Fantasy coins and banknotes are items that look similar to coins and banknotes, but they are made by private companies in the name of a place (a country, a region, or a fictious place) without any official relationship with that place. As such, they are made only for collecting purpose; they have no legal tender and they are not official coins or banknotes from the place they pretend to be from.
Up to now, we used to catalogue them on Numista with the issuer set to the state they pretend to be from. This was wrong, because they are not really issued by that state; and it was misleading, because search for items from a state would bring both items really issued by that state and fantasy items that pretend to be from that state. And it was even more misleading now that it's possible to search for coins, banknotes and exonumia in a single search, as rightly pointed out by several people in this other forum thread.
In order to better represent the relationship between a fantasy coin or banknote and the state written on it, we introduced a new field in the catalogue “pretended issuer”.
For these items, the “issuer” is not be specified anymore and, when creating or modifying a fantasy coin or banknote, the field for “issuer” is replaced by the field “pretended issuer”.
As a result, fantasy coins will not be returned when searching for items from a given issuer. People interested in fantasy items should use the general search query field or the lettering field to search for them.
Also, places which only have fantasy coins and banknotes will disappear from the list of issuers (the only reason some fantasy places are still in the list is because of some items not categorized correctly yet).
The fantasy coin N#85829 showing Andorra as pretended issuer.
Who will decide whether the pretend issuer had the legitimacy to mint coins?
We do collectively, just like we used to do with all kind of issues when we decided between coin or exonumia … the forum is full of these discussions, some easier to decide than others. Everybody is invited to bring proof to the table …
Just call me Bram
No new swaps for the moment, still too many half-ongoing swaps to clean up!
Who will decide whether the pretend issuer had the legitimacy to mint coins?
We do collectively, just like we used to do with all kind of issues when we decided between coin or exonumia … the forum is full of these discussions, some easier to decide than others. Everybody is invited to bring proof to the table …
+1 for that
I thought all micronations and semi-recognized issuers would be moved to fantasy.
I'm not happy about the fact that I now have coins that from an “Unidentified country” in my list. I'd rather see that there is a separate heading with “Pretended Issuers” and that I can find them there. Also, all coins that are unidentified are on the same page, which is not logical.
I guess there a lot o work going on and it is temporary.
I'm only concerned that the issuers I invest time and money in trusting Numista judgement (Seborga, Sealand, Lundy, etc) might end up being categorized alongside total fantasy coins.
Bad decision. Should at least give us the issuer as say “Pretend Bulgaria” rather than everything “Unidentified”. Are we 2nd class citizens if we collect fantasy euros etc….Grr
At the moment one way you can find find these Pretend Issuers is if you have some in your collection.
I have got quite a few of them (419 to be precise) and have added a lot of them to Numista over the last few years.
There are 2 ways to see them this way. (If you have some that is) 😁
1 - Go to the My Collection page, Select All Issuers, and Fantasy Coins. or…
2 - Go to the My Collection page , Select Unidentified Issuer, and All Types.
Either way you just get the full list of them all and they just come up in some kind of random order under Unknown Country.
This depends on how you have your Sort option set, they come up in lots of weird orders.
They all still show the Flag of the Country they purport to come from though which is interesting.
Maybe we could sort them by Flag? Then different Pretend Issuers would be grouped together?
I don't know, just throwing it out there?
The other way to find them is to select Fantasy Coins only under Coins on the Catalogue page. If you sort by Ruling Authority you get some kind of grouping for them. But it is not all that good.
I hope we can come up with a better way of including them on Numista. Maybe a complete new section for them?
The common denominator seems to be that they are Fantasy Coins and are now in an Unidentified Issuer group.
I suggest we take Fantasy Coins out of the Coins Category list and place them in a separate Category of their own.
We would then have Coins, Tokens, Medals, Banknotes, Paper Exonumia and Fantasy Coins as per this mockup?
Of course Micronation Coins and ECU & Pre 199 Euro would stay in Coins as they are now, maybe as an Other Coins Grouping/
I really like the new way that Numista is now set up, It is a huge improvement and I want to thank Xavier and the rest of the team that worked on it. I just hope we can do something better with these Unidentified/Pretend/ Fantasy Coins.
Regards Mike
Master Referee - See my profile for what I collect.
Bad decision. Should at least give us the issuer as say “Pretend Bulgaria” rather than everything “Unidentified”. Are we 2nd class citizens if we collect fantasy euros etc….Grr
All “Unidentified” will be changed to the pretended issuer (as say the first post!)
Wanted & swap list (euro coins & world coins, exonumia and banknotes circulated) https://goo.gl/AQjfKp - I have euro & world CC coins for swap.
I underestimated the impact of removing the issuer of fantasy coins. It makes them too difficult to find in the catalogue and in the collections. Let's rollback the change if needed and find a better solution to address the two issuers that let this development:
It's wrong and misleading to tell that a fantasy coin that pretend to be from a given state was issued by that state.
When searching for coins or banknotes by issuer, many people want to see only items issued by the selected issuer, not items that pretend to be from that issuer.
Here are some solutions that have been proposed so far.
Continue with the current solution where fantasy coins have no issuer but only a pretended issuer. We can improve sorting so that coins that pretend to be from the same country are grouped together. We could also change the labels “unidentified issuer” and “unknown issuer” into “unspecified issuer”.
Assign an issuer to fantasy coins (as it was mostly the case before). The coin page can still show “Pretended issuer” based on the object type (fantasy coin or fantasy banknote). And the search issue can be solved in different manners: 2a. Add an option in the search form “Include fantasy items: yes / no”, with “no” as a default value. 2b. Move the fantasy items out of the categories “Coins” and “Banknotes” and make them into a new category “Fantasy items”, so that they are easier to unselect. 2c. Adjust the sorting logic so that fantasy coins are always shown after regular coins.
Create specific issuers for fantasy items. For example, we would have an issuer “Vatican (fantasy)” separate from “Vatican”. This way coins really issued by an issuer and fantasy coins that pretend to be from that issuer are never mixed in search results.
Please share your opinion about your preferred solution(s).
I know the situation is complicated, I kind of liked it before having distinct separation between ALL “Coins” and ALL “Exonumia”.
In my personal collection, I have a few from Western Sahara that are properly assigned as “Fantasy coins”, and when looking in the “my collection” section of the website, they come up when I sort specifically by "fantasy coins":
My issue is that for some reason they don't show up when sorting by ALL, which includes all my coins, banknotes, and even other exonumia, but for some reason not the few fantasy coins from Western Sahara. I just realized: like you guys already discussed, it's because they're categorized as “unknown country”, even though the pretended issuer has the right country (Artsakh & Western Sahara for my examples). In my opinion, it would be better if they weren't listed as unknown country, just because that makes sorting and finding them very hard, and not visible on your map no matter what you do.
That's just my opinion,
-Parker
Parker Freeze (@freeze_coins)
• Referee for coins from Burkina Faso
I did enjoy the category re-organization, putting everything on one page solved a lot of problems… then you destroyed that progress by making it harder than ever to find fantasy items… What would I prefer.
I doubt you will find a global solution to an individual problem; I would put all the fantasy items back to the issuers they pretend to be from.
But keep items separated by ‘type’, so coins, then banknotes, then tokens/medals, and fantasy items at the bottom.
The solution for people that hate fantasy items should be individual – so add an option in settings so all items tagged as ‘fantasy’ do not appear in any view or search of the catalogue – rather than a global solution that hides them from everyone they should simply disappear from the catalogue for anyone who dislikes them.
I underestimated the impact of removing the issuer of fantasy coins. It makes them too difficult to find in the catalogue and in the collections. Let's rollback the change if needed and find a better solution to address the two issuers that let this development:
It's wrong and misleading to tell that a fantasy coin that pretend to be from a given state was issued by that state.
When searching for coins or banknotes by issuer, many people want to see only items issued by the selected issuer, not items that pretend to be from that issuer.
Here are some solutions that have been proposed so far.
Continue with the current solution where fantasy coins have no issuer but only a pretended issuer. We can improve sorting so that coins that pretend to be from the same country are grouped together. We could also change the labels “unidentified issuer” and “unknown issuer” into “unspecified issuer”.
Assign an issuer to fantasy coins (as it was mostly the case before). The coin page can still show “Pretended issuer” based on the object type (fantasy coin or fantasy banknote). And the search issue can be solved in different manners: 2a. Add an option in the search form “Include fantasy items: yes / no”, with “no” as a default value. 2b. Move the fantasy items out of the categories “Coins” and “Banknotes” and make them into a new category “Fantasy items”, so that they are easier to unselect. 2c. Adjust the sorting logic so that fantasy coins are always shown after regular coins.
Create specific issuers for fantasy items. For example, we would have an issuer “Vatican (fantasy)” separate from “Vatican”. This way coins really issued by an issuer and fantasy coins that pretend to be from that issuer are never mixed in search results.
Please share your opinion about your preferred solution(s).
Xavier - Thanks for the thought that has gone into the possible solutions. I agree with your first two dotpoints at the top of your post.
It's wrong and misleading to tell that a fantasy coin that pretend to be from a given state was issued by that state.
When searching for coins or banknotes by issuer, many people want to see only items issued by the selected issuer, not items that pretend to be from that issuer.
Personally I prefer a combination of a couple of the solutions proposed.
I think a separate Menu Bar item for Fantasy Coins as I proposed above. Taking Fantasy coins out of the Coins option but Leaving Micronations and Pre 1999 ECU's In the Coins option. They could be combined in a new Other Coins grouping within Coins because that is what they are.
Then within the new Fantasy Coins menu bar item is created only actual Fantasy Coins will be included in that grouping. Coins like these.
Within this Fantasy Coins section we will need to be able to select individual Pretend Issuers so your
option 3
Create specific issuers for fantasy items. For example, we would have an issuer “Vatican (fantasy)” separate from “Vatican”. This way coins really issued by an issuer and fantasy coins that pretend to be from that issuer are never mixed in search results.
would work quite well and I think would satisfy most if not all the problems we are having.
Regards Mike
Master Referee - See my profile for what I collect.
I don't see enough reason that warrants a separate category. If the object is neither official nor unofficial/private with a use for some kind of exchange of value or service it is nothing more then an art-piece. And as such I would think they should be put under medals.
What about banning or segregating all non relevant NCLT from actual circulating coins, so all the Meme coins, “artistic silver rounds” showing skulls with knifes through them from Niue and Farookastan are relegated away from real coins like an 1829 Shilling of the UK or even a 1965 Nickel from Canada?
But I applaud this move, a wise and good one!
I love coins. Especially silver, gold and anything really old.
Member of the Royal Numismatic Society of New Zealand and the Auckland Numismatic Society
There are too many new terms: “collector coins”, “pretend issuers”, and too many complex sub-divisions, a pain for not only newcomers in numismatics but even for the old ones.
The site is not only “I just want see official coins” and “I just want to see fantasies”, people uses the catalog to find out what a coin is, or to add to the collection or even to get frustrated because bought something but is fantasy. Sometimes we want to see the coins, sometimes we want to research, sometimes we want to add to our collections, so now it is a bunch of selects/unselects, click here, click there, oops, was not selected the right thing.
The previous incredible amazing simple divisions was perfect.
Cocos Keeling have Fantasy Coins and made up Coins, each one should be in each part of the catalog. Coins or Exonumia.
From our 250 members of our Collectors group that uses Numita: NONE liked the mixed catalog.
I underestimated the impact of removing the issuer of fantasy coins. It makes them too difficult to find in the catalogue and in the collections. Let's rollback the change if needed and find a better solution to address the two issuers that let this development:
It's wrong and misleading to tell that a fantasy coin that pretend to be from a given state was issued by that state.
Greetings Boss, and also all lovers of payment across our galaxy.
I don't want to argue or look for problems, I just don't like something. I am also the publisher of the 🏅 medal "for saving life" and a person's faith in recovery. However, for many years I have been carrying the fact that my medal is included among,, unknown countries,, and the publisher is also - compare here.
I am very unhappy about it.
Look at the coin issuer,, Numista,, -The issuer is the state of,,France,,
This is mine:
Fantasy
So isn't it a double standard?
The medal is issued by "me", and I live in Moravia - which is part of the Czech Republic, and the coin evokes the non-existent coin of the publisher "Great Moravia", - a state unit of the Middle Ages that stretched from the Baltic to the Adriatic - the whole of Central Europe.
This is the correct inclusion for this coin - exonumia:
From our 250 members of our Collectors group that uses Numita: NONE liked the mixed catalog.
I'm starting to wonder where that parallel numista universe is located … I think it would be better if those "250 members" participated in improving the catalogue and participating in the discussions on the Numista forum.
If the coin/exonumia division was as black and white as you are trying to make it sound, we would not be having this discussion. Like in real life though, there are many grey fields and what we (everybody participating in the overhaul of the site AND the discussions on the forum, so you included) are trying to archieve is to define every item as correctly as possible. With the additional subdivisions, the clasification will maybe not always be easier to use, but at least the result should be more correct. As discussed many times before when we just had the coin/exonumia subdivison (that you make sound like heaven), the classification is not as black and white with a lot of exonumie (eg. tokens) being much more coinlike than many coins (eg. NCLT).
I don't think the ctrl-Z will happen, there is still great support for the new approach if you read the posts, so try to work with the Numista team and make suggestions to improve the system and help the site move worward.
And like was already said before: exonumia = token+medal+paper exonumia … so exonumia is still here, just with more (logical) subdivisions.
Just call me Bram
No new swaps for the moment, still too many half-ongoing swaps to clean up!
I'm starting to wonder where that parallel numista universe is located
Man there is a world of collectors outside Numista and many communities.
participating in the discussions on the Numista forum.
I bet less than 1% of Numista members participate in the forum. Even worse for those with language barriers.
would be better if those "250 members" participated in improving the catalogue
Who said we do not?
make suggestions to improve the system
I just did above
Xavier asked opinions, and so my opinion is: The changes turned things to worse. There were hundreds of amazing improvments in the past, but I guess this one was a step back, the subdivisions are good but blending all together is not. It is part of the flow of evolution, and if is forbidden to say that, I would gladly erase all my comments.
We know coin collecting is not black and white, but for instance, there is one Krause foir coins, one Krause for tokens, if Numista chooses to mix everything, that is ok, but should expect some frustration from collectors.
All you have to do is only select coins from the categories menu bar if you are not interested in Exonumia. It is a simple as that. Your selection choice is remembered for the next time you log in. You never have to look at Exonumia if you don't want to.
You can even fine tune it down to only Standard Circulating and Commemorative coins if you want. This new setup gives us the best of all worlds and in my opinion is fantastic.
Mike
Master Referee - See my profile for what I collect.
All you have to do is only select coins from the categories menu bar if you are not interested in Exonumia. It is a simple as that. Your selection choice is remembered for the next time you log in. You never have to look at Exonumia if you don't want to.
You can even fine tune it down to only Standard Circulating and Commemorative coins if you want. This new setup gives us the best of all worlds and in my opinion is fantastic.
Mike
Understood
But let's see what happens in real life:
Ok, you are a collector and want to buy coins, unless they are fantasy made up coins
Checking a coin site you find this one:
Great! Cocos Keeling! So you browse the catalog but the filter is showing only legal coins and so will not show this coin, should be end of story. But in real life, of course you will select everything to find that coin and check if it really is something else. Then all selections will be saved, and then so on, after a time it is a lot of click-unclick-select-desselect.
I guess that is why people are not liking the mix.
But might be just me, maybe I am too much time checking coins.
Perhaps adding user defined searches would help with the “lot of click-unclick-select-desselect.” This is similar to other people suggesting adding bookmarks for favorite searches except they'll always be there regardless of what computer you're using or what browser you're using.
Perhaps adding user defined searches would help with the “lot of click-unclick-select-desselect.” This is similar to other people suggesting adding bookmarks for favorite searches except they'll always be there regardless of what computer you're using or what browser you're using.
+1
Wanted & swap list (euro coins & world coins, exonumia and banknotes circulated) https://goo.gl/AQjfKp - I have euro & world CC coins for swap.
Regarding the inconsistencies/problems found… the change is in process, we can not expect everything to be fixed at once… patience!
Xavier
Hello,
I underestimated the impact of removing the issuer of fantasy coins. It makes them too difficult to find in the catalogue and in the collections. Let's rollback the change if needed and find a better solution to address the two issuers that let this development:
It's wrong and misleading to tell that a fantasy coin that pretend to be from a given state was issued by that state.
When searching for coins or banknotes by issuer, many people want to see only items issued by the selected issuer, not items that pretend to be from that issuer.
Here are some solutions that have been proposed so far.
Continue with the current solution where fantasy coins have no issuer but only a pretended issuer. We can improve sorting so that coins that pretend to be from the same country are grouped together. We could also change the labels “unidentified issuer” and “unknown issuer” into “unspecified issuer”.
Assign an issuer to fantasy coins (as it was mostly the case before). The coin page can still show “Pretended issuer” based on the object type (fantasy coin or fantasy banknote). And the search issue can be solved in different manners: 2a. Add an option in the search form “Include fantasy items: yes / no”, with “no” as a default value. 2b. Move the fantasy items out of the categories “Coins” and “Banknotes” and make them into a new category “Fantasy items”, so that they are easier to unselect. 2c. Adjust the sorting logic so that fantasy coins are always shown after regular coins.
Create specific issuers for fantasy items. For example, we would have an issuer “Vatican (fantasy)” separate from “Vatican”. This way coins really issued by an issuer and fantasy coins that pretend to be from that issuer are never mixed in search results.
Please share your opinion about your preferred solution(s).
I am agree with the new "Pretended issuer" in fantasy objects, and I like more the option 2 (Assign an issuer to fantasy coins, as it was mostly the case before).
I see disadvantages in the other options:
1. Continue with the current solution where fantasy coins have no issuer but only a pretended issuer.
I guess this consists of two issuer fields (issuer, with value in normal objects, and empty in fantasy objects; pretended issuer, empty in normal objects, and with value in fantasy objects) and an issuer list used in both issuer and pretended issuer fields.
Disadvantage:
Fantasy objects and normal objects are displayed in different lists. This is an advantage (if we want a list of only normal objects) or a disadvantage (we can not get an unique list with all objects from, or pretended from, an issuer). Of course, the system can merge both lists but is extra work.
3. Create specific issuers for fantasy items.
I guess this consists of an issuer field and an issuer list with both fantasy and normal issuers.
Disadvantages:
We have duplicated issuers. For example: “Vatican (fantasy)”, and “Vatican”. There is more data to manage (to use and to translate).
Fantasy objects and normal objects are displayed in different lists. In this case, the system can not merge both list because the issuers are different and not related.
About the option 2:
I am agree with show “Pretended issuer” based on the object type.
This option get all objects from an issuer (real or pretended):
count all its object,
the search of objects gets them all,
the map with our collection drawing all objects.
If an object has a pretended issuer the link on forum messages show the name of the issuer (perhaps the system could add “ (pretended)” in the link), instead of “Unknown country” like now here: N#136413
If we do not want see fantasy objects, we can deselect the types “fantasy coins” and “fantasy banknotes”. I do not see the problem here…
About the search issue:
2a. Add an option in the search form “Include fantasy items: yes / no”, with “no” as a default value.
As i said we can now deselect the types “fantasy coins” and “fantasy banknotes”. This quick access can be useful.
I was not too convinced at first: A collector of non-emergency objects could want an option “Include emergency items: yes / no”, and other want an option “Include non-circulating items: yes / no”, other “Include item patters: yes / no”, and so on. But if this option is renamed to “Include items from pretended issuers: yes / no”, I see more sense in it.
2b. Move the fantasy items out of the categories “Coins” and “Banknotes” and make them into a new category “Fantasy items”, so that they are easier to unselect.
I like option 2a better.
Same reasoning. Why not a new category “Emergency items”? or a new category “Item patters”?
Note: perhaps a new category “Special filters” with all object types common to coins and banknotes: Standard circulation items Circulating commemorative items Non-circulating items Fantasy items Emergency items Local items Items patterns Contemporary counterfeits Item replicas Play money Confinament items and more
2c. Adjust the sorting logic so that fantasy coins are always shown after regular coins.
I am agree.
First the objects with issuer and then objects with pretended issuer. But how?
issuer1, issuer1 (pretended), issuer2, issuer2 (pretended)… (I like more this) or
Well, I am half “team #well-done” and half “team #ctrl-z” about these changes, so let's say I'm neutral.
But I admit that my initial reaction was the same as Geison (at least I already knew the rework was on the cooking).
But I've seen that some progress was already made since the overhaul went live. Seeing fantasy issuers between modern and ancient issuers was very off to me, that was already fixed thank goodness.
Since this new site design is coming to stay (and with that needing to re-learn some things), it's better to be well-designed, so I hope all the issues that have arisen gets a proper solution, specially the exonumia issue. I knew that merging the 3 sections would create a big problem but at least this exonumia problem is now one of the top priorities.
rsirian's suggestion of user-saved search settings sounds great.
…And what about also having two slots for predetermined search settings ("standard & commem coins" and “standard & commem” notes) along with the 3 slots for personalized settings?
Thinking on them as some sort of quick access to the display of “only coin” and “only banknote” on each country that we are used to see, without selecting half dozen buttons, these two could open two of your personal slots for your other search favourites.
@MIMAEL, your comment about the issuer for tokens and medals highlights a real issue. It's not accurate to say that the Numista tokens were issued by France. We have a workaround that shows “Location” instead of “Issuer”, but I'm not so happy with that solution. It's actually quite similar to the question of fantasy coins.
If we stick with the current guidelines (here), the issuer/location should be either the pretended issuer (Great Moravia in your case?) if it's a fantasy coin or the country of the issuing entity (Czech Republic in your case) if it's a token or medal.
@MIMAEL, your comment about the issuer for tokens and medals highlights a real issue. It's not accurate to say that the Numista tokens were issued by France. We have a workaround that shows “Location” instead of “Issuer”, but I'm not so happy with that solution. It's actually quite similar to the question of fantasy coins.
If we stick with the current guidelines (here), the issuer/location should be either the pretended issuer (Great Moravia in your case?) if it's a fantasy coin or the country of the issuing entity (Czech Republic in your case) if it's a token or medal.
Thanks to the Boss for his comments and understanding.
Yes, I recognize that the rules should be binding and the same for everyone.
However, there must be - if there is a reason for it from the publisher - designer, designer - the possibility to use a fantasy land as an exception to the rules.
You know it's not the first time I've asked for it and presented it. Thank you.
Ivan
And this is the great thing about our community, that we can talk about things and look for solutions. If the world worked like this, there would be no conflicts.
Perhaps adding user defined searches would help with the “lot of click-unclick-select-desselect.” This is similar to other people suggesting adding bookmarks for favorite searches except they'll always be there regardless of what computer you're using or what browser you're using.
Developing this idea… user-defined searches pages can be saved with name, instead of a generic name “User defined #N” (adding to search box a fields set “New user defined search” with a text input “Name” and a submit button “Save”).
For example, an user can create different user-defined searches:
These user-defined searches can all be displayed on the first level as in the example of risian1, or grouped in a new “category” of “user defined searches” (in my opinion, better if there are many user-defined searches).
Also, Numista needs a section, for example in the “My account settings” page, for management the user defined searches list (delete and perhaps rename them).
Note: Maybe this must publish to a new suggestion for Numista (moving these messages in a new topic?)
My point is, we have to always keep everything selected, coins and exonumia.
And the next search will show all results (coins and exo) mixed together, so we have to only select the results we want, choosing in the list and clicking, selecting, unclicking etc.
That's why some users are creating bookmark lists for each search configuration. I could be wrong, but I don't believe this approach is neat as the two main categories used previously.
My point is, we have to always keep everything selected, coins and exonumia.
No you don't. You can do whatever you want. You can search in only Coins or only in Exonumia or both if you want.
For me I look at a piece and can pretty much decide whether something is a coin, or a medal, or a token etc and then search accordingly. Clicking on a few options is not difficult and compared to the old way where you had to first select coins or exonumia and then country or types this new way is much more efficient. The piece you used as an example above would have taken a lot more than 3 seconds to find using the old methods.
Regards Mike
Master Referee - See my profile for what I collect.
I underestimated the impact of removing the issuer of fantasy coins. It makes them too difficult to find in the catalogue and in the collections. Let's rollback the change if needed and find a better solution to address the two issuers that let this development:
It's wrong and misleading to tell that a fantasy coin that pretend to be from a given state was issued by that state.
When searching for coins or banknotes by issuer, many people want to see only items issued by the selected issuer, not items that pretend to be from that issuer.
Here are some solutions that have been proposed so far.
Continue with the current solution where fantasy coins have no issuer but only a pretended issuer. We can improve sorting so that coins that pretend to be from the same country are grouped together. We could also change the labels “unidentified issuer” and “unknown issuer” into “unspecified issuer”.
Assign an issuer to fantasy coins (as it was mostly the case before). The coin page can still show “Pretended issuer” based on the object type (fantasy coin or fantasy banknote). And the search issue can be solved in different manners: 2a. Add an option in the search form “Include fantasy items: yes / no”, with “no” as a default value. 2b. Move the fantasy items out of the categories “Coins” and “Banknotes” and make them into a new category “Fantasy items”, so that they are easier to unselect. 2c. Adjust the sorting logic so that fantasy coins are always shown after regular coins.
Create specific issuers for fantasy items. For example, we would have an issuer “Vatican (fantasy)” separate from “Vatican”. This way coins really issued by an issuer and fantasy coins that pretend to be from that issuer are never mixed in search results.
Please share your opinion about your preferred solution(s).
Xavier - Thanks for the thought that has gone into the possible solutions. I agree with your first two dotpoints at the top of your post.
It's wrong and misleading to tell that a fantasy coin that pretend to be from a given state was issued by that state.
When searching for coins or banknotes by issuer, many people want to see only items issued by the selected issuer, not items that pretend to be from that issuer.
Personally I prefer a combination of a couple of the solutions proposed.
I think a separate Menu Bar item for Fantasy Coins as I proposed above. Taking Fantasy coins out of the Coins option but Leaving Micronations and Pre 1999 ECU's In the Coins option. They could be combined in a new Other Coins grouping within Coins because that is what they are.
Then within the new Fantasy Coins menu bar item is created only actual Fantasy Coins will be included in that grouping. Coins like these.
Within this Fantasy Coins section we will need to be able to select individual Pretend Issuers so your
option 3
Create specific issuers for fantasy items. For example, we would have an issuer “Vatican (fantasy)” separate from “Vatican”. This way coins really issued by an issuer and fantasy coins that pretend to be from that issuer are never mixed in search results.
would work quite well and I think would satisfy most if not all the problems we are having.
Regards Mike
Of all the options discussed here and proposed by @Xavier , the one I like the most is @brismike.
I would just like to add that I think it would be better to call the new category Fantasy Items and include coins and banknotes in it.
I love this new Numista classification, being able to see banknotes and coins of the same type and issuer together is something that I don't think can be done in any other online catalog. Simply great, congratulations!!!
I also want to highlight the incredible effort that is being made to find solutions to the problems that arise and the joint and consensual search for the best options.
Regards, Oscar
Coin referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea, Marshall Islands, Moldova, Liberia and Spain
Banknote referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea and Spain
IMHO, maybe a solution should be to consider the real issuer; sometimes, they are companies with little to no relationship with the issuer depicted on the coin/banknote. In the case of the Italian "miniassegni", the true issuer were banks nothing to do with Italy (intended as the Italian state). At that time no foreigner banks were established in Italy, but assume that Credit Agricole issue someminiassegno in Italy, who will be the issuer? Italy. France or Credit Agricole
IMHO, maybe a solution should be to consider the real issuer; sometimes, they are companies with little to no relationship with the issuer depicted on the coin/banknote. In the case of the Italian "miniassegni", the true issuer were banks nothing to do with Italy (intended as the Italian state). At that time no foreigner banks were established in Italy, but assume that Credit Agricole issue someminiassegno in Italy, who will be the issuer? Italy. France or Credit Agricole
The case of the Miniassegni (and I am not an expert), I think is correctly assigned to the Issuer "Italian Notgeld", just as has been done with the emergency coinage of other states. It was emergency paper money created in Italy to circulate in Italy by entities (mostly) from Italy.
One question I have is whether these banknotes were in local circulation (from the region of the issuing bank) or if they were in free circulation throughout Italy.
Currently, the Issuer is Italian Notgeld, but I think that the necessary Issuing Entities/Banks should be created to cover all the issuing entities and assign them to each banknote.
As for the category of these banknotes, they are currently "Local banknotes". As I said, I don't know if they are only for local or state circulation, but even if they are local, I think they should be changed to the "Emergency banknotes" category.
This is just my opinion.
Coin referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea, Marshall Islands, Moldova, Liberia and Spain
Banknote referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea and Spain
Here are some solutions that have been proposed so far.
Continue with the current solution where fantasy coins have no issuer but only a pretended issuer. We can improve sorting so that coins that pretend to be from the same country are grouped together. We could also change the labels “unidentified issuer” and “unknown issuer” into “unspecified issuer”.
Assign an issuer to fantasy coins (as it was mostly the case before). The coin page can still show “Pretended issuer” based on the object type (fantasy coin or fantasy banknote). And the search issue can be solved in different manners: 2a. Add an option in the search form “Include fantasy items: yes / no”, with “no” as a default value. 2b. Move the fantasy items out of the categories “Coins” and “Banknotes” and make them into a new category “Fantasy items”, so that they are easier to unselect. 2c. Adjust the sorting logic so that fantasy coins are always shown after regular coins.
Create specific issuers for fantasy items. For example, we would have an issuer “Vatican (fantasy)” separate from “Vatican”. This way coins really issued by an issuer and fantasy coins that pretend to be from that issuer are never mixed in search results.
Thank you for addressing this important issue. I believe that combining elements from your proposed solutions could offer the best outcome. Specifically, creating specific issuers for fantasy items (Option 3) while also implementing an option in the search form to include or exclude fantasy items (Option 2a).
By having dedicated issuers like "Vatican (fantasy)," we can clearly distinguish fantasy coins from official ones, preventing any confusion during searches. Additionally, giving users the ability to include or exclude fantasy items in their search results empowers them to control what they wish to see, enhancing their overall experience.
This combined approach maintains clarity in the catalog, ensures accurate search results, and accommodates the preferences of different users. It strikes a balance between organization and usability, and I believe it would effectively address the concerns raised.
Referee for Spain, Iberia (ancient), Suebi Kingdom and Visigothic Kingdom
Btw Micronations should be on a Micronations section and not inside a Fantasy section.
Of course fantasy Micronations (and fantasy unrecognized countries) coins should still belong in the Fantasy group.
This distinction will respect the sovereignty of partially recognized entities and will make collectors who focus on them happy.
They are within their own sub section under the Fantasy coins. That gives enough filtering options for those who are interested and correctly keeps legal tender from fantasy currency separate.
Btw Micronations should be on a Micronations section and not inside a Fantasy section.
Of course fantasy Micronations (and fantasy unrecognized countries) coins should still belong in the Fantasy group.
This distinction will respect the sovereignty of partially recognized entities and will make collectors who focus on them happy.
They are within their own sub section under the Fantasy coins. That gives enough filtering options for those who are interested and correctly keeps legal tender from fantasy currency separate.
So basically Numista is saying that all micronations are purely fantasy. Might not be the case of all of them.
There are even people that died to defend their sovereignty.
As per my suggestion above, Micronation & pre 1999 ECU coins should stay in “Coins” under a section called "Other Coins". Basically a renaming of "Fantasy Coins.
Then actual Fantasy coins should have a separate section of their own on the top menu bar where we can list them as Fantasy Vatican, Fantasy Australia, Fantasy Greece etc etc.
Mike
Master Referee - See my profile for what I collect.
As per my suggestion above, Micronation & pre 1999 ECU coins should stay in “Coins” under a section called "Other Coins". Basically a renaming of "Fantasy Coins.
Then actual Fantasy coins should have a separate section of their own on the top menu bar where we can list them as Fantasy Vatican, Fantasy Australia, Fantasy Greece etc etc.
It seems difficult to reach a consensus about the best solution.
However, there is a consensus that the implemented solution, where the fantasy coins and banknotes have no issuer, is not a good solution. So I reverted the change. Fantasy coins and banknotes are now associated again with their issuer. I only kept the wording “Pretended issuer” instead of “Issuer” on the page of fantasy items.
Micronations are generally disrespectful to all the sovereign nations these tax dodgers and nutjobs stake their unenforceable claims.
Could be. Who are the expert in international laws to judge them? Numista Team?
Anyway, also there are two kinds of micronations coins, those issued by those who claim the sovereignity and those that create that scam fantasy coins to lure collectors. So there is micronations, and fantasy micronations.
So I reverted the change. Fantasy coins and banknotes are now associated again with their issuer. I only kept the wording “Pretended issuer” instead of “Issuer” on the page of fantasy items.
Is this process complete, still ongoing, or as it just failed to return many items?
A few examples:
The Jason Island notes from the Falkland Islands: N#232861
The Redonda Islands notes from inside Antigua and Barbuda: N#398495
Will still the micronations be considered all under Fantasy invented places in the menu?
Idk, maybe the word “Fantasy” is different in some languages.
Fantasy: Counterfeits made to lure collectors, fakes, make-believe, unnoficial imitations, imaginated things, play money, coins of fairy tales, delusions, illusory coins, fancy coins, coins for fun, coins for kids…
Will still the micronations be considered all under Fantasy invented places in the menu?
Idk, maybe the word “Fantasy” is different in some languages.
Fantasy: Counterfeits made to lure collectors, fakes, make-believe, unnoficial imitations, imaginated things, play money, coins of fairy tales, delusions, illusory coins, fancy coins, coins for fun, coins for kids…
What do you see in that category that shouldn't be called Fantasy?
Will still the micronations be considered all under Fantasy invented places in the menu?
Idk, maybe the word “Fantasy” is different in some languages.
Fantasy: Counterfeits made to lure collectors, fakes, make-believe, unnoficial imitations, imaginated things, play money, coins of fairy tales, delusions, illusory coins, fancy coins, coins for fun, coins for kids…
What do you see in that category that shouldn't be called Fantasy?
Will still the micronations be considered all under Fantasy invented places in the menu?
What do you see in that category that shouldn't be called Fantasy?
Micronations.
Each one have their history.
Having a history doesn't make a fake country into a real country.
But I should have been more precise in my question. Trying again: Which items currently listed under the Fantasy/Micronation category shouldn't be called Fantasy?
Will still the micronations be considered all under Fantasy invented places in the menu?
What do you see in that category that shouldn't be called Fantasy?
Micronations.
Each one have their history.
Having a history doesn't make a fake country into a real country.
But I should have been more precise in my question. Trying again: Which items currently listed under the Fantasy/Micronation category shouldn't be called Fantasy?
Hutt River: In 1970 Leonard Casey and some families in Western Australia had 4000 hectares of wheat to harvest in an agreement with the Australian government called production quotas, the government only bought 40 hectares from the families, Casey went to court requesting compensation, as it was not accepted, he used international laws that allowed the secession of properties from the country, with separation of the Commonwealth from Australia, but maintaining loyalty to Queen Elizabeth II as sovereign.
Seborga: Was independent since 1054 , in 1960 was said still independent with a prince nominated, referendum in 1995 decided to keep autonomous electing the new prince _La Tremendità_.
Sealand: Based on the Plataform HM Fort Roughs created in 1943, considered sovereign state by the Bates family, was recognized as a _de facto_ state by Germany.
Lundy: In the 1920s, Martin Coles Harman, a major English businessman, purchased the island for £25,000 and proclaimed himself king, claiming Lundy to be a self-governing dominion under British sovereignty. Coins of Lundy were found in circulation along with British coins in local taverns, which was enough to sentence Harman.
Cocos Keeling: The Clunies-Ross family governed the Cocos (Keeling) Islands in a feudal-like system, issuing their own currency to be used by residents for purchasing goods in local stores.
Christiania: Semi-autonomous community with an alternative social structure that dates back to the early 1970s. Danish government has tolerated and contested its autonomy at various points, but it has gradually formalized Christiania's standing through agreements that allow the community to exist with certain conditions.
----
Just some examples; I know there are more but I am not familiar with them.
By the way there are coins issued by the rulers of those nations and there is fantasy coins, I see there are threads in the forums about what should be on the catalog and what not, based on who recognized the issue of the coins for each of those micronations.
The legal status of each "country" is certainly matter of discussion and debate, and I'm not in a position to judge it. But who is?
Cocos Keeling and Seborga are different from the other entries in your list in that there are items in Numista for them that aren't classified as Fantasy. The fact that some items are classified as Fantasy doesn't mean the country isn't or wasn't real.
For Seborga, is there any real connection between the previous state and the current tourist attraction called Seborga?
For the others, do you really believe they fit a standard dictionary definition of “country”? Is there any of them that has a full legal code and independent law enforcement? That has people who are citizens of that “country” and not a citizenship in another country?
do you really believe they fit a standard dictionary definition of “country”?
No expert in international laws here to claim anything.
But I (and others) do collect coins from micronations and partially recognized states, and I guess some of them have a degree of background story that make their coins, legal or not, interesting and appealing.
And Numista should not act as the magistrate to determine the officiality of the sovereignty of those claimants.
I agree that Numista should try to avoid making decisions on sovereignty. And should try to avoid decisions on many similar things – instead Numista should use standard definitions in common use.
To decide whether something is a current country there are several standards that could be chosen:
