Switzerland 5 Rappen 1939 - missing from data

Numista mintage data for 5 Rappen coin missing data for 1939

Google reckons ~10 million minted 

Google is not a source.

 Already on the page 

N#170 

 Maybe you were looking at 

N#168  [1879-1980] 

and did not look down the page to the 'See also' section > 

You are correct!

wasn’t expecting the mint to change the composition in the middle of a huge date run 

This is where the comments section should be used so that things like these are explained! Maybe someone can update the comments section on both entries…

peterjhalford

This is where the comments section should be used so that things like these are explained! Maybe someone can update the comments section on both entries…

I thought that's what the See also section was for.  According to the guidelines:

Other coin types with identical designs, but different alloys, weights, dimensions, edges

Why add a comment that says, “For similar coins of different composition see:  ”

rsirian1

peterjhalford

This is where the comments section should be used so that things like these are explained! Maybe someone can update the comments section on both entries…

I thought that's what the See also section was for.  According to the guidelines:

Other coin types with identical designs, but different alloys, weights, dimensions, edges

Why add a comment that says, “For similar coins of different composition see:  ”

There must be a specific reason why that range of dates was not made in the original and subsequent metal. 

I'm not saying put something as stupid as see the link section for other coins. But there is a gap in a date run. The op needed help if there was a comment that would helped them. Context is everything… JustJust trying to educate people 

peterjhalford

rsirian1

peterjhalford

This is where the comments section should be used so that things like these are explained! Maybe someone can update the comments section on both entries…

I thought that's what the See also section was for.  According to the guidelines:

Other coin types with identical designs, but different alloys, weights, dimensions, edges

Why add a comment that says, “For similar coins of different composition see:  ”

There must be a specific reason why that range of dates was not made in the original and subsequent metal. 

 

I'm not saying put something as stupid as see the link section for other coins. But there is a gap in a date run. The op needed help if there was a comment that would helped them. Context is everything… JustJust trying to educate people 

Yes, I agree with that.

Had the OP just searched Switzerland for that year, he / she would have easily found the coin.

peterjhalford

rsirian1

peterjhalford

This is where the comments section should be used so that things like these are explained! Maybe someone can update the comments section on both entries…

I thought that's what the See also section was for.  According to the guidelines:

Other coin types with identical designs, but different alloys, weights, dimensions, edges

Why add a comment that says, “For similar coins of different composition see:  ”

There must be a specific reason why that range of dates was not made in the original and subsequent metal. 

 

I'm not saying put something as stupid as see the link section for other coins. But there is a gap in a date run. The op needed help if there was a comment that would helped them. Context is everything… JustJust trying to educate people 

My guess would be the plan was to switch over to nickel coins in in 1932 for good except WWII interfered and they had to revert back to Cu-NI. After the war with nickel in short supply they just kept with the Cu-Ni.