Hi this coin is incorrectly listed with 2 lines each claiming a mintage of 25,018. It should be one ND line with mintage 25,000. It is a double dated coin 1635-1935.
Quote: "cncote10"Hi this coin is incorrectly listed with 2 lines each claiming a mintage of 25,018. It should be one ND line with mintage 25,000. It is a double dated coin 1635-1935.
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces78898.html
Thanks!
Fixed.
Sapientiae plerumque stultitia est comes.
Si c'est un grand plaisir d'être reconnu par ses amis, c'est peut-être encore plus flatteur d'être reconnu par ses adversaires.
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken.
So what is Numista's policy now, putting all the NDs back on commems with a date range (which includes the actual date) which were taken down years ago?
1635-1935 are the date of the anniversary not the issue date specifically.
Sapientiae plerumque stultitia est comes.
Si c'est un grand plaisir d'être reconnu par ses amis, c'est peut-être encore plus flatteur d'être reconnu par ses adversaires.
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken.
I can understand when it says 1800-1900 but was made or given out in 1905 that ND is right but in this case the 2nd date is the date and I think there was a longer discussion a few years back about this. That is the reason I am so adamant about it.
Quote: "Idolenz"I can understand when it says 1800-1900 but was made or given out in 1905 that ND is right but in this case the 2nd date is the date and I think there was a longer discussion a few years back about this. That is the reason I am so adamant about it.
you are totally right
@pejounet I'm afraid you are wrong, and it needs to be changed to 1935 as per Numista rules
Quote: "Idolenz"I can understand when it says 1800-1900 but was made or given out in 1905 that ND is right but in this case the 2nd date is the date and I think there was a longer discussion a few years back about this. That is the reason I am so adamant about it.
you are totally right
@pejounet I'm afraid you are wrong, and it needs to be changed to 1935 as per Numista rules
I also prefer to have the 1935 date i was just more concerned with getting rid of an unnecessary line
Quote: "Idolenz"I can understand when it says 1800-1900 but was made or given out in 1905 that ND is right but in this case the 2nd date is the date and I think there was a longer discussion a few years back about this. That is the reason I am so adamant about it.
you are totally right
@pejounet I'm afraid you are wrong, and it needs to be changed to 1935 as per Numista rules
True only if the 2nd year is the minting year otherwise it stays ND. I don't have catalogs in hand today (travelling) but if you have it and can see it was minted in 1935 then you can do the modification to have it properly. Otherwise I'll check tomorrow.
Sapientiae plerumque stultitia est comes.
Si c'est un grand plaisir d'être reconnu par ses amis, c'est peut-être encore plus flatteur d'être reconnu par ses adversaires.
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken.
