Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numismatics

FAR

I have nominated €2 commemorative coins for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 04:11, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

TFD: Lue

See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:Leu. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:44, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Canadian Platinum Coin Sets

2009 Charlton Catalogue of Canadian Coins I believe the mintage of the 1998 set: mintage is/was 661 not 527 1999 set: mintage is/was 495 not 434 2001 set: mintage is/was 448 not 336 2002 set: mintage is/was 344 not 700

N.B. I bought many of the $200 Gold coins directly from the Royal Canadian Mint (RCM). One of them the 1998 White Buffalo had a Certificate of Authenticity (COA) numbered higher than the number minted 11,187 versus 7,419. When I enquired of the RCM I was told thet the COA number does not reflect the number struck nor the order of striking. I thought that their comments were relevant in light of the importance some collectors place on a low numbered certificate. I am also surprised that the COA number can be higher than the mintage as this would provide something of a small window for fraud/counterfeit. Gpbaile (talk) 18:18, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality scale of American Silver Eagle page

Could an editor take a look at the quality scale tag for Talk:American_Silver_Eagle and possibly move the article up to a higher quality scale? Currently it is tagged as "Start-Class" but has been edited a lot since then. — Diiscool (talk) 20:47, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I have changed it to B class, but anyone is allowed to rate an article; it doesn't have to be from the project. Reywas92^Talk 21:35, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

permissions for British Pound banknote images due to lapse!

The special permission from the Bank of England to display File:Pound sterling banknotes fan.png, File:Bank_Of_England10.png, and File:Bank Of England20.gif are due to lapse in 4 days on Feb 3rd (and in the case of the first image, has already lapsed). Can someone in the know go about getting permission renewed for another year? --Cybercobra (talk) 07:04, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Name this trick, please

User (smile) wants to forge a rare historical coin. He has a new press die of reasonable quality but shies from using modern alloys. Instead, he takes a not-so-rare historical coin of the same size and same hallmark as the target, smooths the surfaces, and uses it as blank medium. The metal is genuine, the coin is fake.

Is there a short English name for this kind of forgery? TIA, NVO (talk) 21:24, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Reviews needed

Hi everyone! €2 commemorative coins is up for review as a featured article, with the review here. It has been moved to the FARC section, which is where editors enter keep or delist declarations. Currently there is a split over the quality of the referencing. Interested editors are invited to comment, especially regarding the questioned sources, so that this article can finish moving through the process. Thanks! Dana boomer (talk) 16:29, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Reichsthaler and ducats

a question has been raised in an A-class review of Order of Saint Hubert (Bavarian) about the value of Ducats and Reichsthalers vis a vis the US dollar. A gold ducat = 5 florins 10 kreuzer in the part of the Holy Roman Empire considered in the article. The reviewer wants to know what that equals in today's currency. The gold imperial ducat was 60 assay. Can anyone help with this? Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:13, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

It depends on bullion value verses wage and what that wage could buy. Also the type of economy, technology, social structure would come into play. So it is very hard to get s definitive answer for this one. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 05:22, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Hong Kong

I have done some new articles for the Hong Kong dollar, if somone has time can you please go over it. Thanks Template:HK currency and coinage, Enlil Ninlil (talk) 05:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

10 cents australia

is a 1966 10 cent worth more than 10 cents —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.187.19.89 (talk) 03:41, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Uncirculated it is worth more, but in Australia any other grade is face value. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 05:19, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

UK coins

What is the copyright status of UK coins from over 50 years ago? Some are tagged as {{PD-UKGov}} and on Wikimedia Commons; others are tagged as such but are said to be in copyright and fair use in the US, though if they are PD-UKGov, they are out of copyright in the US also according to the template and links; then some are only tagged as fair use. —innotata 14:41, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

As far as I know, because this wiki does not obey national boundaries, what ever country the currency comes from those laws from that country apply to their use. So the U.S law would be null and void on this issue, on this site. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 06:23, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually, Wikimedia projects do obey boundaries, to some extent, and they are based in the United States. As regards media, they must be public domain the United States: if they are PD elsewhere but not in the US, they are fair use. Media also must be PD in their source country for Wikimedia Commons, but not necessarily for Wikipedia. In this case, this e-mail linked from the template seems to state clearly that works in expired crown copyright are PD worldwide. I think this should be clear enough for most of the coin images in question to be moved to Wikimedia Commons, but I would like to confirm this; I now think Commons's village pump would be a better place to bring this up. —innotata 14:18, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I think commons:Commons:Currency#United_Kingdom is clear enough to be certain that any simple scans are permissible. —innotata 14:26, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Here's somewhere people from this project can help: File:Englishpenny1967.jpg is not free, but it can be replaced by a penny from over 50 years ago. —innotata 14:45, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

There are lots of other Elizabeth coins we don't have, the halfpenny for instance. —innotata 14:50, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Well Innotata, the e-mail you provided seems to indicate that the where the material originated from, those are the laws that need to be followed. What is the wiki policy on this? I will find it. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 06:18, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I think pages like Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights are what you are looking for—just search for "copyright" in the project namespace here and on Wikimedia Commons. —innotata 20:49, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

The British Museum wants to give you money and help you write articles!

Yesterday I was lucky enough to attend the Backstage Pass event at the British Museum. It was part of a wider project of engagement with Wikipedia (see WP:GLAM/BM) that has seen them take on a temporary Wikipedian In Residence, User:Witty lama. They see Wikipedia as sharing many of their aims, and they want to encourage involvement by Wikipedians with the museum, and vice versa. They have even offered 5 prizes of £100 at the BM shop for featured articles on BM topics - in any language. The museum has huge holdings of coins and medals, so you should be able to find something to write about - one of the many hordes of coins for instance.
Most Wikipedians probably don't know that the BM has curators dedicated to answering phone/email questions about their specialist areas, and most of their department libraries welcome visitors doing bona fide research - and they now seem to recognise that editing Wikipedia articles, especially about items in the BM's collections, counts for those purposes. I know that the first question most people will have is "Can we have images of all their stuff?" and I'd just ask people to be patient on that front. Let's just say that the museum are well aware of our hopes there, there are staff who see advantages to the museum in doing something, and it's being discussed at the highest level. On the other hand it's a very complex area that needs to be handled diplomatically. Literally in some cases - foreign governments can get very touchy about the dissemination of images of artifacts relating to their cultural history, and the museum needs to respect those concerns.
So for the moment the focus is on using the BM's huge resources of books, expertise etc to improve article content, and hopefully that will include articles being peer-reviewed by BM staff. Some of them are quite nervous about doing stuff on Wikipedia, a mixture of fear of professional ridicule, nervousness about the technical aspects, stories of rapid reverts of good-faith edits and just general culture shock - it's a very different world to the one they come from. So I'd ask everyone to look after any BM people that you see around the place, Wikipedia can gain a lot from their involvement and it would be a shame if they're discouraged for any reason. As I mentioned above, WP:GLAM/BM is the clearing house for the BM's involvement with Wikipedia, and I suggest that further questions/comments are directed there. Le Deluge (talk) 14:26, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Move request at Japanese yen

There is a move request at Japanese yen involving former project titleing guidelines. Discuss at Talk:Japanese yen — AjaxSmack 03:18, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Proposed merge July 2010, Rupee sign and Indian Rupee sign

Hi, everyone. Please comment here: Talk:Indian rupee sign - Richard Cavell (talk) 02:11, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Coins banned as Featured Pictures?

There is a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Featured_picture_candidates#Categories_of_nominations_that_are_defacto_banned that may interest you. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 13:48, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Shield nickel at FAC

The peer review is here, goal is to get it to FAC early next month. We do not presently have any Featured Articles on coins, since the article on the 2 euro commemorative coins got demoted.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:08, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

After a successful peer review, I have nominated it for Featured Article. Feedback is welcome, and the nomination may be found here. Thanks in advance.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:53, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Historical exchange rate for the Ecuadorian sucre?

Hi all, see Talk:1949_Ambato_earthquake. Does one of you perhaps know how to determine an exchange rate of a currency that is not in use anymore? The flow of prose in this article would benefit from some sort of context about how much 250,000 Ecuadorian sucre are - better still, how much money that was in 1949, or how much it would be today, adapted for inflation. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Pgallert (talk) 17:47, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

One of the greatest US Coin resources I've ever seen

Hello everyone,

I added a lot of external links to specific resources located at http://www.usacoinbook.com/ , only to have them all deleted. This is one of the best US coin resources around. For instance, I went to the "Three Cent Pieces" Wikipedia article and added this page as an external link: http://www.usacoinbook.com/coins/three-cents/silver-three-cent/ . Is this legal? I would like numismatic members to check out this awesome site. Wickland (talk) 08:23, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps we would have been more receptive to this if you weren't WP:SPAMMING the articles with a for-profit coin sales website that lists coin prices rather than something encyclopedically useful. Reywas92^Talk 16:09, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

It's not an entire for-profit website. Did you even LOOK at it? You might understand what I'm talking about if you read my post and look at the link I provided. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wickland (talk • contribs) 18:28, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Also, these "coin prices" are numismatic values of coins. For example, if you view the external links at this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half_dollar_%28United_States_coin%29 you will see this: http://www.coinfacts.com/half_dollars/kennedy_half_dollars/kennedy_half_dollars.html It shows all the same information that the link I provided has (except theirs is 4 years outdated) and they don't have the "Red Book" of prices so people can see what their coins are worth.

These "coin prices" are not storefront dealer prices, they are encyclopedic guides for collectors to find what their coins are worth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wickland (talk • contribs) 18:42, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the comment about existing links. I have removed the EL sections from a couple of articles. Most of them might merit some scrutiny. --John (talk) 19:00, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I understand now, I will stop posting links to this site in Wikipedia. This site seemed like such a great resource so please take a look at it and use it as a reference if you like it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wickland (talk • contribs) 19:18, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

This is not an encyclopedic reference, just "numismatic values", as you call it. It's pretty clear that you are simply trying to advertise your website, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. Thank you. Reywas92^Talk 19:52, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Reproduction of Australian Banknotes & Coins

Also posted at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#Reproduction of Australian Banknotes & Coins, discussion here.

I've started a template Template:Non-free currency-AU-Note with information about a general permission for reproductions of Australian banknotes, using information from the Reserve Bank of Australia. I've placed it on File:100_Australian_dollars_front.jpg, but can't get to the commons banknotes File:AUS$20 Mary Reibey.jpg and File:AustraliaPNew-5Dollars-(20)05-donatedowl f-1-.jpg at the moment. I imagine there are many other images of Australian Banknotes on Wikipedia - we could start with Banknotes of the Australian dollar.

I've also started one for Template:Non-free currency-AU-Coin with information about applying for permission to reproduce Australian coins. Since the Mint reserves permission, a free-use rationale is required. Some of the existing ones are incorrect as they assume that a photographic (2D) representation is not copyrighted by the Mint.

I've tackled most of the coins on Coins of the Australian dollar, but I'm not sure about pre-1969 coins, which the Royal Australian Mint doesn't own the copyright on. Who does? twilsonb (talk) 05:30, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

For the AU Coins copyright question, some users (e.g. at File:1966_australian_50_cent_piece_circular.jpg) seem to think that the Mint's lack of ownership pre-1969 implies that no-one owns the copyright. Seems tenuous to me... twilsonb (talk) 05:34, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I was wrong - copyright before 1960 has expired - see Template:PD-Australia. twilsonb (talk) 13:55, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, Crown Copyright is 50 years. In practice, any predecimal Australian coin is PD in Australia, as there was no originality in changing the date from 1960 to 1961, unless I am mistaken all post-1960 predecimal Australian coins were to designs made before 1960.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:13, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Orders, decorations, and medals

I have encountered a number of articles on orders, decorations and medals which have been tagged to WP:NUMIS. My understanding is that while specific orders, decorations and medals fall with the field of exonumia, they are nevertheless out of scope for WP:NUMIS as they are covered by WP:ODM. Notwithstanding, defining articles such as Medals and Order (honour) have sponsorship by both projects. A potential grey area is early medals/medallions issued occasionally before the modern versions became prevalent (ie before they were issued with ribbons). By my calculation, there are about 110 articles on specific ODM that have a WP:NUMIS banner which will be removed if the Project is leaving these to WP:ODM. If WP:NUMIS wants to cover all ODM, this will result in duplication for the entire list of ODM articles which is currently running at over 2300 tagged articles and rising. My thinking is it is better left for WP:ODM as a complementary. Before I start doing any wholesale changes, I am seeking WP:NUMIS' view. Cheers, AusTerrapin (talk) 15:13, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Identify a Byzantine coin ...

Hello, would anyone know what File:Byzantine golden coin.jpg is? Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:34, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

On the left side there is ΑΛΕΣΙΩ ΔΕΣΠΟΤΗ (Alessios) on the right ΤΩ ΚΟΜΗΝΩ. (= Alessios despot, of the Comnenians) May be Alexius II or III. For the title look at despot. If is right was struck when he was the heir-apparent to the throne. --Carlo Morino aka zi' Carlo 15:37, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

WP Numismatics in the Signpost

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Numismatics for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 03:35, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Numismatic articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Numismatic articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Sunday, November 14th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

If you have already provided feedback, we deeply appreciate it. For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 16:35, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

BAM to be replaced by EUR?

Check the table at Multi-speed Europe#Overview of degrees of integration by country. Bosnian column, eurozone row: "(fixed rate 1998 / adopting in 2013)". What is this supposed to mean? There is no source given & I have not heard of anyone else claiming that BAM will be replaced by EUR anytime soon. There is another comment at Talk:Bosnia and Herzegovina convertible mark#suceeded by euro which suggests that the BAM article contained a similar statement at some point. Is this information really correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.247.11.156 (talk) 22:12, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Currency templates

I've been doing work on various Category:Currency templates (eg {{JPY}} and {{AUD}}. So far the templates have pretty much existed separately from each other. Would it make sense to bring them altogether under the Numismatics project?  Stepho  (talk) 04:54, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Standing Liberty Quarter

I was checking some of the Wiki articles about U.S. coins, and I came across the article for Standing Liberty quarters. The article is obviously collector-oriented. I'm pretty new at Wikipedia and I don't pretend to be an expert at all, but shouldn't the articles just present the facts about coins (or any subject really) without going too deeply into the subject of collector value and rarity? I would have edited the article, but I wasn't sure if I should remove some of the SLQ collector-oriented information or not.-RHM22 (talk) 03:18, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

"Type set" members

The "type" set should include 1836 & 1839 silver dollars as both were released to circulation. On the other hand, the 4 dollar gold piece was not released to general circulation, unless you count the 1879 pieces which apparently were distributed to various congressmen. In that case, you should indicate a one year circulating issue. The coiled hair stella did not circulate at all, so I agree that there should not be two types of $4 gold pieces. Artworks144 (talk) 23:37, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Franga

Can someone help me with the Franga article? --Vinie007 21:02, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Namibian mark

The article Namibian mark has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for reference found no published (gBooks) WP:RS support for the subject, fails WP:N and WP:V

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:36, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Louis Braille Dollar

File:2009 USA One Dollar Coin Louis Braille.jpg

2009 USA one dollar coin commemorating the birth of Louis Braille.

(NB: I posted this comment on the "Dollar coin" article talk page, but thought it should be here instead, where it might be read.) --- I have three Louis Braille dollars that were issued in 2009. Shouldn't there be a Wikipedia article about this coin? Here are two articles about it at Coin Update: Louis Braille Commemorative Coins and Louis Braille Silver Dollar Sales Ending Today Note: I posted the image at right to three other Wikipedia articles already. I would write the article but my English language skills fail me sometimes. Bien amicalement, Charvex (talk) 06:32, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Follow-up: Maybe someone can write about the decision to to make Louis Braille's eyes wide open in the coin design. Since his eyes could not function, they would not have sparkled - nor would they have even been seen, for that matter. The famous life-like maquettes and sculpture of Braille by Étienne Leroux show his eyes closed, as with most blind people, e.g. Andrea Bocelli. I think it was a really stupid decision by the U.S. Mint. There had to be a contoversy about showing his eyes this way. Does anyone know? -- Tchao, Charvex (talk) 06:12, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

guideline change affecting all collectibles articles

Wikipedia_talk:What_Wikipedia_is_not#re_collectables has a discussion over an addition to the guideline stating Catalogue. Wikipedia is not a stamp catalogue nor a database of collectables. More than the existence of reliable published information regarding specific items is required for inclusion. Collect (talk) 23:12, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Usage of non-free images

I routinely patrol this report, looking for articles where non-free images are being used in an inappropriate/excessive manner. This is in support of WP:NFCC #3, minimal use requirements. For example, today I removed a number of team crests that were used on that article as icons (WP:NFCC #8 failure), and lacking rationales per WP:NFCC #10c. Over the time I've been watching this list, I've seen a significant increase in the number of numismatics articles on this list. Two weeks ago, Euro coins took over the top slot on this report with this series of edits by an anon-IP. That article topped the then first place article by more than 150%. Numismatics articles comprise 25 of the top 52^* articles (48%) and are responsible for 52% of the non-free image uses in those top 52. No other class of articles comes even close to claiming as much of the top 50 spots as numismatics articles. A very distant second are articles containing uniform ranks (7 articles, 140 uses, or about 1/5th as much).

* - 52 due to a tie among some articles near 50

WP:NFCC #3a implores us that "Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information". Using the Euro coins article, do we really need to display every version of every euro coin from every country in order for the reader to understand the subject of euro coins? I think not.

Further, WP:NOTDIR noted that Wikipedia is not "a complete exposition of all possible details" and WP:INDISCRIMINATE notes "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information"

Many of these currency articles are virtual catalogs of every possible version of a particular item of currency. In some cases the information is being replicated in some form across multiple articles. Compare the table of euro coins in the above mentioned article to the country by country showing at 10_cent_euro_coins#Obverse_.28national.29_sides. This isn't isolated. Look at 1_euro_coins#Obverse_.28national.29_side and 20_cent_euro_coins#Obverse_.28national.29_sides for more examples.

I think it would be an excellent idea to come to some consensus on just how such articles should be constructed, while keeping a strong eye towards compliance with WP:NFCC policy. Thoughts? --Hammersoft (talk) 16:21, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

• Hello? --Hammersoft (talk) 21:08, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

I wish to point out that following a comment on Banknotes of Zimbabwe all the banknotes of Zimbabwe are demonetised, and following an investigation a couple of years ago it was discovered that demonetised banknotes were in public domain. --Marianian^(talk) 12:02, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

To convey the meaning and preventing hurt to the articles, I think the interim rule for non-free images of currency should be: "for articles pertaining to a circulating currency, the coins of that currency collectively, and banknotes/bills of that currency collectively (e.g. New Zealand dollar, Coins of the New Zealand dollar, Banknotes of the New Zealand dollar), a maximum of ONE obverse image and ONE reverse image of EACH currently circulating denomination is permitted, OR a maximum of FOUR composite images: one each for coins obverse, coins reverse, banknotes obverse, and banknote reverse, OR a mixture of both, but no individual image can be shown again if it features in a composite image." Clear as mud? Hopefully, in the future we can just get down to four non-free images per article (when we have the photos). Lcmortensen (mailbox) 23:53, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

• Your standards would leave numismatic articles with no limitation on the about of non-free images permitted on the article. Sorry, it doesn't work. --Hammersoft (talk) 00:25, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

It does work. If the United States dollar has four circulating coins (1c, 5c, 10c, 25c) and six circulating notes ($1, $5, $10, $20, $50, $100), then the upper limit is 20 non-free images. I assume the overall limit is somewhere around 30 (EUR, UAH). The realistic maximum would be twice the total number of denominations in circulation. Of course, this is in the interim until such time that we can reduce the number of images to just two to four composites - one for coins and one for notes (with obverse/reverse of each if necessary) (see File:New British Coinage 2008.jpg for example).

Lets reword that: "for articles pertaining to a circulating currency, the coins of that currency collectively, and banknotes/bills of that currency collectively (e.g. New Zealand dollar, Coins of the New Zealand dollar, Banknotes of the New Zealand dollar), a maximum of ONE obverse image and ONE reverse image of EACH PER currently circulating denomination is permitted OR a maximum of FOUR composite images: one each for coins obverse, coins reverse, banknotes obverse, and banknote reverse, OR a mixture of both, but no individual image can be shown again if it features in a composite image. regardless of each images composition" Lcmortensen (mailbox) 02:47, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

• There is no interim. WP:NFCC doesn't provide a stage whereby articles get a special pass until editors come up with some other way to present information. The point is to comply with it. Period. Wikipedia is not a catalog. It is wholly unnecessary to display every unit of currency in a currency system in order to write an encyclopedia article about that currency system. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:02, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I think coins are a rare exception in that they cannot be released into the public domain while in circulation or otherwise freely licensed. Doing so would diminish the integrity and value of the currency. Considering permission for use in an educational setting is expressly allowed when replication is on-screen (e.g. New Zealand Banknotes, at least for the reverse side), it seems to do our readers a disservice to pass on this opportunity. Lara 18:07, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

• If our desire was purely for educational setting, then there would be little in the way of limitations on non-free image use. We could use non-free content liberally, as under fair use law an educational defense is rather strong. But, that's not our criteria. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:53, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Hammersoft and Delta have gone on a rampage to remove all fair-use images from all currency pages. Please raise your voice here and at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 51#Currency notes if you have opinions on this, because currently they're taking the relative silence as approval. Jpatokal (talk) 22:28, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

• Thank you for your characterization that I've gone on a rampage. You are absolutely correct. I've been going absolutely bezerk. It's like an addictive drug that I can't get enough of. I definitely need rehab. My God, I've already edited ---3--- numistmatics articles! Holy integer Batman! Stop me before I get to 4!!!! <cough> Next time you decide to raise issue with something that is being done, please restrain yourself from hyperbole? Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 00:34, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok before you goo further, I would like to know which country the images are copywrited and which are not, can you do this before you implement changes. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 08:44, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

• I'm not very concerned with which countries have their currency copyrighted and which do not. I am concerned with what tag they are marked here on this project. I of course have no objection if another editor finds proof that currency from a particular country is available under a free license or public domain, and subsequently retags the images here appropriately. But, as long as they are marked as non-free here, they must abide by WP:NFCC in all respects. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:04, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

So I guess you are all talk and no real substance then. Ok fine. But it will take time to find out, are you willing to wait? Enlil Ninlil (talk) 03:20, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

• I huff and puff and blow a stack of straw down, yes :). As to waiting, no, not really interested in waiting. There's no quarter in policy or guideline to suspend either in favor of waiting indefinitely for people to determine the copyright status of an image. There's no prohibition on re-uploading an image under a free license once it's found to be free either. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:35, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

This has been brought up at Talk:Croatian_kuna#Use of non-free images on this article. In short, I contend that it's perfectly fine to depict the set of current banknotes on currency pages and that removal of such minimal pictures (as opposed to some random other non-free currency pictures) is unwarranted. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 11:14, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah, and moving forward with that there's Wikipedia talk:Non-free content#RfC: Did recent currency image deletions go beyond the proper aims and objectives of the NFC image policy?. Sorry for the redundant comment. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 11:46, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Template:RMB

{{RMB}} usage is under discussion, see Template talk:RMB . A related discussion is at WT:CHINA. 65.93.12.101 (talk) 09:21, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

National coinage history template

I have created {{Coinage (United States coin)}}. It serves as a history for current coinages. I think it should be approximately the standard template for national coinage histories. I think separate templates should be made for obsolete coinage denomination histories and linked via "below=" wikilinks. If they are not separated some countries will have bloated templates because of the extent of their histories. In the U.S. where we have only been around for 235 years, this template works out pretty well. I also think that we should consider removing individual denomination templates and merging/redirecting them into this template.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:52, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Now see Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_April_22#Template:USdollars.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:43, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

I like the template, but I wouldn't support removing the existing templates from the articles. I don't think it a bad idea that the articles have a couple of templates with minor overlap.-RHM22 (talk) 18:04, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Tony asked me to comment. I have nothing to say regarding the matter.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:15, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

That template is terrible and confussing for some, a simpler one would be more appropriate. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 02:24, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Reassessment request

Hi, I've removed the importance rating from Franklin half dollar. Could someone new to the article reassess it? The old rating seemed too high and I'd be grateful if someone could take a peek. Possibly I'm wrong. If no one does it in a week, I'll restore the old rating.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:10, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Coin topics will need consistency on certain issues.

There seems to be tremendous production of quality articles on U.S. coins recently. Congratulations on many successes. I am curious about some consistency issues. Now that I have added {{Coinage (United States)}} to all coin articles, there are many succession boxes that seem redundant. Can we make it a policy to remove them all if they are redundant with template information? I don't want to bog down various FACs by pursuing this article-by-article.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:10, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Additionally, I am not sure how many coins have experienced significant fluctuation in diameter over time. I know that the dollar has and have asked that the Peace dollar clarify its diameter in the LEAD and the body. Can similar clarifications be made on all dollar coin articles.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:10, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I at the Peace dollar FAC, I have requested that articles (even just basic stubs) be created on Silver runs. There are a bunch of articles that are all trending toward WP:FT status that could benefit from articles on the Runs, but they are not important enough to any single one of them to necessitate such an effort. However, IMO, people doing the silver coinage article FTs are the last hope for WP to have at least stubs for this topic. If you guys don't do it, who will? All that is needed is something like X was a silver price bubble that occurred from Month YYYY to Month YYYY. It was caused by Event Y. It concluded when event Z occurred. Throw in maybe two refs and find some good cats.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:10, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Should most images of coins and notes be removed from Wikipedia?

Meaning "fair use" images in currency lists, that is. The discussion below will decide "yes" or "no", so comments are very welcome. Wikipedia talk:Non-free content#Did recent currency image deletions go beyond the proper aims and objectives of the NFC image policy? Jpatokal (talk) 12:02, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Coins are affected as well, see eg. what Fifty pence (British coin) looks like now. Jpatokal (talk) 11:12, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Template merge

I am just giving you guys a heads up that the {{Coinage (United States)}} template merge is sitting in the queue at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion#To_merge. It could take months for someone with the proper expertise to come by and do the merge or one of you could do it and make sure it is done right.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:56, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Care and Photographing of old coins

Hi We came into possession of an old coin issued by the British East India Company in 1835. The photograph is here: [1] I would like to contribute it (the image, not the coin!) to Wikipedia (feel free to pick it up) but I would also like to take a better photo first. Any tips on photographing a coin with an entry level DSLR? (Nikon D60, kit lens)

Also, any tips on how to preserve old coins? I would like to pass it on to my children :)

Also, anyone can help me with valuing the coin? I am in India, not looking to sell, but still, I would like to know how much it would be worth. Ravikiran (talk) 05:09, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Bar Kochba Revolt coinage fake?

A recent edit to the Bar Kochba Revolt coinage page suggests that the coins are a forgery. This is supported by a single source dating from 1909. Please voice your opinion on the article talk page. Poliocretes (talk) 15:45, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Help on Commemorative coins of Poland - coin images are being removed !

Dear All, I need a help or advice on Commemorative coins of Poland article. The user ΔT keeps removing images of Commemorative coins of Poland claiming that "The presence of a fair use rationale for this article on an image description page does not make it acceptable for a given use." I believe I have fulfilled all rules and made all the steps necessary to be able to use the images of the coins on Wikipedia. I knew I will spend a lot of time uploading those images, there fore I first made sure that I can actuatlly upload them withouth breaching any Wikipedia rules. Please advice on what to do, since I am sure more of you had similar issues when putting coin images in the Wiki. Kupsztal (talk) 11:41, 17 June 2011 (UTC)