Improve Lettering consistency

14 posts

This message aims at: suggesting an idea to improve Numista

Status: Opened
Upvotes: 6
Downvotes: 1

» Quick access to the last post

There need to be better guidelines for the lettering and translation of legends for better consistency.

1. Accurate punctuation and symbols should be included. E.g:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces173802.html

2. A consistent way of demarcating different bodies in the legend. For example these three coins:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces169990.html
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces151857.html
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces92595.html
One uses " // ", another one " / " and another one has one body of text per line. And there are many other styles. I think a good compromise is this:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces90246.html
where bodies of text are kept in one line, even if on the coin they are split. (ie. "ONE HALF PENNY" instead of a word on each line). But keep different bodies of text separate (ie. "COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA" is on a different line)
On the same topic, what should happen when the writing is interrupted by a design feature, like here:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces109038.html

3. Regarding the date on a coin, it is confusing for coins issued in several different years, like on this one:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces902.html
it should instead be written as "[date]" like here:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces40626.html

4. Same for coins with different Mint Marks, Privy Marks "[mint mark]" should be used, unless there is a different page for each mint mark. Alternatively, there could be a dedicated field for the mint mark, like for the engraver, and possible mint/moneyer marks could be listed separately, one per line:
AL-lV (Karlsburg, Transylvania)
KB (Kremnitz, Hungary)
BEZ (Bistrice, Romania)
HS (Hermannstadt)


5. The translations are very inconsistent throughout. Especially for legends with abbreviations. I propose to have three fields:
Field 1, the original legend, e.g.:
ADOLPHVS · D · G · S · R · I · PRIN · ET · A · FVLD [Date]
GB
Mint Mark: "B", "F" or no mint mark
Field 2, the unabridged, romanised version (converted to latin script, if original is in Greek for example):
ADOLPHUS D(ei) G(ratia) S(acri) R(omani) I(mperii) P(rinceps) ET A(bbas) FULD(ensis) [Date]
G(iorgio) B(althasare)
Mint Mark: B(ouillone) or F(ulda)

Field 3, the translation:
Adolphus, by the Grace of God, Prince of the Holy Roman Empire and Abbot of Fulda
Giorgio Balthasare, the engraver's name
Bouillone or Fulda
We badly need the new version of the Guidelines :D

I disagree on 2 points:
-1. punctuation. Too variable on old coins and often not visible on worn coins.
- Field 2 at the end. It is enough to add it in the description. And I would avoid complicated syntaxis with upper and lower case, parenthesis etc. It takes time to write. Please lets keep it simple.

Agree on points 2 and 3.
4 I don't quite understand. There is a field for mint mark in the date lines.
The meaning of the letters can be added in comments.

Don't forget that the more we add fields, there more empty fields will be for 1000s of coins, unless you work hard to fill them.
Quand l'Histoire et la Géographie se croisent sur nos pièces de monnaie ...
Referee for Austria-Habsburg, Austrian Netherlands, Austrian States, Bohemia, Silesia.
Traducteur, demandez en cas de besoin ! Translator, ask if you need !
Thanks Escape!

re. point 4, here is an example:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces7077.html

There are 5 possible mint marks, yet in the "Lettering" only one of them is listed.
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/contributions/instructions.php

The Guidelines for Lettering are different to what you've suggested (e.g. punctuation). But I think the guidelines are sensible. I would however suggest:
  • add guidelines for the Translation section so it's clear what should go in there
  • clarify in the guidelines where the Mint Mark explanation should go (in description, comments, translation)
  • clarify in the guidelines how split legends should be treated

Re. the punctuation, I agree that older coins are not always consistent, but to be consistent with the rest of the guidelines, the punctuation of the coin in the photograph should be included, and should any varieties exist, they should be listed in the comments
Other team member, Pejounet is currently working on new updated guidelines, and I have not seen the draft yet, so I am not sure if your comments are or aren't already included.
Catalogue administrator
Thanks for researching on this, I agree on all 4 points.
if a coin has more than 1 year or mintmark then there should be only marked (Date) and (Mintmark)

point 2 yes we should have consistency here, problem is that different sites and authors use different ways and we have all possible ways in our catalogue.
in general what I see is / indicates a non continuous legens seperated by something whereas // indicates that the text continues but on a different line.
whatever we follow as directions it would be better to have only one way used in the lettering of Numista.
If you like coins, medals and tokens with ship motives follow my new instagram account with regular updates @numisnautiker
From time to time I sell some coins on Ebay make sure to follow me @apuking on Ebay.
As we now have a new guideline, I guess this suggestion can be close?
Always look on the bright side of life!
Quote: "Indomini16"​As we now have a new guideline, I guess this suggestion can be close?
Wow, this is probably one of the very first posts I ever made. Indeed most points are irrelevant with the new guidelines.

However, I would still support a field for the unabridged legend. Currently, we list this in the "translation" field:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces273832.html
Quote: "stratocaster"​Wow, this is probably one of the very first posts I ever made. Indeed most points are irrelevant with the new guidelines.

​I'm used to look at the idea to improve Numista and upvote the ones I like :-)
Always look on the bright side of life!
Quote: "stratocaster"​And there are many other styles. I think a good compromise is this:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces90246.html
​where bodies of text are kept in one line, even if on the coin they are split. (ie. "ONE HALF PENNY" instead of a word on each line). But keep different bodies of text separate (ie. "COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA" is on a different line)






A problem could be with roman coins.
Here: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces45293.html
GLORI-A EXER-CITVS is a different coin, with a different RIC# than GLOR-IA EXER-CITUS.
So how the design splits the lettering does matter.
http://numismatics.org/collection/1944.100.13030

http://numismatics.org/collection/1944.100.13491
Quote: "juliofcampos"​​A problem could be with roman coins.
​Here: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces45293.html
​GLORI-A EXER-CITVS is a different coin, with a different RIC# than GLOR-IA EXER-CITUS.
​So how the design splits the lettering does matter.
http://numismatics.org/collection/1944.100.13030

http://numismatics.org/collection/1944.100.13491
​Well, that point is not in discussion anymore with the new guidelines.

Re. RIC, I am not aware of coins split based on this criterion. RIC generally splits based on portrait types. Those two examples are diademed and laureate portraits. Furthermore, one is Lugdunum, the other Thesalonika.
Hello,

There is now a dedicated field for the unabridged legend.

For example: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces31984.html

Quote: "stratocaster"​Thanks Escape!

​re. point 4, here is an example:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces7077.html

​There are 5 possible mint marks, yet in the "Lettering" only one of them is listed.
​Then just "A (one of 5 mint marks)"
Globetrotter
Coin variants in English:
https://sites.google.com/site/coinvarietiescollection/home
In French on Cobra's site (not the same)
https://monnaiesetvarietes.numista.com
Quote: "apuking"​Thanks for researching on this, I agree on all 4 points.
​if a coin has more than 1 year or mintmark then there should be only marked (Date) and (Mintmark)


​In my opinion you have to show which mint mark is on the coin and then add (mint marks see Mint marks) or somthing similar, but the mint mark has to mentioned, be it "A", "B", crossed hammers, sailing boat or whatever. Don't need to run run the risk of mixing up Mintmasters, die numbers or other initials!!!
Globetrotter
Coin variants in English:
https://sites.google.com/site/coinvarietiescollection/home
In French on Cobra's site (not the same)
https://monnaiesetvarietes.numista.com

Used time zone is UTC+2:00.
Current time is 09:43 pm.