Split Singapore 50 Cents into 2 pages

Good day! May I suggest to please split N#1666 into 2 pages due to different types of edges

1985-1988 — Reeded edge

1989-1991 — Smooth edge with incused lettering

Also, any similar coin will also be split based on their edge type. Thank you for your cooperation.

It's not a significant enough change to warrant splitting the entry. The rest of the design is the same. 

https://en.numista.com/forum/topic160901.html

peterjhalford

It's not a significant enough change to warrant splitting the entry. The rest of the design is the same. 

Yes, many of us agree with that, but then, please, change Numista Guideliness;

From Numista Guideliness:

"Coin types are split on independent pages when they feature:

• Significant design differences (design, orientation, size, edges, etc.)
  • 1 Cents (Reeded edge)  ||  5 Cents (Security edge)

Coin types – Numista

Yes, this should be split.

Hi Jarek, seeing the low acceptance (5 downvotes) of this rule described in the Numista Guidelines, perhaps it would be good if the admin team could analyze the option of eliminating this (and perhaps also the orientation, coin or medal alignment, option) as a criterion for spliting a coin into two different types.

Oscar

oynbcn

Hi Jarek, seeing the low acceptance (5 downvotes) of this rule described in the Numista Guidelines, perhaps it would be good if the admin team could analyze the option of eliminating this (and perhaps also the orientation, coin or medal alignment, option) as a criterion for spliting a coin into two different types.

Oscar

Agreed! Please look at removing this criterion, it will cause hundreds more catalogue pages for very little benefit.

oynbcn

Hi Jarek, seeing the low acceptance (5 downvotes) of this rule described in the Numista Guidelines, perhaps it would be good if the admin team could analyze the option of eliminating this (and perhaps also the orientation, coin or medal alignment, option) as a criterion for spliting a coin into two different types.

Oscar

+1

Closed for now, we will discuss it on admin level.

Hello,

Our current guidelines consider different edges as a significant change, which justifies separate pages.

https://en.numista.com/help/coin-types-145.html

I believe these guidelines are good. We do have separate pages for design variations of the obverse and reverse. A complete change of the third side of the coin - the edge - also deserves separate pages in my opinion.

Also, from a database perspective, we don't have a way to record multiples edge descriptions. If we want to have a selector of type of edge in the future (https://en.numista.com/forum/topic73033.html) or allow search by edge type (https://en.numista.com/forum/topic44579.html), we should not mix both types of edge in the description.

Xavier

Hello,

Our current guidelines consider different edges as a significant change, which justifies separate pages.

https://en.numista.com/help/coin-types-145.html

 

I believe these guidelines are good. We do have separate pages for design variations of the obverse and reverse. A complete change of the third side of the coin - the edge - also deserves separate pages in my opinion.

 

Also, from a database perspective, we don't have a way to record multiples edge descriptions. If we want to have a selector of type of edge in the future (https://en.numista.com/forum/topic73033.html) or allow search by edge type (https://en.numista.com/forum/topic44579.html), we should not mix both types of edge in the description.

Then we should be using the edge photos on the main catelogue page to help people easily see the differences. Otherwise catelogue names will need updating to reflect differences. 

peterjhalford

Then we should be using the edge photos on the main catelogue page to help people easily see the differences. Otherwise catelogue names will need updating to reflect differences. 

I agree that edge photos should be used.

But even with the photos the edge type should be in the coin/token name. It's a distinctive design feature, and the guidelines say that information should be used in the title “when it helps to distinguish between several similar types”. (Coin name guidelines, section 4)