User:Johann Wolfgang/Sandbox3

In the middle we have the front runner for me. Modified from the original. No value slot (I feel value line is redundant with Dollar coin heading one line above), with production years, alloys abreviated. In center; min mods, number in circulation (bottom) I don't care to much about, but it is a nice fact. The one on the far left is the original.

Dollar coin
Value:	1 U.S. dollar
Mass:	8.100 g
Diameter:	26.5 mm
Thickness:	2.00 mm
Edge:	Plain
Composition:	88.5% copper 6% zinc 3.5% manganese 2% nickel
Obverse
180px|Obverse of a United States dollar coin
Design:	Sacagawea with child
Designer:	Glenna Goodacre
Design Date:	2000
Reverse
Design:	Eagle in flight
Designer:	Thomas D. Rogers
Design Date:	2000

Dollar coin
Production Years:	2000?-Current
Mass:	8.100 g
Diameter:	26.5 mm
Thickness:	2.00 mm
Edge:	Plain
Composition:	88.5% Cu 6% Zn 3.5% Mn 2% Ni
Obverse
Design:	Sacagawea with child
Designer:	Glenna Goodacre
Design Date:	2000
Reverse
Design:	Eagle in flight
Designer:	Thomas D. Rogers
Design Date:	2000

Dollar coin
Face Value:	1 U.S. dollar
Mass:	8.100 g
Diameter:	26.5 mm
Thickness:	2.00 mm
Edge:	Plain
Composition:	88.5% copper 6% zinc 3.5% manganese 2% nickel
Obverse
Design:	Sacagawea with child
Designer:	Glenna Goodacre
Design Date:	2000
Reverse
Design:	Eagle in flight
Designer:	Thomas D. Rogers
Design Date:	2000
?Number in Circulation?	To Many

Main articles, ones that have more than one major mintin design, shouldn't have this table, such as United States dollar coin. It should be reserved for more specific articles such as Sacagawea dollar. Just my two cents (hehe I love links). Lemme know what your thoughts are. The tables caught my eye last night, so I figured I'd do something. Joe I 20:56, 12 October 2005 (UTC)