A new source

Angus is a member of WoC and has just given me the permission to use his finding and images from this site

http://eurocollection.co.uk/Variants.html

and here is my first full use of his site:

Obverses photos are 1€

Reverse 2€

Oh My! How did I manage not to notice that. Thanks.

Better now?

I think referees should start complying with the 2022 guidelines regarding this type of documentation and reject this format. The more we wait, the more work we will have to do to correct these later.

Quoting Xavier…

We already have some guidelines about how to describe varieties.

See the section 3.6 at https://en.numista.com/catalogue/contributions/instructions.php#comments

with some good examples:

• N#194
• N#23008
• N#187

The images should not contain text, since such documentation is difficult to update and to translate. Also, there should be separate pictures for each variety, again to facilitate future updates.

It's good practice to give a text explanation in addition to the pictures, to help the readers understand the difference between varieties.
The comment in the year lines should be short, just referring to the varieties already described in the general comments section (see section 3.8.5 of the guidelines).

Québécois

I think referees should start complying with the 2022 guidelines regarding this type of documentation and reject this format. The more we wait, the more work we will have to do to correct these later.

 

Quoting Xavier…

 

We already have some guidelines about how to describe varieties.

See the section 3.6 at https://en.numista.com/catalogue/contributions/instructions.php#comments

with some good examples:

• N#194
• N#23008
• N#187

 

The images should not contain text, since such documentation is difficult to update and to translate. Also, there should be separate pictures for each variety, again to facilitate future updates.

It's good practice to give a text explanation in addition to the pictures, to help the readers understand the difference between varieties.
The comment in the year lines should be short, just referring to the varieties already described in the general comments section (see section 3.8.5 of the guidelines).

You do that for your own documentations, and I do mine as always, Xavier is OK with that, something is better than NOTHING.

Sjoelund

Better now?

No, that’s still the wrong reverse :-)

Sjoelund

 

You do that for your own documentations, and I do mine as always, Xavier is OK with that, something is better than NOTHING.

FYI

Real nice attitude there Ole.

Next time you complain about something you find not according to the Guidelines, I will send you a link to this comment. 🤣

Like I wrote, I hope the other referees will reject this format from now on.

Best retards,

Forgot to make the jpg, the ppt was ok!

Sjoelund

 Xavier is OK with that, something is better than NOTHING.

Quoting Xavier when I asked him if I should delete these docs done as pictures :

We still accept other formats as we appreciate Ole's work, although it would be preferable to use the recommended format. This was already discussed with Ole in the past if I remember well.

Maybe the translation is your native language is not clear:  You should abandon this format from now on because it creates translation problems and it's impossible for Numista's referees to update these pictures when needed. Personnaly, I'll be ready soon to remove this documentation format from every Canadian coin pages and I will reject this format from now on.

You're welcome to remove my documentations from Canada for the good of all numista members?

Sjoelund

You're welcome to remove my documentations from Canada for the good of all numista members?

Not only yours, ALL of them done using this format (as pictures). They will soon be replaced using the recommended format according to the guidelines.

It's even less work now then when members were using the picture format…and anyone can do it without extra computer skills.

Look at the exemples Xavier pointed out (you can even add your or a combination of copyrights if you wish):

• N#194
• N#23008
• N#187

Hello,

while it is true that new format would be preffered, but we should also not refuse information as it comes.

Best regards,

Jarek

Québécois

Sjoelund

You're welcome to remove my documentations from Canada for the good of all numista members?

Not only yours, ALL of them done using this format (as pictures). They will soon be replaced using the recommended format according to the guidelines.

 

It's even less work now then when members were using the picture format…and anyone can do it without extra computer skills.

 

Look at the exemples Xavier pointed out (you can even add your or a combination of copyrights if you wish):

 

• N#194
• N#23008
• N#187

Calm down and take care of Canada. I'll try not to document any more Canadian coins. I'll even delete my documentations today or tomorrow, since they are offensive to your way of seeing things.

Jarcek

Hello,

 

while it is true that new format would be preffered, but we should also not refuse information as it comes.

 

Best regards,

Jarek

Sorry but I don't agree with you on this. Accepting these will create more work for referees in the future and it create problems because the translation won't be able to happen automaticaly. Guidelines are there for a reason and we should not accept anymore of those picture format documentation.

If it were easier to do this documentation with this picture format I would agree, but it's not. So what's the point of accepting something more complicated to produce, for referees to maintain and that creates problems with the automatic translation tool ?!?

It's just plain and stupid resistance to change.

Sjoelund

 

Calm down and take care of Canada. I'll never try to document any more Canadian coins. I'll even delete my documentations today or tomorrow, since they are offensive to your way of seeing things.

I'm calm and Canada is well taking care of already.

About your “documentation”, come on be serious, you just copy (sometime summarize) what others produce and publish on the internet. You make it fit to your PPT template and add your name to it. Pejounet and I have seen the quality of your research/work for Canada and honestly we had some doubts about it and your process of verifying the info before publishing it. Most of the time, if not allways, you don't double check with more then one source. Since we mention this to you, you seem to be at war with us. Every time we try to make a comment you react poorly.

This being said, if Numista and the some others referees consider your work, as you put it your self, BETTER THAN NOTHING, it's not my case. Some of your past work was erronous and I prefer no info than bad info. 

It's normal for referees to push to get the info in the most appropriate format for this site (it's the case for all pictures and all other fields; the varieties in the comment section should not be an exception). Maybe something is blinding you and you don't see the advantages of the new format:

• It is even less work for members, no need to have special computer skills (Powerpoint and/or an image creating software).
• It is easier to add/edit to the comment section for the members
• It will be easier for referees to maintain in the futur
• It will get automaticaly translated in all languages in usage on Numista (now and in the futur)

Are you really too blind to see the advantages of changing from this old format that wasn't even a standard by the way ?!?

Expect more and more rejections for your so call documentation from the referees because they will be the ones stuck with the problems of maintaining/translating this unsuitable format for Numista's tools.

Guidelines - a general rule, principle, or piece of advice

I think painting outside the lines a little is acceptable till a better solution is achieved. Being too rigid with the “Guidelines” in this case does more harm than good.

I am not against changes and certainly not against new guidelines.

I would argue that rather than rejecting the new information outright, it might be good to save it. If you can reproduce the new format for variety information easily and fast, there is of course no point in accepting. If you cannot, then it seem to me that accepting at least something is sensible approach.   

My two sents' worth on guidelines.

Guidelines are just that, guidelines. If they were requirements, then I imagine that they would be called ‘Requirements’. I think that it is better to have good quality accurate information added than to not have it added - there are plenty of members who are active in amending existing listings so that they conform to the guidelines. Some of them are also active in transcription and translation. Referees are the curators of their sections, and should accept good work and then amend it as necessary.

Just take this one event as an exemple, it took 3 posts and 2 interventions from members to have this “picture documentation” right.

It proves the point that no one, including the referee, can add or modify this picture without the source document from the member who created it. We would have to redo the work all over again if a small update was needed and the picture creator wasn't available. It proves that this format is absolutly not suitable and not compatible with Numista's collaboration philosophy.

Also, this format is not compatible with Numista's translation tool making it (the picture documentation) not available in the other languages pages. So why should Numista accept it ? Don't give me that crap that “it's better than nothing” ! Is Numista accepting poor quality pictures in all format that exist in the world ? Is Numista accepting pictures to document the inscriptions on coins ? The answer is no and there's a simple reason for it, we establish Standards/Guidelines/Rules (call them wathever you wish) for everyone to follow to prevent creating a big mess.

Sometimes in life, you have to draw a line and stick to your decisions for the benefit of all and the project.

Really disapointed at the last few comments from other Numista referees, I suppose you didn't have one case yet for witch you had to modify one of these “picture-documentation” !   

I highly value the documentation that is provided by Ole and as there is no-one else who consistently provides documentation, I’d vote for keeping it. As a referee, you are responsible for making sure that the data is correct and unless there is someone else creating documentation in the desired format, I don’t see why you wouldn’t accept what is provided by Ole.

smvdbrink

I highly value the documentation that is provided by Ole and as there is no-one else who consistently provides documentation, I’d vote for keeping it. As a referee, you are responsible for making sure that the data is correct and unless there is someone else creating documentation in the desired format, I don’t see why you wouldn’t accept what is provided by Ole.

Ole can still add his documentation, he just need to change the format. Why should we referees accept something that creates problems and that no one can maintain ? Are you proposing your self to maintain this format and it's translation in all supported languages on Numista ?  

Before giving my opinion I would like to congratulate Québécois and Sjoelund for the great work they do to make Numista a better online coin catalogue. My most sincere congratulations. 

That said, in my capacity as a referee, if I received a modification request with Ole's usual format, the first thing I would do is, obviously, check that everything is correct, consulting the necessary sources. If the information is correct, of course I will approve the request because, even if it does not follow the established format (whose advantages seem obvious), I consider that it is better to have information in that format than not to have that information. 

Another action that can be done as a referee is to adapt the information to the appropriate format.

I have the feeling (and I'm sorry if I'm wrong) that there are certain personal issues that are influencing decision-making, which in the long run can have repercussions on other users and on the Numista catalogue. I believe that certain decisions that we referees make should be subject to the control of Catalog administrators.

Be serious, if someone send a picture in an unsupported format, it's automatically rejected. It should be the same in this case (for Ole and any other member using this format).

It's even less work for Ole to comply instead of assembling a PPT with multiple pictures and then create a single picture for him to send to Numista.

This is a childish beahaviour of resisting to change and he's stuck in it since Pejounet and I made a remark about one of his so call better than nothing documentation.

As a referee for the banknotes of some countries, I have modified some images uploaded by members, generally by straightening them and adjusting the colour balance if necessary to remove colour casts. I do this extra work rather than replacing the image from an approved source because I think it important to encourage all contributions from members - it keeps the project alive and vibrant.

Hibernia

As a referee for the banknotes of some countries, I have modified some images uploaded by members, generally by straightening them and adjusting the colour balance if necessary to remove colour casts. I do this extra work rather than replacing the image from an approved source because I think it important to encourage all contributions from members - it keeps the project alive and vibrant.

I did and still do the same for coins, but it's not the same issue here.

It would be less work for everyone even for Ole. Here's an exemple of what we are talking about:

Wouldn't be simpler to document/maintain and translate if we just add the two bottom pictures to the comment section and describe the two varieties ?

Examples :

• N#194
• N#23008
• N#187

Québécois

Be serious, if someone send a picture in an unsupported format, it's automatically rejected. It should be the same in this case (for Ole and any other member using this format).

 

It's even less work for Ole to comply instead of assembling a PPT with multiple pictures and then create a single picture for him to send to Numista.

 

This is a childish beahaviour of resisting to change and he's stuck in it since Pejounet and I made a remark about one of his so call better than nothing documentation.

I think we have to be careful with certain expressions that can annoy users and referees who, like you, are dedicating a lot of work and time to improve the catalog. Expressions like “be serious” and “childish behavior” I don't think are appropriate to express an opinion. If the rest of us don't think alike, does that make us childish? 

While I congratulate you for your work in the catalogue, you dedicate yourself to cataloging as childish the opinions, like mine, that do not coincide. Not much more to say on my part.

Texts in images should be banned indeed, not only for all reasons mentionned above about maintainability and translations, but also simply because it is a bad practice concerning websites' accessibility (screen readers cannot treat them) and searchability (from internal search engine or external ones like google).

These images are simply web bad practice.

But I'm open to discussion :-)

I just did not saw yet any argument in favor of them? 

@Sjoelund can you explain why you prefer PPT over using text & image editor in Numista ?

Merci Compendium, il était temps que quelqu'un semble voir un peu l'autre côté de la chose.

J'ai hâte de lire les arguments supportant ce format. 😆

If I recall correctly, Ole is 76 years ‘old’ and I don't know many people of that age who can do more on a computer than use a browser and an e-mail client. He uses powerpoint to make the documentation, because that is a way that he understands, you can't expect him to change that. The fact that he contributes all that documentation should be encouraged and I think it's a safe bet that he will stop providing documentation if you insist that he changes his method. So, either we accept that this is the way that documentation is provided by Ole and we have someone recreate it in the preferred format, or we don't get any more valuable documentation at all and someone has to do it from scratch in the preferred format. I feel that we benefit more from the first scenario!

@Québécois, the way you talk about other members annoys me. You are absolutely entitled to your opinion, but you could show a bit more respect.

smvdbrink

If I recall correctly, Ole is 76 years ‘old’ and I don't know many people of that age who can do more on a computer than use a browser and an e-mail client. He uses powerpoint to make the documentation, because that is a way that he understands, you can't expect him to change that. The fact that he contributes all that documentation should be encouraged and I think it's a safe bet that he will stop providing documentation if you insist that he changes his method.

Oh, ok. @Sjoelund do you confirm?

Anyway, if that's the issue then it's exactly same issue than with cropping photos and removing backgrounds: those who dont know how to do it are helped by those who do (either referees directly, either contributors in specific forum threads). 

We should probably do that then, transform PPT in actual comments.

But I disagree that Ole wouldnt be able to properly use comments section, as he proved many times how he masters the forum (texts, images, links), and it is exactly same type of editing fields :-)

Québécois - I would ask for one thing. If information comes to you in wrong format, please take it into account. My point is that we should not “reject and forget” that some meaningful information came to Numista, just because of format.If you reject and work with the information you got this way (checking elsewhere, making documentation yourself, writing a comment, or whatever, that would be fine) I hope I explained my stance on this.

I remember few past referee who were, lets say very strict about quality of new entries and it turned out that the catalogue was suffering from that approach.

Jarcek

Québécois - I would ask for one thing. If information comes to you in wrong format, please take it into account. My point is that we should not “reject and forget” that some meaningful information came to Numista, just because of format.If you reject and work with the information you got this way (checking elsewhere, making documentation yourself, writing a comment, or whatever, that would be fine) I hope I explained my stance on this.

 

I remember few past referee who were, lets say very strict about quality of new entries and it turned out that the catalogue was suffering from that approach.

It is exactly what he said he would do ;-)

I dont know why some people think Quebecois is mean to Ole or wish to delete information. I reread entire thread and he never did that imo. 

I thank him to push for following guidelines while gathering all valuable info shared by Ole and everyone else! :-)

Thanks Compendium for your comment.

All this time lost, I could have add a few missing canadian coins to the catalog or even sort out and update the Silver Maple Leaf (SML) bullion coins that need my attention.

I will stand on my ground, by myself if I have to, knowing this format should be abandonned (from now on). If anyone submit one for Canada, I will ask to edit and resubmit according to the proposed simpler, better solution as describe in the guidelines.

It's 3:58 am here and I lost my long reply so enought for tonight about this topic.

Good night.

Jarcek

I remember few past referee who were, lets say very strict about quality of new entries and it turned out that the catalogue was suffering from that approach.

We are a colaborative catalog, it's mean that everyone can contribute, if we want to have all good at onece we would not be a collaborative catalog. A documented information should not be rejected by any mean, but everyone can update the catalog to be in line with the guideline.

Even the first page of Numista is counting with tenths of edits and still can be updated:

The probelm is that if you don't have any base how can you collaborate to improve the catalog?

So an imperfect base is better than nothing …

Compendium

Texts in images should be banned indeed,

As I see it, referees could easily modify images which do not conform when other data in a submission are well presented.

Various people are fluent in various software packages. We do our best with what is available to us. Requiring people to learn different software packages is a bit much to ask, imho.

Generally, when referees need assistance with adjusting something, they ought to ask for that assistance. I have found that numista has many members who are very willing to assist on modifications when help is asked for.

Good day,

I see some of you are still on this topic this morning !

Can one or all of you in favor of still using this format (except Ole) try to edit this image to add an hypothetic missing third variety please ? Let's say one with alternate straight and slanted stars (use what ever picture you wish for this test if you don't like the one I provided).

Please look at your watch before starting the process and at the end.

 Write us back how much time it took you with the resulting picture. You won't understand until you try.

Edit the following:

Add a third coin variety to it using this fake picture (lets pretend it has straight and slanted stars):

I'm not asking for a french and spanish version yet, good luck to all. 

At your mark, get set, GO !!!

P.S. by the way, It took me less than 17 seconds to upload this third picture with it's description text. 🙌

HiberniaVarious people are fluent in various software packages. We do our best with what is available to us. Requiring people to learn different software packages is a bit much to ask, imho.

Totally agree!

With comments field of Numista, no software is needed. It is exactly like writing a forum post. It is why I asked Ole why he prefers to use Powerpoint, as it seems to me more complex than just writing directly in Numista :-)

Compendium

HiberniaVarious people are fluent in various software packages. We do our best with what is available to us. Requiring people to learn different software packages is a bit much to ask, imho.

Totally agree!

With comments field of Numista, no software is needed. It is exactly like writing a forum post. It is why I asked Ole why he prefers to use Powerpoint, as it seems to me more complex than just writing directly in Numista :-)

If you want to help users also outside the small world of numista, you need to have a portable format. Mine are 100% portable! I'm not married to numista, I try to help the all coin communities. If you want to transport, what the Canadians want you to do, you need to make a screen-shot (even with now 77, I can manage that) and what is the result again? A JPG file!!!!! The difference is where??? 

 

If you want to help users also outside the small world of numista, you need to have a portable format. Mine are 100% portable! I'm not married to numista, I try to help the all coin communities. If you want to transport, what the Canadians want you to do, you need to make a screen-shot (even with now 77, I can manage that) and what is the result again? A JPG file!!!!! The difference is where??? 

Putting texts and images as comments would allow anyone to copy paste :-)

Compendium

 

 

If you want to help users also outside the small world of numista, you need to have a portable format. Mine are 100% portable! I'm not married to numista, I try to help the all coin communities. If you want to transport, what the Canadians want you to do, you need to make a screen-shot (even with now 77, I can manage that) and what is the result again? A JPG file!!!!! The difference is where??? 

Putting texts and images as comments would allow anyone to copy paste :-)

Not to mention they could access and use it the their language of preference making it available to more communities. Witch is not the case now.

Sjoelund

I'm not married to numista, I try to help the all coin communities. If you want to transport, what the Canadians want you to do, you need to make a screen-shot (even with now 77, I can manage that) and what is the result again? A JPG file!!!!! The difference is where??? 

FYI,

Good thing we aren't married. Why not starting by helping all the Numista's communities (French, Spanish, Polish, Ukrainian, etc.). It's not the Canadians, it's common sense and the guidelines. So if it's that easy for a 77 years old, why resist ? A small step in the right direction (to me it's a shortcut) for everyone's benefit !!!

Regards,

smvdbrink

If I recall correctly, Ole is 76 years ‘old’ and I don't know many people of that age who can do more on a computer than use a browser and an e-mail client. He uses powerpoint to make the documentation, because that is a way that he understands, you can't expect him to change that. The fact that he contributes all that documentation should be encouraged and I think it's a safe bet that he will stop providing documentation if you insist that he changes his method. So, either we accept that this is the way that documentation is provided by Ole and we have someone recreate it in the preferred format, or we don't get any more valuable documentation at all and someone has to do it from scratch in the preferred format. I feel that we benefit more from the first scenario!

 

@Québécois, the way you talk about other members annoys me. You are absolutely entitled to your opinion, but you could show a bit more respect.

 

Agreed !!!

So did one of you tried to edit the image to add an hypothetic missing third variety ?

How much time did it took you ?  What problems did you experienced ? Can we see the results ? If you succeded in a few clicks, we have an unpaid full time job for you.  Due to the fact we are still accepting new images you will have job security.

Anyways this is futile, the ultimate goal is to convert those images to the proposed format as describe in the guidelines. If you find an easy, quick way to do this conversion, maybe you can show us how you do it.  We will be looking for volunteers.

Until you try…Good night.

I would not add this source, the pictures do not really seem authentic, rather just a ragtag downloaded pile from internet.

I am extremely on the side of Ole in all of this. He should be thanked for all he has done to make Numista a valid resource for collectors at a beginning, intermediate, and master level of collecting.  I will never forget meeting Ole and his willingness to share his knowledge organized and presented well over the years.  I do not know what to say about Canada…I hope they have not lost Numista a great researcher.