copied…
When historians write history of RDC, Mobutu's ruling is naturally just a phase in it, not at all a new country.
I guess you wont find any essay which title would be “history of Congo then Zaire then RDC”, because everyone understands that history of RDC includes the period where official name was Zaire obviously.
The point is that we shouldn't be writing a history at all. A catalogue is a record of facts. That's why the change in a name can't be ignored.
It is where we disagree:
- When we research informations about issuers, currencies' succession, ruling authorities etc we are doing historical typology work already. Which are facts too. Just not facts written on the coin.
- we are not ignoring anything, just not putting a simple name change at the issuer level
As I wrote elsewhere here, I feel there may be a gap between two visions of Numista: one “naturalist” stating a coin is existing per se and only what's written on it is the truth and accurate ("Zaire is written on it = Zaire is the issuer") VERSUS one seeing Numismatics as a Social science, meaning historical field of knowledge where what's written on it is not necessarily literally the most accurate way to sort it ("Zaire was just a previous name of current RDC and this country is the same object historically speaking = issuer is RDC"). I'm definitely more fond of 2nd approach but am pretty sure UX and technical solutions can reconcile both needs.
"- When we research informations about issuers, currencies' succession, ruling authorities etc we are doing historical typology work already. Which are facts too. Just not facts written on the coin.
- we are not ignoring anything, just not putting a simple name change at the issuer level"
Please don't forget, that Numista is a coin catalog. The priority for a coin catalog is certainly the coins and not the history, hence let the coins be the objects to focus upon.
- When we research informations about issuers, currencies' succession, ruling authorities etc we are doing historical typology work already. Which are facts too. Just not facts written on the coin.
- we are not ignoring anything, just not putting a simple name change at the issuer level
A name change is not simple. Just ask the people of North Macedonia.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
- When we research information about issuers, currencies' succession, ruling authorities etc. we are doing historical typology work already. Which are facts too. Just not facts written on the coin.
- we are not ignoring anything, just not putting a simple name change at the issuer level
Oh boy, your parents didn't tell you life is complicated, as a whole. But there are ways to make it even worse, not to say chaotic, which is the way you want to go?
I'm a coin collector and not a history nerd, numista is a coin catalog and not a world history book, neither an Atlas !
Ole, I'm not sure such sarcastic comment can really help improving the catalogue or the community.
We made the decision to consider that two coins from the same place are from the same issuer if the only change to their country is a change of name. This way coins from North Macedonia are all grouped together, whether they were minted before or after the change of name from Macedonia to North Macedonia. The same rule applies for Ceylon, Zaire, etc.
The alternative choice could have been acceptable as well, and other catalogues made this choice. It's just not the direction we took for Numista. And I don't plan to change this decision for the moment.
My focus is rather about how we can improve the website while preserving the experience for collectors who organize their collection in a different way: flags, searching by period, etc.
Ole, I'm not sure such sarcastic comment can really help improving the catalogue or the community.
We made the decision to consider that two coins from the same place are from the same issuer if the only change to their country is a change of name. This way coins from North Macedonia are all grouped together, whether they were minted before or after the change of name from Macedonia to North Macedonia. The same rule applies for Ceylon, Zaire, etc.
The alternative choice could have been acceptable as well, and other catalogues made this choice. It's just not the direction we took for Numista. And I don't plan to change this decision for the moment.
My focus is rather about how we can improve the website while preserving the experience for collectors who organize their collection in a different way: flags, searching by period, etc.
The best way to improve this website is to make it more accurate and more accessible. The “direction” you took is making Numista less accurate and less accessible. That shouldn't have been a choice to even be considered, far less implemented. Surely by now you can see the many problems it creates without contributing anything of use? The groupings you talk about were present before this policy was applied and don't require the deletion of the old names.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
We are assigning as you can see the Congo flag to Zaire, and we are saying in parentheses it's Congo, but again this is not historically true:
2 - When I look for Zaire in the coin search it's still 480 coins, and not all are related to Zaire.
I understand that we have an idea running on that, but first we are making change without considering user experience, ending with a way longer process that before (thanks for your quick fix on that) and secondly this idea have more negative votes than positive, so we came from an accurate situation and goes with a situation where we are saying that Zaire never existed.
Can we make sure before we take any changes that we keep at least the same level of historically accuracy as before?
Why should we rush changes when we are obviously not ready?
So, instead of user friendly as historically correct, we now have … well, what do we have now? I want to say “a mess”, but I'm sure that really covers it.
