Talk:Quarter (United States coin)

Image

As these designs are in the public domain, I'd like to begin uploading images. Logically this page would be the place, but I'm afraid putting them all here would make the load time of the page too slow. Right now I'm toying with the idea of putting an extra table row at the bottom of each state's table and putting the image there. Anyone have thoughts on this? - Hephaestos 16:49, 26 Aug 2003 (UTC)

The mint has started copyrighting some of the more recent designs.

The images from my site (www.acoin.com) are copyrighted images. If you want to aquire your own images and upload them, feel free. Do not take the images from my site. It took me years to aquire them myself. Other coin sites have the same problems, so don't lift their images either. The design is PD, not the image. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KellyCoinGuy (talk • contribs) 23:24, 21 November 2003

Do you have any more info on the copyrighting by the mint? I hadn't heard about that. (of the designs I mean, as opposed to the web images) - Hephaestos 23:29, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

All I know is that the mint has begun submitting (for about five years now) all their coin designs to the copyright office. So far, I believe the only people they've gone after are those who would duplicate the images on Silver Rounds... as far as I know they've never had a problem with people putting pictures of their coins on websites. You might be able to find more at http://www.usmint.gov , their official website. I read it in Numismatic News, and may not have all the facts completely straight on this matter.

Also, as for putting that many images on one page, it does make for very slow loading on most people's machines... I wouldn't advise it on something like wikipedia... —Preceding unsigned comment added by KellyCoinGuy (talk • contribs) 12:48, 22 November 2003

silver coin image

This may be nitpicking, but the obverse coin image you show is of a 1963 coin--one from the silver era (which explains the tarnish it is developing). It would be nice, if possible, to depict a non-silver (i.e. from 1965 or later) quarter instead.

Also, the front of the coin shown is from the state quarters series, while the back is from the older coins. While both images are correct, one coin would not possess both of them. Youngamerican 16:04, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Alright, I took a picture of a circulated quarter and uploaded it. Not absolutely wonderful, but should do until someone does a better job. Maybe I shouldn't have cropped so much. vLaDsINgEr 01:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Infobox

Should the infobox have the Nebraska reverse on it like that? It implies that all US quarters have that design on the reverse, which is (thankfully, as that one is terrible) not the case. I would think the best thing would be the use the old eagle, as it's the only one in common circulation that's not a limited issue, and presumably the US Mint will be going back to that design after they run out of states. Kairos 19:32, 21 April 2006 (UTC) Mixed up "reverse" and "obverse" somehow. Kairos 19:40, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

I would think maybe an additional infobox with the old reverse and add to the "design" field of the current infobox that the reverse varies from state to state(perhaps with a link >). I could even throw together a page with all the available statehood reverses, with brief descriptions to link to. Thoughts? Bobby 19:47, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Highest denomination US coin commonly in circulation

I take issue with this statement. Both the Susan B. Anthony and newer Sacajawea one-dollar coins are not very uncommon, typically being dispensed as change from vending machines for postage stamps, subway tickets and the like, even some change machines. They are not uncommon enough to raise the eyebrows of experienced cashiers. Duckspeaker 16:02, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

The sole factor that determines whether or not it is commonly circulated is whether or not it is commonly circulated, not by eyebrow raising of experienced cashiers. I believe your statement should be reworded "Both the Susan B. Anthony and newer Sacajawea one-dollar coins are only dispensed...". What was the last time you buy stamps from a machine? How many Americans regularly take the subway? What percentage of beverage vending machine give chance in dollar coin as opposed to 4 quarters?

I actually support dollar coin replacing dollar bill. However, we must not misrepresent facts here. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 04:14, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

The "Who Cares?" Section

I understand the point of this section, trying to point out that quarters and coins in general can be of some value and investment (I've been a numismatist for several years now), but IMHO this seems just a tad too conversational, as well as opinionated.

I'm not so sure how to edit it myself, but that's my two cents (pun unintended). Hopefully someone out there can adjust it accordingly.

Yes, this was recently added and was then removed as being inappropriate for an encyclopedia article. —Centrx→talk • 01:56, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

1933 quarter

See http://www.bhcoinclub.org/ for a picture of a 1933 quarter, which the coin club says has been authenticated.

1933 quarter —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.204.183.88 (talk) 20:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

• Nice try, but that's a Photoshop'd image. --- 66.92.0.62 (talk) 02:05, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Links to outside articles on the various designs.

I entered references to an outside site (coinsite.com) which has articles on the coin designs. Collect (talk) 18:56, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

metals in "Current design" section

The description of the coins' current makeup isn't quite clear. It says they are cupronickel and gives the percentages but also they are clad. Is this with silver? or nickel? or more cupronickel? If the last, what accounts for the "sandwich" appearance? Thanks. -- Jieagles (talk) 22:39, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to go in and "clean up" the first paragraph in the "Current design" section. The outer layers aren't nickel, they're cupronickel (25%Ni 75%Cu)and it's not really a "plating", which to my mind implies a thin coating. The mint uses the word "clad", so that's what I'm going with.Almostfm (talk) 06:08, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Value ?

What is this that the "value" is 0.284 U.S. dollar? Isn't the value precisely 0.25 US dollar? yamaplos 01:56, 17 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yamaplos (talk • contribs)

Pieces of Eight

I removed the incorrect statement from the introduction section:

"These fragments were known as Pieces of Eight."

Confusingly, while it is true that Spanish dollars were regularly cut into 8 pieces, and regularly called "Pieces of Eight", these facts are not directly related. See Spanish dollar for the actual usage and origin of the term "Pieces of Eight". Aidan (talk) 06:51, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Obverse photo

The obverse photo on this article is actually the obverse from the 50 State quarter/Territories program. The current obverse (America the Beautiful series) uses John Flanagan's original design. I checked the mint website, but they didn't seem to have a photo of the new obverse. Does anyone know of any public domain resources that might have such a photograph?-RHM22 (talk) 13:27, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Copper-nickel clad series

Commentary on my tagging this section in the article —
It's dubious that "individuals" were melting down 90% silver coins due to their higher value as metal than their official monetary value. How many people do you know who have a metal foundry in their house or garage with the tools and capabilities of smelting coin silver? Sounds ridiculous. The real story was that the U.S. Treasury, in collusion with the Federal Reserve Bank, were inflating the U.S. Dollar, and there was a real fear that foreign creditors would make a run on the gold reserves in Fort Knox. The government's "solution" to the dilemma was to de-monetize gold and silver coins, issue counterfeit cupro-nickel slugs in their place and remove the wording from Federal Reserve notes that they were "redeemable in lawful money of the United States". The circulated silver coins that supposedly were being melted down are still being traded in the precious metals market in 2011, as "junk silver", since individuals who possessed them squirreled them away in the face of a flood of counterfeits. See Gresham's law. —Quicksilver^{T @} 23:04, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Without addressing the collateral issues you raise, I agree that it is extremely unlikely that silver coins would be melted down for profit. Pre-1964 "junk" silver coins continue to be traded in bulk for their metal content. The fact that they have been minted proves weight and purity and makes them preferred over silver of unknown origin. Melting coins would reduce them to an unrecognizable mass of silvery metal which would have to be weighed, and assayed for purity, each time it was bought and sold. Bullion investors want to preserve coins in an un-melted state to prove their purity. This was the original function of mints, after all . . . Xanthis (talk) 04:17, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Tires

Would it be appropriate to mention that the US quarter is frequently used as a gauge of tire tread wear? If the tread does not reach at the least reach the top of George Washington's head, then the tires need replacement for safety purposes. (For legal purposes, Lincoln's head on the cent is used.) The problem is that that distance varies with the type of quarter. The US Mint web site, half of which is broken, does not contain the information on what that distance is in. Bostoner (talk) 02:09, 2 November 2011 (UTC)