Seriously, it's just weird to see all those "Common coin" labels on all kinds of scarce, rare and extremely rare types. And I'm not sure if it was even a fitting term in the first place anyway.
I propose "Regular coin" as the replacement - meaning the same thing without actually implying something about (lack of) rarity.
Alternately, we can use "Normal coin" as the default instead; I like this version less (because it seems to imply that the commemoratives, patterns, and so on are abnormal), but it should also work.
(I think the technical term is "definitive", but it might be more narrow than needed here, and it would probably confuse all the casual readers, anyway.)
I am not sure what is wrong with using the terms that coin collectors use: Circulating...circulating commemorative...non-circulating...non-circulating commemorative...pattern...bullion issue...legal tender...non-circulating legal tender...mule...pattern...novodel...proba...error
You are right, when I hear normal coin, I am then expecting an error.
Library Media Specialist, columnist, collector, and gardener...
Quote: "Oklahoman"I am not sure what is wrong with using the terms that coin collectors use: Circulating...circulating commemorative...non-circulating...non-circulating commemorative...pattern...bullion issue...legal tender...non-circulating legal tender...mule...pattern...novodel...proba...error
You are right, when I hear normal coin, I am then expecting an error.
That would change "common" to "circulating", right? Not sure if that's the best choice for a default value, but it could probably work as well.
I agree that "normal" might not be the best fit. Still better than "common", though, because it doesn't imply any lack of rarity.
What about "Ordinary use" (although I do not think "Ordinary" alone implies anything but coins used in ordinary day-to-day commerce while "Regular" implies there are also "Irregular" coins, which is not the case, more like other categories [NCLT, commemorative, etc.] are "Extraordinary")?
My suggestion is to use "business strike", have a look in Wikipedia, this is the standard term for any coin which was issued for circulation, i.e. meant to end up in someone's pocket as change
Quote: "gebikimame2017"My suggestion is to use "business strike", have a look in Wikipedia, this is the standard term for any coin which was issued for circulation, i.e. meant to end up in someone's pocket as change
IIRC, "business strike" just means "not proof or specimen".
It's perfectly possible for a non-circulating coin to be business strike (e.g. the bullion American Silver Eagle). And for circulating commemoratives, being a business strike is actually normal.
More importantly, the current Numista system does not actually distinguish proof coins as separate types (though, IIRC, there is some debate on whether it should), so for types where proofs exist (which includes many - perhaps most - modern circulation types), a "business strike" designation would not be particularly applicable anyway.
Quote: "Oklahoman"I am not sure what is wrong with using the terms that coin collectors use: Circulating...circulating commemorative...non-circulating...non-circulating commemorative...pattern...bullion issue...legal tender...non-circulating legal tender...mule...pattern...novodel...proba...error
You are right, when I hear normal coin, I am then expecting an error.
that is what it just be. Not sure why it changed.
if for one year you have, let's say 4 varieties circulating.
70% of those is of variety 1
20% of variety 2
8% of variety 3
2% of variety 4.
They are all regular coins.
They are all circulating coins.
Amongst those the variety 1 is commonly found, 7 out of 10
Variety 2 is less common with only 2 out of 10.
Variety 3 is rare, with only 8 out of 100.
Variety 4 is scarce, with only 2 out 100.
The discussion now is if rare or scarce is the less common? You see, common is there again!
Just my thoughts, my honourable colleagues. Up to you now?
Better late than never, let me revive this post. We got several good suggestions. Can you help me choose by voting for the label(s) that best describe non-commemorative circulating coins in your opinion?
my main problem isn't so much on labelling the coin of same type, but adding only coins of certain types and certain years on my wanted list.
for example (https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces1492.html), I can't just check 1881 CC on my " I wish to get this coin" list, but i have to check the entire morgan dollar series on my wish list.
I think either 3 of them are good. Because in the collecting world there are too many definitions. And to really be specific, it would be something below all the categories I can think of.
Coins over time may become rare due to historical happenings. Just like magic the gathering where I heard stories of people throwing away all the black lotus card like a dirt. Fast forward about 10 years later it is a rare card that will cost 100 dollars a card and many long time collectors really regretted big time. Until now I still can imagine that time I saw a lot of them in dustbin. Dame it.....
Be kind to people. Sharing is Caring. Collect what you like and not by the Crowd.
To seek for perfection, it is too painful and there is a very high price to pay. To seek for something comfortable is more easy. To seek for nothing is even more easy.
I just made the change, so that "common coin" has been replaced by "Standard circulation coin".
And to answer partially Saber82's comment, "bullion coins" was already suggested here, and the idea was rejected as we could not agree on the definition of a bullion coin.
