edit date [solved]

N#227621

Please change dates on yearlines to:

01/03/1960 (1963)

as per comments it was issued in 1963, but date on note states 1st March 1960

The format DD/MM/YYYY (YYYY) is not possible as far as I know.

Hi Bram!

I put the year 1963 in the issue date field and adjusted the correct date to March 1, 1960.

Thanks! =)

Idolenz

The format DD/MM/YYYY (YYYY) is not possible as far as I know.

Does this guideline not apply anymore since introduction of the issue date? Then guidelines should be changed if not in use anymore … (@Xavier ? )

https://en.numista.com/help/year-month-day-180.html

"If the year of issue is different to the year written in the note, record it in the Gregorian/Julian calendar using the “Change date” override feature:

• 1945-May-29 (1947) (29 May 1945 is written on the banknote; 1947 is the issuing year)"

 Just wondering 😉

So it is possible, I remembered that in the past it wasn't possible. Maybe because of the width of other elements like number of printed notes and values as well as signatures.

BramVB

Idolenz

The format DD/MM/YYYY (YYYY) is not possible as far as I know.

Does this guideline not apply anymore since introduction of the issue date? Then guidelines should be changed if not in use anymore … (@Xavier ? )

 

https://en.numista.com/help/year-month-day-180.html

"If the year of issue is different to the year written in the note, record it in the Gregorian/Julian calendar using the “Change date” override feature:

• 1945-May-29 (1947) (29 May 1945 is written on the banknote; 1947 is the issuing year)"

 

 Just wondering 😉

Except these guidelines weren't followed here since the new "Issued date" was used.

rsirian1

Except these guidelines weren't followed here since the new "Issued date" was used.

The good thing about the “old” system is that it is possible to add issue date per yearline, while the issue date is for the first issue of the whole type. I do prefer the old system, even though only admins could add those dates …

BramVB

rsirian1

Except these guidelines weren't followed here since the new "Issued date" was used.

The good thing about the “old” system is that it is possible to add issue date per yearline, while the issue date is for the first issue of the whole type. I do prefer the old system, even though only admins could add those dates …

never mind

Hello everyone! Since some conversations still took place here after we had responded to Bram's request, I think I can give my two cents here. =)

There are, in fact, several records where, in the year lines, we have the date stamped on the note and, in parentheses, the year of issue. And this is still quite useful when we have several different variants of the same issue. In this specific case, where we only have one variant (besides the Specimen), having the year 1963 in the issue line ends up being redundant information, since we now have the option of putting the date of issue in its own field.

In this field, we put the date of the first issue of a banknote (or coin). When there is only one variant, we put the date of issue there and everything is fine. There will continue to be cases where we will have the year of issue in parentheses, as there will also be cases like this one in this forum. And that's all fine! The important thing is that the information is as clear as possible for users. =)

The most important thing about this topic was that Bram alerted us to the date that was previously registered incorrectly. And there are still many adjustments to be made to various issuers here at Numista. We continue to try to make the site better and better.

Have a good Sunday everyone!

Regards,

Vladimir.

Sorry. I was just testing the possibilities and meant to cancel those change requests.