As you may know, new organization is being born and there will probably be several rounds of team reorganizations, including some appointments and applications from new people. While most of these will be solved behind the curtain, there are also many things that will affect most of us here.
I would like this thread to serve as some gathering point of ideas, problems and for people to come out, to say - hi, I can this this or that, I can help.
I will to make a list of all these here. And one last thing. Please do not argue over somebodyelse's suggestions. Putting anybody ideas on the list means they are going to be heard and not done.
I think the biggest problem I've encountered several times is this:
I have a couple of swaps ongoing, and get another request for a swap. I look at his swap list and select the coins I'm interested in, only to find out that some of them I had already selected in other swaps - there should be a different icon or a different colour icon when looking at someone's swap list to indicate that this particular coin/year is already incoming in another swap, so I don't select it again.
The usage of unknown or ND for commemorative coins that are double dated for example. I run into this issue a lot. The coin does have a year and I think listing it would be a good idea
One more - I can see that the exported version of your collection in Excel looks much better now, but it would be very beneficient to add a column for the grade of the coins as well.
Personal I don't have too many issues with Numista. But being the referee for three countries I have noticed a samll problem with the addition of deletion of currencies within the country list. I have changed and fixed up some of the currencies within two of the county lists I am a referee for and I believe it would be better if I could go through it with someone who can properly change the currencies and delete the incorrect ones. Thanks
In the start a swap list, my "coins they might be interested in" category is high, but when I check with the person for a swap, they say I have nothing they are interested in. Why is the category misleading or incorrect?
I guess this isn't a problem with Numista, just a question I have about the swaps.
Quote: "JRo69"In the start a swap list, my "coins they might be interested in" category is high, but when I check with the person for a swap, they say I have nothing they are interested in. Why is the category misleading or incorrect?
I guess this isn't a problem with Numista, just a question I have about the swaps.
I think this is since a lot of people don't bother to setup their wishlist so all the coins you have and they don't will appear as "coins that they might be interested in" when in reality they most likely are not, wishlists are something that every member needs to setup for themself.
The feature I'd like to see added is the ability to view the coins my potential swap partner might be interested in so that I know before I open a swap if he's interested in anything valuable like silver or just common coins that don't even cover the cost of sending.
I collect and deal in ancient Roman coin. In case you're looking for affordable ancient coins or need any help with the coins you already have send me a message.
Not a new thing since I talk a lot about what I call the biggest problem of Numista, and this is the lack of development. As some users already pointed out in this thread that biggest problem is not some missing coins in catalogues or something like this but technical issues. There are so many technical requests and we know nothing about their development or at least if they will be implemented or when.
To me one of the bigger problems is the speed of change approvals. I also think there should be more flexibility with regards to changes. For example, if a member made a particular number of changes and all of them were good and approved by the referee why not allow that member to make changes without an approval? Also, after an addition is approved why not allow the member who actually added a coin to make modifications without referee approval? At least things like pictures, descriptions, etc. Years, for example, may still require referee approval.
If this was possible I'm sure the load on referees would decrease dramatically allowing them to do bigger things.
1. I would like to see a default of Unknown for dates so we can add coins for which we know a type but date is not known. This is particularly a problem where date lists are verified as complete and we cannot add an "Unknown" category.
2. I would like a clear decision on handling cases where duplicate KM numbers appear in one country, such as the recent discussions on Tristan da Cunha and Indonesia have pointed out.
3. I find it very helpful when locations on the coin of mintmarks are mentioned in Comments on coin pages. Also when a description is given if the mintmark is not straightforward, such as those of India, including British India. Could inclusion of such information be encouraged in some way in the instructions on editing an existing coin page or adding new coins.
I do enjoy Numista a lot and look forward to enjoying it more.
Smoked_caramel: Because things are messed up when more than one people work on the same thing but only one takes the responsibilities (referee). There are good people with good intention but this is not enough for a good catalogue. One good member added perfectly a lot of coins every day but messed up nominal value and other critical details at a coin, probably confused by the high number of coins added in a short time. Without a second pair of eyes our catalogues would be full of mistakes and full of personal customizations. The real problem that worth to be considered is the response time of referees and how responsible they are.
Iam with Andy289 on this. What the saying to many hands in the soup pot makes a bad soup. One chief and a lot of helpers . Is the way to go. Well just my thoughts
These are not necessarily the biggest problems but these are problems that I have experienced that have got me burnt out and stopped me from using the site very much.
1. Swapping feed back. I don't swap very much, my last swap was with was with eitan190, a user (and later team member) of less than reputable actions and ethics. The swap occurred before/as he was going bad. I have asked on at least three occasions to get my feed back from eitan fixed or removed. I believe I have a good case for it given what happened. However nothing has come of my requests.
2. Coins not being validated due to lack of picture. I have added coins before only to have them languish in the queue because the validator didn't like my picture of the coin, or I didn't have a picture. With Ancient and medieval coins, the picture really isn't the important part. It is the description, the text, the weight, etc. Where the coins were hammered, a picture of one that is off centered isn't that important. If you look at the real printed catalogs most of the entries don't even have a picture. I think it is better to have a "partial" entry with the text so a user can find it in a search. I have added plenty of coin entries that others have made better.
3. Dates, by default hammered coins should have a "date off coin," "date not known," or something similar. I find it very frustrating when I try to add a coin, only to find the dates are validated and then I have to go to the forum, just to have my request ignored for months. I get it that the team is busy. But I am trying to make the catalog better and I am being hindered. It makes me not want to contribute.
4. Countries, this is by far my biggest annoyance. Countries come and go. Real countries are removed while Hutt River is still in the list. My coins get moved from Central Asia, Central Khanates, to Persian States, to something else, to Islamic States, and then back to Central Asia. It is annoying and I don't even bother any more. If there was some sort of change log, that also documented the reasons why the change was made, that would help a lot. I get it that KM catalog isn't the best, but at least it doesn't jump around on me all the time.
What i would like to see in Numista is coin values and also i want to be able to see which of my coins are in the interest of another member when i look at his profile
Quote: "g00n"I think the biggest problem I've encountered several times is this:
I have a couple of swaps ongoing, and get another request for a swap. I look at his swap list and select the coins I'm interested in, only to find out that some of them I had already selected in other swaps - there should be a different icon or a different colour icon when looking at someone's swap list to indicate that this particular coin/year is already incoming in another swap, so I don't select it again.
hi g00n,
here re is my solution to this problem. After I confirm the swap. I add the coins to my collection with a note. "Trade g00n"
then when the coins come in I delete the note, also change the year or delete the coin from my collection if not received
the most headache for me as user are these missing things:
- personal comments section for coin or even 2 such sections (separated from comments which everyone can see)
- bank notes section (so need to run lists on another site what is wasting time)
- sets fields (need to explain every time that sets are swapping only as sets)
- ability to put ♥ not only for KM but for certain year or variety - this is the most headache:)
- ability to put pics or scans of the coin near it what will give vision of that grade to swapper before the swap
@jadejackal if you submit coins without pictures and a referee won't accept your addition for this reason I think you should report the problem to admins. It's outrageous when you put an effort to improve the catalog and a referee is against for this obsesive reason. It's like when you don't really know the thickness of a coin so it's better to not add it at all. *facepalm*
Quote: "Andy289"@jadejackal if you submit coins without pictures and a referee won't accept your addition for this reason I think you should report the problem to admins. It's outrageous when you put an effort to improve the catalog and a referee is against for this obsesive reason. It's like when you don't really know the thickness of a coin so it's better to not add it at all. *facepalm*
Quote: "Andy289"@jadejackal if you submit coins without pictures and a referee won't accept your addition for this reason I think you should report the problem to admins. It's outrageous when you put an effort to improve the catalog and a referee is against for this obsesive reason. It's like when you don't really know the thickness of a coin so it's better to not add it at all. *facepalm*
Back in April, I tried to submit a Polish-Lithuanian coin I had that wasn't in the database. In my submission, I linked to a NGC page (which actually had a picture, but their pictures are not accepted by the Numista license), copied all the info from said NGC page, but didn't add any pics (my example was really ugly, barely readable, and in any case my camera just ran out of battery).
Got a reply from the referee saying they want a picture. Looked everywhere I could, and with one exception, all the Numista-acceptable sites didn't have it, and all the sites that had it weren't Numista-acceptable. The exception was one example on Heritage, tiny coin in a huge slab, but I wasn't sure I would be able to pick out the coin image from that huge slab photo, and I had no idea how to download Heritage photos anyway.
As soon as I figured that out, I immediately sent a message to the referee explaining as much. No comment since (and it's been over two months).
In no particular order. You can decide for yourself which one you think is the biggest:
1. Not being able to create additional mintage records because "The list of years is complete and has been verified." - Umm... Well, then, whoever verified it missed something and I want to be able to fix it there and then, instead of going thru the forum. I might not even be trying to add more years - just more subtypes for different finishes.
2. Lack of an edit log, which would list what was changed and why. If there is one, regular users can't see it and that's a problem, because it's regular users who will keep coming back and asking to fix something they think is wrong.
3. Lack of pictures for subtypes
4. No support for error coins
5. No support for year- and other types of sets
6. ND on double-date commemoratives - imo, the way ND is being used is NOT what it was intended for. It makes searches more difficult and can lead to people wasting their time, trying to add what turns out to be a duplicate
Oh, and how could I forget!?
7. A log of changes user made to their collection, wish, and swap lists
If i initially select a coin from someone's swap list, but later on don't want it for any reason, there's no way I can remove it from the swap page completely. All I can do is uncheck the coin. This has become especially problematic for large swaps that my counterpart and I are negotiating which often can go on over weeks with several iterations. In the meanwhile, I may have got the coin elsewhere and now I want to remove it, but unfortunately can't do it. So I have to constantly remember that I have that coin (can be especially hard if its a series-type coin eg. the current Brazilian olympic R1 coins)
In a nutshell, it would be great if we had the option to remove coins from the swap we no longer want!
Quote: "pnightingale"Most of the problems have already been raised above but I'd like to add two more for consideration.
1. Grades should carry over to the swap page along with any future implementation of a value field.
2. The ridiculous "very rare" tags on coin pages need to be removed.
Fully agree with the first, even though I've never actually done a swap. (I also think that search by grade should be a possibility, but that might have been mentioned already.)
Partially disagree with the second (sometimes it's indeed ridiculous, but some coins are actually very rare, and it should be possible to say that).
If anything, I'd prefer some kind of special slider so that I can declare my year lists "complete" when I have all except the very rare coins of a type (it's awful to have an "incomplete" set with all the years that do not cost oodles of money).
Definitely not the biggest problem but I would like to see "latest coins" in more than just alphabetical order. For example I would love to see them in chronological order so that way I can just see what was added since the last time I checked and I don't need to go through the same coins I have already seen.
I agree with everything that Houseofham said. Change log for coin sheets for the public to see for sure. I also think that referees should have the ability to see what users own a coin, so that we can ask for pictures, etc. Maybe even the power to move them to a different coin? Such as splitting a coin page into multiple pages for coins that contain multiple KM# variations in one page.
I also agree 100% that we should have a change log for your collection, and being able to sort by, coins added in the last week, month, year, etc.
I would also like to see custom categories for your collection, hidden or public, such as "Silver", "Part of bulk lot" "Coins in sets", etc. You can add a coin (or year) into the category by click add to one of your categories using a drop down list.
First I must say I like the web site very much. But, of course there are some things I'd like to improve:
I agree with g00n: Coins selected in other swaps should have an icon (for example an envelope) next to them.
This icon should become bold when swap is confirmed by both.
When coins are received the user should be given the option to change icon for all coins in swap to "x" with one click or manually select and change the icon for each coin (to heart or "x").
I would also like to export my wish list.
Included in the exported wish list should be start and end year the coin was produced.
One thing is like to add has to do with the map. When you have a coin from West Africa, or the Soviet Union, etc. It fills up many countries that are/were part of that conglomerate, but often times you also have coins from some individual countries, but not from others you can't see that on the map. Let me give you an example. If i have coins from Kazakhstan, but not from Tajikistan, I would get a color for Kazakhstan, but Tajikistan would remain grey. As soon as i get a Soviet coin Tajikistan has a color, but then it is hard to know by looking at the map that i don't have any Tajikistan coins, but only Soviet coins. My solution to this is maybe having the map filled with stripes, one color for Soviet Union and the other color according to what you have as individual countries. In the example i would get s color for Soviet Union and grey stripes for Tajikistan and the same color for Soviet Union and a color fort Kazakhstan, depending on how's many Kazak coins I have. As it is right now i have to rummage through my coins list to check if i have one from x or y country.
List if countries indeed. There are plenty of posts about it.
Numisdoc section is crap. Very difficult to find something there.
Maybe it would be nice to simplify the differences between french and english catalogues to decrease the translation work. See for ex the recent story about precious metals and fineness. What is the interest to keep 2 different ways to write fineness ? French is 950‰, english (.950), lets just use 950 and we all agree Simplify metals list, coin shapes, etc for automatic translation, agree on a common way for coins names so that they don't need to be translated (ex this habit of uppercase versus lowercase for the names of the currencies, just extra work).
Quand l'Histoire et la Géographie se croisent sur nos pièces de monnaie ...
Others have already posted some of my biggest wishes. I have a few little wishes left.
1) When we open the list of countries, they are hyperlinks to the individual coins that make up the catalog for that country. When I open the list of countries from which I have no coins [under the "Your coins" tab], the list has no hyperlinks. Would it be possible to make the same links available from both pages?
2) The NumisDoc Dates/Calendars section and the Special Keyboard under the "search" option are both very helpful. Is there a reason some calendars are only listed in one, while others are listed in both?
3) I have not listed many swap coins because I don't want to muddy my stats with coins I don't intend to keep. I wish we could keep that list apart from our collection lists.
It is a wonderful site and I'm very glad that you share it with us.
As a new referee, i would like to approve a page seperate from a photograph. I fear rejecting an acceptable listing because of the unacceptability of an image. This might encourage members to contribute listings but havent because of lack of photographic skills. It might also provoke an interest to contribute images from members who have no wish totype up listings.
Library Media Specialist, columnist, collector, and gardener...
Quote: "Oklahoman"As a new referee, i would like to approve a page seperate from a photograph. I fear rejecting an acceptable listing because of the unacceptability of an image. This might encourage members to contribute listings but havent because of lack of photographic skills. It might also provoke an interest to contribute images from members who have no wish totype up listings.
Mine is that the links are close together and my fingers are too big.
When looking at the profile of a collector, whm I am on the middle of and exchange and want to add additional coins, I seem, for quite a few time have accidentally confirmed in error.
If there was a 'are you sure want to confirm' button with Yes or No on the button, it would be a geat help.
Just thought of something else. Would like to see an "Are you sure you would like to leave this page" notification on the make a new coin or edit a coin page, like you would get when you are making a message or forum post and try to leave. I have lost everything I have done a few times because I pushed back be accident.
Such an indicator would be useful to identify some unprofessional collectors or scammers but in most cases it's hard to tell what this score means. If you have bad luck and swap with too many unthrusty users this score will reveal you as a drama searcher, a bad person that leave bad ratings (even if it's the case) or simply that you are a worse collector and cannot spot scammers before to start a new swap.
Anyway such a feature will be interesting.
Quote: "Carlos55"One thing is like to add has to do with the map. When you have a coin from West Africa, or the Soviet Union, etc. It fills up many countries that are/were part of that conglomerate, but often times you also have coins from some individual countries, but not from others you can't see that on the map. Let me give you an example. If i have coins from Kazakhstan, but not from Tajikistan, I would get a color for Kazakhstan, but Tajikistan would remain grey. As soon as i get a Soviet coin Tajikistan has a color, but then it is hard to know by looking at the map that i don't have any Tajikistan coins, but only Soviet coins. My solution to this is maybe having the map filled with stripes, one color for Soviet Union and the other color according to what you have as individual countries. In the example i would get s color for Soviet Union and grey stripes for Tajikistan and the same color for Soviet Union and a color fort Kazakhstan, depending on how's many Kazak coins I have. As it is right now i have to rummage through my coins list to check if i have one from x or y country.
Cheers
Quote: "Carlos55"One thing is like to add has to do with the map. When you have a coin from West Africa, or the Soviet Union, etc. It fills up many countries that are/were part of that conglomerate, but often times you also have coins from some individual countries, but not from others you can't see that on the map. Let me give you an example. If i have coins from Kazakhstan, but not from Tajikistan, I would get a color for Kazakhstan, but Tajikistan would remain grey. As soon as i get a Soviet coin Tajikistan has a color, but then it is hard to know by looking at the map that i don't have any Tajikistan coins, but only Soviet coins. My solution to this is maybe having the map filled with stripes, one color for Soviet Union and the other color according to what you have as individual countries. In the example i would get s color for Soviet Union and grey stripes for Tajikistan and the same color for Soviet Union and a color fort Kazakhstan, depending on how's many Kazak coins I have. As it is right now i have to rummage through my coins list to check if i have one from x or y country.
Cheers
I heartily second that!
I also agree.
1. It would be nice if the Soviet Union (USSR) was removed from all 15 former SSR's.
2. France should be removed from Guadeloupe, Martinique, French Guiana and Reunion Island.
3. Hawaii total should be removed from USA and a dot for it should be added in the Pacific.
4. British West Indies should be removed from the U.K. and Northern Ireland then added to the appropriate Caribbean islands.
5. Remove Portugal from the Azores.
6. Remove Portugal from Madeira Islands.
7. Add South Arabia to Yemen.
8. Add British Indian Ocean Territory name and remove U.K.
9. Add Cocos (Keeling) Islands name and remove Australia.
Quote: "Carlos55"One thing is like to add has to do with the map. When you have a coin from West Africa, or the Soviet Union, etc. It fills up many countries that are/were part of that conglomerate, but often times you also have coins from some individual countries, but not from others you can't see that on the map. Let me give you an example. If i have coins from Kazakhstan, but not from Tajikistan, I would get a color for Kazakhstan, but Tajikistan would remain grey. As soon as i get a Soviet coin Tajikistan has a color, but then it is hard to know by looking at the map that i don't have any Tajikistan coins, but only Soviet coins. My solution to this is maybe having the map filled with stripes, one color for Soviet Union and the other color according to what you have as individual countries. In the example i would get s color for Soviet Union and grey stripes for Tajikistan and the same color for Soviet Union and a color fort Kazakhstan, depending on how's many Kazak coins I have. As it is right now i have to rummage through my coins list to check if i have one from x or y country.
Cheers
I heartily second that!
I also agree.
1. It would be nice if the Soviet Union (USSR) was removed from all 15 former SSR's.
2. France should be removed from Guadeloupe, Martinique, French Guiana and Reunion Island.
3. Hawaii total should be removed from USA and a dot for it should be added in the Pacific.
4. British West Indies should be removed from the U.K. and Northern Ireland then added to the appropriate Caribbean islands.
5. Remove Portugal from the Azores.
6. Remove Portugal from Madeira Islands.
7. Add South Arabia to Yemen.
8. Add British Indian Ocean Territory name and remove U.K.
9. Add Cocos (Keeling) Islands name and remove Australia.
Hawaii should definitely be added to the map, and I agree with you for British West Indies and South Arabia as well (never checked the latter - where is it on the map right now?)
However, I'd say that places which still belong to a particular country should include the coins from said country on the map (except perhaps if they still have their own currency). That means most of your points 2, 5, 6, 8, and 9 are out.
In fact, I'm surprised at the current position for Azores, where it is colored for Portugal if there are Portuguese coins, but a user clicking on the island ends up at the (usually empty) page for their Azorean coins. Either do the same thing for French Guiana, or just treat them normally (like, well, French Guiana).
Anyone knows which island is it that counts both France and Eastern Caribbean? (They happen to be my top dashboard territory by number of coins.) I've tentatively identified it as Saint Lucia, but I'm not sure if it's that. If it's really Saint Lucia, perhaps France should be removed from it - that place had never been French for well over a century.
Hard to say for the USSR. If I wasn't against it on principle, I'd say the current Azores/Madeira setup would work best (in fact, perhaps it would indeed work best there even if it's not the best solution for the Azores and Madeira).
And I know it's very very dispitable, but shouldn't Crimea include Russia as well as Ukraine? Plus the actual Crimea country, obviously (I don't have any coins from there, so I don't know how it's handled).
Quote: "Carlos55"One thing is like to add has to do with the map. When you have a coin from West Africa, or the Soviet Union, etc. It fills up many countries that are/were part of that conglomerate, but often times you also have coins from some individual countries, but not from others you can't see that on the map. Let me give you an example. If i have coins from Kazakhstan, but not from Tajikistan, I would get a color for Kazakhstan, but Tajikistan would remain grey. As soon as i get a Soviet coin Tajikistan has a color, but then it is hard to know by looking at the map that i don't have any Tajikistan coins, but only Soviet coins. My solution to this is maybe having the map filled with stripes, one color for Soviet Union and the other color according to what you have as individual countries. In the example i would get s color for Soviet Union and grey stripes for Tajikistan and the same color for Soviet Union and a color fort Kazakhstan, depending on how's many Kazak coins I have. As it is right now i have to rummage through my coins list to check if i have one from x or y country.
Cheers
I heartily second that!
I also agree.
1. It would be nice if the Soviet Union (USSR) was removed from all 15 former SSR's.
2. France should be removed from Guadeloupe, Martinique, French Guiana and Reunion Island.
3. Hawaii total should be removed from USA and a dot for it should be added in the Pacific.
4. British West Indies should be removed from the U.K. and Northern Ireland then added to the appropriate Caribbean islands.
5. Remove Portugal from the Azores.
6. Remove Portugal from Madeira Islands.
7. Add South Arabia to Yemen.
8. Add British Indian Ocean Territory name and remove U.K.
9. Add Cocos (Keeling) Islands name and remove Australia.
Hawaii should definitely be added to the map, and I agree with you for British West Indies and South Arabia as well (never checked the latter - where is it on the map right now?)
However, I'd say that places which still belong to a particular country should include the coins from said country on the map (except perhaps if they still have their own currency). That means most of your points 2, 5, 6, 8, and 9 are out.
In fact, I'm surprised at the current position for Azores, where it is colored for Portugal if there are Portuguese coins, but a user clicking on the island ends up at the (usually empty) page for their Azorean coins. Either do the same thing for French Guiana, or just treat them normally (like, well, French Guiana).
Anyone knows which island is it that counts both France and Eastern Caribbean? (They happen to be my top dashboard territory by number of coins.) I've tentatively identified it as Saint Lucia, but I'm not sure if it's that. If it's really Saint Lucia, perhaps France should be removed from it - that place had never been French for well over a century.
Hard to say for the USSR. If I wasn't against it on principle, I'd say the current Azores/Madeira setup would work best (in fact, perhaps it would indeed work best there even if it's not the best solution for the Azores and Madeira).
And I know it's very very dispitable, but shouldn't Crimea include Russia as well as Ukraine? Plus the actual Crimea country, obviously (I don't have any coins from there, so I don't know how it's handled).
It all has to do with personal preferences I guess. If I want to see my coins from France, Portugal or other locations, then I would click on those countries. I just don't see the point of seeing the total coin count from the mother countries when I click on Martinique, Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Azores, Madeira, Reunion and the 15 former Soviet states.
Something else I noticed on the map, Puerto Rico has Danish West Indies listed with it. Shouldn't the U.S. Virgin Islands have a dot with Danish West Indies listed.
Quote: "Oklahoman"They are both US Possessions. Shouldnt the US have the dot for them?
My point is why are the Danish West Indies listed with Puerto Rico. When the coins were issued for Puerto Rico and the Danish West Indies they weren't U.S. possessions.
Quote: "SRV5490"It all has to do with personal preferences I guess. If I want to see my coins from France, Portugal or other locations, then I would click on those countries. I just don't see the point of seeing the total coin count from the mother countries when I click on Martinique, Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Azores, Madeira, Reunion and the 15 former Soviet states.
Well, the map can't ignore the fact that Martinique, Guadeloupe etc. are currently part of France, just like Azores are portuguese, just like Alaska is part of the US.
I think Carlos55's suggestion to have a mix of colors or something to show e.g. Martinique both as part of France and as a separate "Numista country" would be the best.
It would be great if all the numista countries a region of the map is or used to be part of were listed in the popup, not just those from which we have coins.
Quote: "SRV5490"It all has to do with personal preferences I guess. If I want to see my coins from France, Portugal or other locations, then I would click on those countries. I just don't see the point of seeing the total coin count from the mother countries when I click on Martinique, Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Azores, Madeira, Reunion and the 15 former Soviet states.
Well, the map can't ignore the fact that Martinique, Guadeloupe etc. are currently part of France, just like Azores are portuguese, just like Alaska is part of the US.
I think Carlos55's suggestion to have a mix of colors or something to show e.g. Martinique both as part of France and as a separate "Numista country" would be the best.
It would be great if all the numista countries a region of the map is or used to be part of were listed in the popup, not just those from which we have coins.
"Mix of colors" is too complicated, especially for a small region like Martinique. (It's just about workable for a decent-sized country like Tajikistan or Estonia.)
I fully agree with the last suggestion, but we'd have to make (many of) our map regions a lot smaller (several sections of western Ukraine were previously in the 20th century parts of Austria-Hungary, regular Hungary, Poland, and Czechoslovakia). And then there's boundary disputes (which can sometimes get large enough to be visible on the map, such as Hala'ib, Abyei, or Kashmir).
It would be cool to be able to have a reasonably accurate listing for every single pixel, but then we couldn't fit the international borders anywhere, unfortunately.
Quote: "SRV5490"It all has to do with personal preferences I guess. If I want to see my coins from France, Portugal or other locations, then I would click on those countries. I just don't see the point of seeing the total coin count from the mother countries when I click on Martinique, Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Azores, Madeira, Reunion and the 15 former Soviet states.
Well, the map can't ignore the fact that Martinique, Guadeloupe etc. are currently part of France, just like Azores are portuguese, just like Alaska is part of the US.
I think Carlos55's suggestion to have a mix of colors or something to show e.g. Martinique both as part of France and as a separate "Numista country" would be the best.
It would be great if all the numista countries a region of the map is or used to be part of were listed in the popup, not just those from which we have coins.
Please explain why you want to see the total coins of France when you click on Martinique, or any others that we're talking about. It is already apparent that Martinique is an overseas territory of France.
Quote: "SRV5490"Please explain why you want to see the total coins of France when you click on Martinique, or any others that we're talking about. It is already apparent that Martinique is an overseas territory of France.
Martinique is currently part of France, just because it's overseas doesn't mean it should be treated differently; you don't expect to see your coins from Brittany when you click on mainland France any more than you expect to see your coins from Liege when you click on Belgium. The website needs to be consistent.
A solution as I've seen described here would be to have a clickable popup allowing us to select which of the possible "countries" we want to see the coins of.
Quote: "SRV5490"Please explain why you want to see the total coins of France when you click on Martinique, or any others that we're talking about. It is already apparent that Martinique is an overseas territory of France.
Martinique is currently part of France, just because it's overseas doesn't mean it should be treated differently; you don't expect to see your coins from Brittany when you click on mainland France any more than you expect to see your coins from Liege when you click on Belgium. The website needs to be consistent.
A solution as I've seen described here would be to have a clickable popup allowing us to select which of the possible "countries" we want to see the coins of.
We know that Martinique is part of France but why do you want to see France's totals when you look at Martinique. This goes for any of the items that I mentioned in my original post. It's not a matter of consistency, geography or history. The question is why?
Quote: "SRV5490"We know that Martinique is part of France but why do you want to see France's totals when you look at Martinique. This goes for any of the items that I mentioned in my original post. It's not a matter of consistency, geography or history. The question is why?
I'm not sure what you want me to say to make it clearer: it is in France. When you go there you pay for stuff with French (well, European) currency. It's only normal that clicking on it get you the list of coins that are currently legal tender there.
And yes, it is a matter of consistency. If you want for some reason a click on Martinique to list a currency that no longer exists, then by the same token clicking on Canada should list coins from Newfoundland or Canadian provinces (I have no idea why the former is not included in the latter btw), clicking on Romania should list coins from Austria - Habsburg, and so on.
Quote: "SRV5490"We know that Martinique is part of France but why do you want to see France's totals when you look at Martinique. This goes for any of the items that I mentioned in my original post. It's not a matter of consistency, geography or history. The question is why?
I'm not sure what you want me to say to make it clearer: it is in France. When you go there you pay for stuff with French (well, European) currency. It's only normal that clicking on it get you the list of coins that are currently legal tender there.
And yes, it is a matter of consistency. If you want for some reason a click on Martinique to list a currency that no longer exists, then by the same token clicking on Canada should list coins from Newfoundland or Canadian provinces (I have no idea why the former is not included in the latter btw), clicking on Romania should list coins from Austria - Habsburg, and so on.
When I click on Martinique I want to see the coin(s) I have from that country, as in the 1897; 1922 franc coins or the Guadeloupe 50 centimes from 1903; 1921, etc. I know that they were issued by France, but by the fact that they have the island's name on them means more to me then to count French Republic coins the same as Martinique coins. Like I said previously, it all personal preference. BrianJ, I respect your point of view and would really like to see more members voice their opinion on this subject.
I honestly don't feel that Numista has any massive pressing problems.
The site functions, the community is stable, and Xavier is fast to appear when technical problems arise.
Yes, there are some things that piss me off, swap options could be more in depth, the catalogue could display latest auction results etc, but they are more development things than 'problems' per se.
The only thing I'd say is a problem is the inconsistency in referees, especially those that demand new users get submissions 100% perfect before accepting them instead of accepting and fixing the issues themselves. (discouraging instead of encouraging catalogue editing)
