Pieces to be moved to Exonumia [solved]

33 posts

This message aims at: requesting the modification of a coin in the catalogue

Status: Done
Upvotes: 2
Downvotes: 0

» Quick access to the last post

Both pieces are fantasies that have to be moved to Gibraltar exonumia.

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces28470.html
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces28082.html
Status changed to Started (pejounet, 16-Jun-2019, 23:08)
While it is catalogued in Krause, it isnt in Garcia's booklet. A post on world of coins implies it isnt official. I will consult one other source and then we will have it.
Euromunt do you have your source? Please share if you do. I would like to consider it as well.
Library Media Specialist, columnist, collector, and gardener...
My source is an employee of the treasury of Gibraltar who confirmed they had no knowledge about the issuance of these pieces. He also provided me a list of all 2007-dated coins they approved, which didn't have these on it. The same information can also be found in the Weltmünzkatalog.
So we have two respected catalogs that are in disagreement... and the author of the one is a contributor to the other. What's the name and where we can contact your source? If they are with, and speak for the government of Gibraltar, it should be easy enough to confirm. Thank you.
Library Media Specialist, columnist, collector, and gardener...
Sources of normal change requests are not being verified either so I see no reason whatsoever why this would need to be verified.

Moreover the pages themselves on Numista already include a warning that the pieces are fantasies so apparently the information was considered to be correct in the past.

Furthermore every advanced collector knows that the Weltmünzkatalog is far more accurate than Krause.

Just change the catalog, thank you.
I may do so. I am researching. And since you cannot provide any proof, or point of contact, I will just have to keep waiting. I have found a document by Garcia, sent an email inquiry to someone else. I will keep you posted.

As far as your comments about coin catalogs...I agree. Schon has a great product. Too bad that it isnt the world standard. But thankfully he has become a contributor to the Krause family of catalogs...They share information, you know. I was excited when Schon became a fellow contributor. I look forward to meeting him sometime.
Library Media Specialist, columnist, collector, and gardener...
You did not ask for proof but rather only for contact details of my contact at the Government of Gibraltar, which I am of course not going to provide as it is nobody's business who I speak to.

Very strange way of doing things but anyway, whatever. I look forward to the obvious mistake in Numista being corrected.
I would guess that your unwillingness to share a name of a government official might have more to do with such a person not existing. It's an unfortunate tendency that you are unwilling, or perhaps unable, to support your statements which is honestly, nothing new with you.

I emailed Mark, the previous referee for Gibraltar. He was very free with his information. It seems this mysterious issue was said to not be official. But then the coins in question were placed in circulation. They might have been pattern pieces. Not the first country to have mysterious issues in this regard. I discovered the two pound coin in first day issue covers does exist in at least two forms with Gibraltar stamps issued for the same occasion. That in and of itself does not qualify this coin as legitimate, but it certainly does not disqualify it either. It would be interesting to find out if this coin was created and then the authorizing never followed through. I even discovered a crown with a similar design that has never come up for discussion, and is not cataloged.
The Krause catalog has assigned these coins catalog numbers. It's been claimed that Schon does not agree. But I cannot know if this is specifically addressed or just not discussed in his catalog. His catalog is not the world standard nor is it widely available. I have no doubt if his catalog ever becomes widely available that we will have great information from it.. But I would guess that Schon himself has been giving advice to Krause, since he is a fellow contributor to the catalog.
The comments for these two coins have been updated to reflect the nature of these pieces.
It will take more than just whim and demand to change their status at this time. In fact, had these been already in an exonomic category, they would have just stayed there waiting on proof that they should not be there.
Are they official or unofficial? Patterns released into circulation? They will remain where they are until more than anecdotal information is found.
Thanks Mark for the advice. Your credibility and knowledge was valuable and your willingness to share appreciated.
Library Media Specialist, columnist, collector, and gardener...
Pejounet, would you mark this resolved?
Library Media Specialist, columnist, collector, and gardener...
This thread made me smile.
What? Me Worry
Status changed to Done (Sulfur, 19-Jun-2019, 23:27)
Why was this made 'Solved" before I had a chance to reply? Why the urgence?

You can be sure that after over 8,500 approved change requests, having been referee for 5 countries and later catalogue admin, I know very well how to get reliable information for the catalog.
.
QuoteBut then the coins in question were placed in circulation.
Any evidence for this statement? I have never seen any pieces that appeared to be circulated. Instead it appeared that much rather they were sold directly to unknowing collectors. Evidence for which can also be found in the fact that at least 1 PNC was made containing these pieces.

Hereby the particular message of the Government of Gibraltar at the time:
.
QuoteI have been looking at our catalogue of Gibraltar coins for 2007 and the only coins officially on our list with the Diamond Wedding Anniversary design are the following:

One Crown
£5
£1

There were 3 other designs commemorating the Diamond wedding Anniversary but none of them were used on a 2p or £2 coin as your photos suggest. I find it rather strange that these coins been minted without our authority
Hello. I am a collector living in Gibraltar and I completely disagree. The 2 coins are not fantasy coins. I found the 2 pound piece in my change the other day, and I believe they were both minted by Pobjoy mint, and the Gibraltar Government later released them into circulation
Referee for coins → Albania, British Virgin Islands, Crusader and Christian states in the Eastern Mediterranean
Referee for banknotes → Gibraltar, Czech Republic
Quote: "Tomas530"​Hello. I am a collector living in Gibraltar and I completely disagree. The 2 coins are not fantasy coins. I found the 2 pound piece in my change the other day, and I believe they were both minted by Pobjoy mint, and the Gibraltar Government later released them into circulation
​Your government clearly did not provide authorization for their issuance and had no knowledge about their existence until I contacted them. Therefore they are fantasy pieces at best (although they can also be considered to be fakes). Both pieces were not minted at Pobjoy Mint but at Tower Mint. Do you have some photos of the piece you found in your change?

Disappointing that the moderators of this forum for some reason unknown to me continue to refuse to change the status of this thread which is clearly not solved.
Thank you Tomas530. By Googling I found a 2 pence described as xf condition. Definately interesting. We had a similarly mysterious issue in the USA. Back in 1856, we needed to move away from a pure copper large cent. In addition to the large cent of 1856, some thousands of a smaller different designed and with a copper/nickel make up were struck. It may have been a pattern, but many did circulate, and in 1857, the design and composition were adopted for the circulation cent. It's a desirable coin to this day.
It is interesting how these issues may have been struck by the Tower Mint like other issues with nearby dates...so we may have the official mint creating designs on official planchets...perhaps they should be considered patterns? If this turns out to be the case, then these designs are right where they should be. The term pattern may be more appropriate. Always considering. Thank you Tomas for sharing your experience with this issue you are finding in circulation. If these were struck by the official mint, and they turn out to be unauthorized, then they very well could conform to the idea of a pattern, proba, essai. All of these pattern type issues from all over the world are listed on Numista in the country listings. They are listed in Krause. They are not listed as exonumia. Interestingly, my friend who recently passed, Ed Rochette, possessed a modern pattern crown of Gibraltar. They issued a set of crowns back in the days of Pobjoy, that celebrated the cases of Sherlock Holmes. One of the crowns had a ship that didnt fit the description completely. A new design was made and widely issued. No one would seriously claim that coin was a fantasy. It remained in his collection as a pattern. Perhaps a unique pattern. All of this is so excitingly mysterious. That's one thing I like about coins.
Library Media Specialist, columnist, collector, and gardener...
Patterns are experimental pieces with an extremely low mintage that are not being released into general circulation or sold to collectors.
It was the Mary Celeste crown of 1994 that appeared in two configurations.
Library Media Specialist, columnist, collector, and gardener...
Many patterns, essais were struck in
relatively large numbers and were available to the public and have, at times circulated. Indeed, some may be only known by their presence in circulation. Patterns have been circulated and can be found in circulated conditions.
I just gave an example of this from the US. Poland, France, and dozens of other nations have patterns that are off metal, on metal, and were issued in large quantities...and actually sold by the government. I wonder about novodels and pieforts...should they be exonumia? I dont think so. They are more pattern than they are not, since they are also struck by the official mint. Cant forget the modern klippe coins issued by Poland. More pattern than not. No one thinks they should be exonumia.

It is tantalizing that if it is ever proven that this issue of Gibraltar is without governmental approval , that we have grounds to consider it as a pattern...since it does seem to circulate, and it is a struck issue from the authorized mint of the nation.

Thanks again for the feedback Tomas. And thanks to you as well, Euromunt.
Library Media Specialist, columnist, collector, and gardener...
Marking thread as solved does not mean someone cannot respond...
Catalogue administrator
Quote: "Euromunt"​You did not ask for proof but rather only for contact details of my contact at the Government of Gibraltar, which I am of course not going to provide as it is nobody's business who I speak to.

​Why can't you just provide an e-mail address in a PM, or phone number/website URL? Why do you make it so difficult? Of course it needs to be cofirmed, and maybe this contact of yours can provide valuable information to our site. Don't play hard to catch, just give him the contact infotmation and it's done. :)
Coin referee for: AZE, FRO, GRL, US-HI, KOR, KGZ, MLI, MHL, MMR, PRK, UZB, SML, TAT, TWN, TJK
Banknote referee for: AGO, AZE, BLR, ECS, GEO, HTI, KAZ, KGZ, KOR, MNG, MRT, PMR, PRK, ROK, SWE, TJK, TKM, TUR, UZB, WSM, ZWE
Quote: "Euromunt"
Quote: "Tomas530"​Hello. I am a collector living in Gibraltar and I completely disagree. The 2 coins are not fantasy coins. I found the 2 pound piece in my change the other day, and I believe they were both minted by Pobjoy mint, and the Gibraltar Government later released them into circulation
​​Your government clearly did not provide authorization for their issuance and had no knowledge about their existence until I contacted them. Therefore they are fantasy pieces at best (although they can also be considered to be fakes). Both pieces were not minted at Pobjoy Mint but at Tower Mint. Do you have some photos of the piece you found in your change?


​Wait. You disagree and demand photo proof, but at the same time fail to provide a contact info to your government friend? Hmmm, I smell a fish in the hat here. ;)



BTW, about the fish in the hat thing, I just made it up! :O
Coin referee for: AZE, FRO, GRL, US-HI, KOR, KGZ, MLI, MHL, MMR, PRK, UZB, SML, TAT, TWN, TJK
Banknote referee for: AGO, AZE, BLR, ECS, GEO, HTI, KAZ, KGZ, KOR, MNG, MRT, PMR, PRK, ROK, SWE, TJK, TKM, TUR, UZB, WSM, ZWE
Photo proof that can only be obtained from him and that he, interestingly, has so far failed to provide.

In contrary to photos of the specific piece he claims to have found, verification of the information I provided can easily be obtained in other ways. There is no need whatsoever for me to provide contact details of my specific contact there. In 5 seconds of googling you will be able to find an email address of the Treasury of Gibraltar which will no doubt be able to confirm exactly what I wrote.

In general it is also good for a referee to have contact with the authorities in the country for which he is referee. When I was referee for the Cook Islands, Liberia, Norway and Albania, I had contacts at respectively the Ministry of Finance of the Cook Islands, Pobjoy Mint, Mint of Norway and the Bank of Albania. Because of that there now is information on Numista that cannot be found in any other catalog.
Watch out, one may explode if too much pride is acumulated.
Catalogue administrator
Quote: "Euromunt"​Photo proof that can only be obtained from him and that he, interestingly, has so far failed to provide.
Why is a photo of his coin so important?
Quote: "Euromunt"​​In contrary to photos of the specific piece he claims to have found, verification of the information I provided can easily be obtained in other ways. There is no need whatsoever for me to provide contact details of my specific contact there. In 5 seconds of googling you will be able to find an email address of the Treasury of Gibraltar which will no doubt be able to confirm exactly what I wrote.
​So, if I have understood you correctly, you see no point in sharing your source of imformation because it takes 5 seconds to google it? Does that mean that your source, in fact, is google? B.
Coin referee for: AZE, FRO, GRL, US-HI, KOR, KGZ, MLI, MHL, MMR, PRK, UZB, SML, TAT, TWN, TJK
Banknote referee for: AGO, AZE, BLR, ECS, GEO, HTI, KAZ, KGZ, KOR, MNG, MRT, PMR, PRK, ROK, SWE, TJK, TKM, TUR, UZB, WSM, ZWE
Quote: "Jarcek"​Watch out, one may explode if too much pride is acumulated.
​haha! lol :O:O
Coin referee for: AZE, FRO, GRL, US-HI, KOR, KGZ, MLI, MHL, MMR, PRK, UZB, SML, TAT, TWN, TJK
Banknote referee for: AGO, AZE, BLR, ECS, GEO, HTI, KAZ, KGZ, KOR, MNG, MRT, PMR, PRK, ROK, SWE, TJK, TKM, TUR, UZB, WSM, ZWE
Ngdawa. These issues are so fascinating!

Found in circulation...
Struck by the Tower Mint, and using the same obverse die as other issues, (Thanks for that tidbit Euromunt. Thought I would acknowledge that contribution before you edit it away.)
Appearing in at least 2 different PNC.
Allegedly struck at the request of an individual and not official...but why would Tower Mint just do that? Wouldnt this requesting person have had to have had an official role for the Tower Mint to do as told? And then to find these pieces released into circulation?
Catalogued and assigned numbers in Krause, (which isnt necessarily a confirmation of truth.) But not in Schon's catalog, (which isnt necessarily a confirmation of truth.) Schon is a fellow contributor to Krause.
Previous and current ref agree with its present placement.
At the best it is a coin. It has been accepted by the coin collecting public and the public at large to be so.
At the worst, and with the help of Euromunt's observation, it is not an issue of a shady mint. They are Tower Mint products that might then qualify as patterns.
The Numista pages speak to their mysteriousity.
They are where they should be. If Numista ever decides to have a pattern section, it would be reasonable to consider a move there.
Library Media Specialist, columnist, collector, and gardener...
Quote: "Jarcek"​Watch out, one may explode if too much pride is acumulated.
No such problems here, Jarcek.
Quote: "ngdawa"
​​So, if I have understood you correctly, you see no point in sharing your source of imformation because it takes 5 seconds to google it? Does that mean that your source, in fact, is google? B.
Very funny.
Quote: "Oklahoman"Thanks for that tidbit Euromunt. Thought I would acknowledge that contribution before you edit it away.)
I have no idea why I would edit that. It is common knowledge.
Quote: "Oklahoman"​Allegedly struck at the request of an individual and not official...but why would Tower Mint just do that?
Money of course. Years earlier they already did the same with the Marines 50p series which was also minted on order of an individual. Back then they did ask the Government of Gibraltar for approval so there is nothing wrong with that issue.

For every coin issue that is being sold to collectors they have to pay a royalty of 7.5-10% to the government, so if they 'mistakenly' fail to inform the government concerned, there is no royalty to be paid.
Quote: "Euromunt"
Quote: "Jarcek"​Watch out, one may explode if too much pride is acumulated.
​No such problems here, Jarcek.

Quote: "ngdawa"
​​​So, if I have understood you correctly, you see no point in sharing your source of imformation because it takes 5 seconds to google it? Does that mean that your source, in fact, is google? B.
​Very funny.

Quote: "ngdawa"Thanks for that tidbit Euromunt. Thought I would acknowledge that contribution before you edit it away.)

​I have no idea why I would edit that. It is common knowledge.

Quote: "ngdawa"​Allegedly struck at the request of an individual and not official...but why would Tower Mint just do that?

​Money of course. Years earlier they already did the same with the Marines 50p series which was also minted on order of an individual. Back then they did ask the Government of Gibraltar for approval so there is nothing wrong with that issue.

​For every coin issue that is being sold to collectors they have to pay a royalty of 7.5-10% to the government, so if they 'mistakenly' fail to inform the government concerned, there is no royalty to be paid.
​One of the quotes above are from me. Why did you manipulate the username you are quoting?

Also, if you want a change to be done, reveal your source. Without a reliable source no changes can be made. You've been here long enough to know that.
Coin referee for: AZE, FRO, GRL, US-HI, KOR, KGZ, MLI, MHL, MMR, PRK, UZB, SML, TAT, TWN, TJK
Banknote referee for: AGO, AZE, BLR, ECS, GEO, HTI, KAZ, KGZ, KOR, MNG, MRT, PMR, PRK, ROK, SWE, TJK, TKM, TUR, UZB, WSM, ZWE
Quote: "ngdawa"
​​One of the quotes above are from me. Why did you manipulate the username you are quoting?






It is difficult on the forum to insert multiple quotes in a message so I inserted the quotes with the Quote BBcode by hand and indeed a small mistake was made while doing so which has now been adjusted accordingly. It was at any time clear for everyone to see who wrote what so I don't see any major problem. Certainly no 'manipulation'.
Quote: "ngdawa"Also, if you want a change to be done, reveal your source. Without a reliable source no changes can be made. You've been here long enough to know that.
I have shown the message and told where the information originates from. The referee can easily make an enquiry there to verify the information if he so wishes. I have been long enough here to know that with normal change requests, sources are hardly ever being checked -certainly when provided by a reliable member- so I am surprised that information that I provide apparently suddenly needs to be checked so rigorously.
The coins are staying put. At best they are coins. At worst they are patterns.
Library Media Specialist, columnist, collector, and gardener...
Quote: "Euromunt"sources are hardly ever being checked -certainly when provided by a reliable member- so I am surprised that information that I provide apparently suddenly needs to be checked so rigorously.

​No comment
What? Me Worry
Quote: "neilithicman"
Quote: "Euromunt"sources are hardly ever being checked -certainly when provided by a reliable member- so I am surprised that information that I provide apparently suddenly needs to be checked so rigorously.

​​No comment
​you were faster :O
Coin referee for: AZE, FRO, GRL, US-HI, KOR, KGZ, MLI, MHL, MMR, PRK, UZB, SML, TAT, TWN, TJK
Banknote referee for: AGO, AZE, BLR, ECS, GEO, HTI, KAZ, KGZ, KOR, MNG, MRT, PMR, PRK, ROK, SWE, TJK, TKM, TUR, UZB, WSM, ZWE
Quote: "Oklahoman"​The coins are staying put. At best they are coins. At worst they are patterns.
​I continue to beg to differ on that but I won't continue this discussion further as it seems pointless.

I won't comment on the replies of the trolls in this thread. It is sad that whatever I do on this website, since several years I am continuously under attack and there is nobody who does anything about it. It at times makes me wonder what I have all done it for all those years.
So let me get this straight...
  • You make a claim about a wrong listing in the catalogue
  • You refuse to give any sources or verifying information
  • You tell the referees can check it for themselves
  • The referees do their own research and come to the conclusion that you were incorrect
  • You complain that the referees have done their job by checking rather than blindly taking you at your word.

What a hero.
What? Me Worry

» Forum policy

Used time zone is UTC+1:00.
Current time is 11:52.