I think it would be more consistent with other mules to call it an East Africa 10 Cents, as that's what the planchet is. The current arrangement would be like calling the 1967 New Zealand 2c mule a Bahamas issue, which no one does.
It has to remain in British West Africa because British East Africa KM# 17 is this 1 Florin - George V - East Africa – Numista . You would have to remove km17 from the graphic and the Mule coin page which would make some people irate. Like it or not, right or wrong, it belongs in BWA because SCWC says so.
It has to remain in British West Africa because British East Africa KM# 17 is this 1 Florin - George V - East Africa – Numista . You would have to remove km17 from the graphic and the Mule coin page which would make some people irate. Like it or not, right or wrong, it belongs in BWA because SCWC says so.
KM# 17 doesn't need to be removed, it just needs to be qualified with the country.
(Which is true for many coin pages in Numista where the Numista country assignment doesn't match the KM (or Schön or Schön DM or other catalog) country assignment. For one example see this comments section.)
It has to remain in British West Africa because British East Africa KM# 17 is this 1 Florin - George V - East Africa – Numista . You would have to remove km17 from the graphic and the Mule coin page which would make some people irate. Like it or not, right or wrong, it belongs in BWA because SCWC says so.
KM# 17 doesn't need to be removed, it just needs to be qualified with the country.
(Which is true for many coin pages in Numista where the Numista country assignment doesn't match the KM (or Schön or Schön DM or other catalog) country assignment. For one example see this comments section.)
I disagree. This should not be allowed to happen.
An explanation in the Comments section is fine but the KM number should be removed from the Reference section.
It has to remain in British West Africa because British East Africa KM# 17 is this 1 Florin - George V - East Africa – Numista . You would have to remove km17 from the graphic and the Mule coin page which would make some people irate. Like it or not, right or wrong, it belongs in BWA because SCWC says so.
KM# 17 doesn't need to be removed, it just needs to be qualified with the country.
(Which is true for many coin pages in Numista where the Numista country assignment doesn't match the KM (or Schön or Schön DM or other catalog) country assignment. For one example see this comments section.)
I disagree. This should not be allowed to happen.
An explanation in the Comments section is fine but the KM number should be removed from the Reference section.
I disagree. Since the “issuers” in Numista doesn't exactly match the “countries” for KM it is expected that there will be duplicate numbers occasionally. (And the same issue will arise with other multi-country catalogs like Schön and Schön DM.)
To get another opinion I submitted a change request to eliminate the Brandenburg-Ansbach-Bayreuth KM# 7 from that coin, giving my reasons for keeping the reference code and pointing to this discussion. A referee for German States, escoins, agreed with me and rejected the request. The explanation:
I agree with you and would keep KM and SchönDM references for this coin. The comment clearly describes how these should be interpreted. Most auction houses and dealers do it exactly the same way. Therefore, I will reject your change request.
(In my request I also mentioned the Schön DM code for that coin is another case where the country doesn't match the Numista issuer.)
