As I am new to this site, I have a few questions. I currently own a number of official coin sets from the dutch mint (years 1980 to 2000, besides 1981, none was issued that year).
How to add those to my collection? When I select for example a Guilder, I can choose proof or normal. No ‘part of set’ option is available. Do I need to list the coin under normal release UNC or is it a proof version? And how can I tell if it is proof or not?
For other coins (for example, 1 German eurocent) there are three different types of lines: for normal issues, for "in sets only", and for "proof".
If there are no "in sets only" lines for Dutch coins, possibly they are proofs or the catalogue is incomplete.
Another New Zealand member and I added all the sets for New Zealand coins a while ago and then an over zealous admin went and removed them all because apparently there was going to be an official way to enter sets coming. That was over a year ago now and still no sign of it.
I don't think sets should be added in my opinion. If you have a set, add the coins on an individual basis. So add all the coins that are in the set, and just select uncirculated or proof depending on what they are. If there's a different finish to the coins than regular uncirculated, a new line should be added. But I don't see why a set should be it's own entry on numista.
Quote: "Arusak"I don't think sets should be added in my opinion. If you have a set, add the coins on an individual basis. So add all the coins that are in the set, and just select uncirculated or proof depending on what they are. If there's a different finish to the coins than regular uncirculated, a new line should be added. But I don't see why a set should be it's own entry on numista.
And OP, your coins are uncirculated, not proof.
You obviously don't collect or swap sets but you shouldn't let that fact cloud your judgement when it comes to the wants and needs of other collectors who do. Official mint sets, both BU and Proof, are a completely separate entity to loose coins, they have their own numismatic catalogue reference in many cases and they should have their own section or 'currency' within their respective countries. I do not collect sets myself but I have been contacted by many set collectors and I sympathise with their plight; when the original set listings (from NZ, UK and others) were taken down off the site as Neil mentioned, we were assured that the team were looking at restructuring the site to accommodate sets but I am beginning to wonder if that will ever happen or if they were just empty promises.
Just because you can't see it ... doesn't mean it isn't there - Anon.
Quote: "Arusak"I don't think sets should be added in my opinion. If you have a set, add the coins on an individual basis. So add all the coins that are in the set, and just select uncirculated or proof depending on what they are. If there's a different finish to the coins than regular uncirculated, a new line should be added. But I don't see why a set should be it's own entry on numista.
And OP, your coins are uncirculated, not proof.
You obviously don't collect or swap sets but you shouldn't let that fact cloud your judgement when it comes to the wants and needs of other collectors who do. Official mint sets, both BU and Proof, are a completely separate entity to loose coins, they have their own numimatic catalogue reference in many cases and they should have their own section or 'currency' within their respective countries. I do not collect sets myself but I have been contacted by many set collectors and I sympathise with their plight; when the original set listings (from NZ, UK and others) were taken down off the site as Neil mentioned, we were assured that the team were looking at restructuring the site to accommodate sets but I am beginning to wonder if that will ever happen or if they were just empty promises.
Completely agree. Losing the sets were a loss. Only thing I'd add is each set should have an extra for the cases, and an indicator for whether it's a long, short, proof, bu, or specimen set.
I have most of the GB and South African short proof sets up to 1850 or so which are probably one of the best parts of my collection.
I'm very interested to know how sets will be handled. I'm all for the inclusion of official issues in their original cases. It would also be nice to include those wildly popular "Coins of all Nations" sets which typically have a substantial value. However as these were not official releases it opens the door to including countless privately produced sets of often very poor quality and even less merit. There's a real risk that including private issues we may create another Tokens / Exonumia monster. It's a hard line to draw.
I would like to make a plea for the inclusion of Maundy issues in some format which recognizes their special nature. It would be very useful to have them grouped by year instead of scattered among the business strikes by denomination. Perhaps even to include a separate checkbox for the original case.
Non illegitimis carborundum est. Excellent advice for all coins.
Make Numismatics Great Again!
Quote: "pnightingale"I'm very interested to know how sets will be handled. I'm all for the inclusion of official issues in their original cases. It would also be nice to include those wildly popular "Coins of all Nations" sets which typically have a substantial value. However as these were not official releases it opens the door to including countless privately produced sets of often very poor quality and even less merit. There's a real risk that including private issues we may create another Tokens / Exonumia monster. It's a hard line to draw.
I would like to make a plea for the inclusion of Maundy issues in some format which recognizes their special nature. It would be very useful to have them grouped by year instead of scattered among the business strikes by denomination. Perhaps even to include a separate checkbox for the original case.
This, though it should include an entry for the condition of the case too in my opinion.
It would be nice to have things like the 1975-1977 wildlife sets grouped also as you say, but this is more difficult and annoying to accomplish.
Quote: "Arusak"I don't think sets should be added in my opinion. If you have a set, add the coins on an individual basis. So add all the coins that are in the set, and just select uncirculated or proof depending on what they are. If there's a different finish to the coins than regular uncirculated, a new line should be added. But I don't see why a set should be it's own entry on numista.
And OP, your coins are uncirculated, not proof.
The idea to add the sets was because some people collect and swap the sets and it's easier to enter the set for swap than enter each coin individually and write a note to say they were part of a set, easier for your exchange partner to select, and then easier to update your collection when the swap is complete.
The sets were kept separate from the regular circulation coins by setting them up as a separate section, so the New Zealand section looked like
New Zealand Pound (1840-1966)
New Zealand Dollar (1967-Present)
New Zealand Trade Tokens
New Zealand uncirculated and proof sets
It was all working well but was taken away for no real reason. Hours of work was wasted with the promised replacement still not implemented over a year later.
QuoteThe idea to add the sets was because some people collect and swap the sets and it's easier to enter the set for swap than enter each coin individually and write a note to say they were part of a set, easier for your exchange partner to select, and then easier to update your collection when the swap is complete.
I don't know much about sets (in layman's terms I am still rookie in coin collecting), but when talking about them, I tend to think an-original-set-of-coins is minted and packed as a set by the Mint itself and if there are smart people at the minting house they add some paper in form of a certificate and pack the whole damn thing in shiny box to make it more expensive. I have seen some modern "non-original" Euro plastic-bombastic sets, of which me having some of them in possession, but I am reluctant to add these coins as an original-set. I would there for be more willing to add coin into fields with "set" remarks if there would also be available picture of the original set and the certificate itself on Numista web page (e.g. below). But then again with some knowledge it's pretty easy to say, which sets are "true ones" and which ones not.
Maybe admins can add special section after Obverse, Reverse and Edge, named Certificates or something... with photo field and so on....
