What defines a km# number? Or: Major varieties on a single type of coin.

7 posts
Hello friends!

I'm not getting what is the criteria to assemble a new KM# number, I understand Numista follow Krause, but is not time to Numista create its own numbering system?

For instance, this km#127 Panama Coin:

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces2851.html

The 2001 and the 2017 coins are totally different, the design is very different, even the writing is not the same, I can't tell about the composition but one looks nickel and other stainless steel, even that, the number is the same.

For those who collect by type, how do you feel having to choose just one of them? :D




And I see other older coins from other countries have different km# numbers even when is impossible to distinguish by eye.

How is possible?
I vote for the N# number, based on Numista!
I agree.
...you can run,  but you can't hide...
They are broken out by subtypes, KM#127.1 and KM#127.2. I believe that the subtypes are small changes in design or composition. It isn't consistently applied and results in some odd numbering.
I get the subtypes and the broken numbers

But why those two, for instance, are not a subtype?:

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces1239.html
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces5332.html
The 2001 coin is copper-nickel clad copper. Look at the picture of the edge on the coin page and compare it with your 2017 coin. If it's not the same it will definitely get a new KM# number. Because of the difference in design and writing it will probably even get a new sub number if the composition didn't change.
You overlooked something very important: the 2017 and 2018 coin are NOT yet in Krause, so it certainly can't be a Krause mistake. If the composition has changed, it's even a Numista mistake to put these dates in the same coin type. So don't you make any illusions: there are a lot of mistakes in Krause, but there are also a lot of mistakes in Numista. The only difference is Numista always tries to correct mistakes while at Krause the mistakes seem to last forever.
I also believe it is time for Numista to come up with its own numbering system.
Catalogue administrator
Quote: "Geison"​I vote for the N# number, based on Numista!
​I believe you may already find the N# prefix in use for the JJ North catalogue, we may need to adopt Num#, for example.
Just because you can't see it ... doesn't mean it isn't there - Anon.

Coin catalogue referee for England, United Kingdom & pre-Union South Africa.
Banknote catalogue referee for England & United Kingdom.

» Forum policy

Used time zone is UTC+1:00.
Current time is 22:32.