This is the trickiest part with the banknote catalogue. What should be kept together, and what should be split.
I hate to say it, but here Colnect is brilliant.
I would say we should keep them together, since they have the same KM-numbers, and since the date is printed on the note it's easy to see what year one has. If the year wouldn't been printed on the note, then we would either have to post pictures in the comments field for distinguish the different issue, or we split them in different listing. But to me, I reckon that as long as the year is printed on the note, there's really no need to split the listings.
These banknotes have totally different designs which are clearly visible and can be clearly identified and even they have been introduced in different years despite of having same denomination or value. So in my opinion I think they deserve to be in different catalogs like the other banknotes which have been cataloged differently on the basis of their designs and date of issue.
When it comes to splitting/combining, neither external references nor dates matter--we need to look at the banknotes' designs. And these banknotes clearly look different to me.
Status gewijzigd naar Goedgekeurd(Sulfur, 14-aug-2021, 20:44)
Thanks for these. I've added details to all these notes with distiguishing features and links. Hopefully these will be approved and then everything should be clear.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.