This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Numismatics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Numismatism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
The US was also considering joining the Latin Monetary Union with the dollar at 5 Francs. If they'd done that, then 1 Franc would've been exactly 20 cents. Was that part of the motivation? -- Nik42 04:39, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
It is one theory. See: , however, I believe by the time the coin actually came into production the idea had been dropped. Splarka 05:36, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Again, solid research and solid prose; clearly close to promotion. I'll hold this one until you've had a chance to address the bottom three points here.
"the twenty-cent piece was made a legal tender up to five dollars" -- Am I understanding this phrase right that you couldn't use, say, 30 of them for a payment of six dollars? Interesting.
You are correct. Remember, we are not dealing with a token here, but a dollar defined by the gold standard, which the US was for all intents and purposes on. A full-weight gold coin was worth exactly what it said, it contained, say, ten dollars in gold if you melted it down. If you melted down $6 in twenty-cent pieces in 1875, you would have silver worth somewhat less than six dollars (I have the historic values of silver in my references). The dollar was defined as gold. Silver and base metal pieces had limited legal tender status.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:30, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
" Vermeule admitted the pattern designs made by Barber, especially the "Liberty by the Seashore" design, which the historian believes owe a debt to the British copper coins of that period depicting Britannia—Barber was an Englishman by birth." -- this sentence seems to get a little confused--what is it that Vermeule is admitting here? I wonder if this could be untangled into two sentences--also, "admitted" should probably be avoided per WP:WTW in favor of "said" or "wrote".
It should have been "admired". Typo.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:39, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
"He deems it appropriate" -- tense seems to be shifting here; Vermeule's other comments were relayed in past tense
""The new twenty-cent coin". The New York Times. April 29, 1875. Retrieved June 20, 2013." -- is this entry correct? The paper seems to be the Mansfield Herald
I've fixed the remainder. Thank you very much for the review.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:49, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
The lede seems slightly confusing. Proofs were struck in all 4 years of this coin's run. The statement, "for circulation in 1875 and 76 and for collectors the following two years" seems to indicate that proofs were only struck in 1877 and 78. Joefromrandb (talk) 06:27, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. Tweaked.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:35, 6 November 2013 (UTC)