Delete yearl line and move members [opgelost]

Please delete 1999 year line from here: N#239447 and move members here N#239447

Later edit.

Same thing for: N#275944 move here N#388549

Delete year line 1997 from here N#275945 and move member here N#388553.

And last delete year line 1997 from here N#275946 and move members here N#388556

Thank you!

For the $10 note, the same page is listed twice.

And what is happening for all of them? Are they being split apart simply for a security thread?

Sorry my bad for the $10 note. delete 1999 from here N#239447 and add members here N#388545

To answer your question, yes this are split for the security thread. 

Can't say I agree with that course of action.  Are we splitting out all notes into new pages with security thread changes?  If so, there will likely be thousands of new pages.  I'm not always on top of things here--have we discussed this topic in another thread?

1. https://en.numista.com/help/add-or-modify-a-banknote-in-the-catalogue-185.html
The same type of banknote may include several varieties, the differences of which do not constitute the basis for the creation of a new page.

2. https://en.numista.com/help/banknote-types-143.html

• Different security features, when they result in no visible changes to the naked eye in daylight

3. https://en.numista.com/help/banknote-varieties-and-variations-144.html

Multiple varieties can exist for the same banknote type and should not be listed on a different page.

Maybe with #2 above, you could argue--but like I said, we'd be creating thousands of new pages every time a security thread was added or changed.

Banknote types are split on independent pages when they feature:

Different security features, including different watermark designs, except for different watermark patterns:
 

https://en.numista.com/help/banknote-types-143.html

1 and 3 are the same thing and varieties there do not include security features. #2 is exactly what I am saying. Different security features that can be seen with naked eye, different pages. 

For the moment, we disagree with the interpretation of the guideline intent.  My opinion is that this would be similar to adding a new coin page for each mint mark, because the change is too minor.

I would like more discussion on it before moving forward.

A mint mark is not a security  feature and we are not talking about coins here. The guidlines are clear, different security features different pages. Why are different watermarks allowed to be split and an adition of a security thread is just a small difference in your opinion?

Is a security edge (or smooth or reeded) on a coin a security feature?  Answer: yes.  Are we breaking out coins into new pages for these edge differences?  Not to my knowledge.

I have no relevant/current knowledge discussion of watermarks being split, so I don't know why.  If that is in fact the case, I also disagree with it.  This is why I want more discussion on this with referees and possibly Xavier.

I definately think differences should get there own pages.  But I think we should look at this differently.  Watermarks, security devices seen and unseen, lathwork, engraving varieties…are almost always what we find when a banknote has a different imprint, or place of manufacture.

If numista would use imprints as a reason for a different page, then these concerns of threads, watermarks, etc. Would be moot.

I disagree with less pages for banknotes and false equivalency to coins.  Imprints are proprietary and compete with other imprints.  So they each have their own master matrix, engraving, security features that are often copyrighted.  They should be be treated to their own page by imprint and then none of this other nonsense matters.

gyoschak

Is a security edge (or smooth or reeded) on a coin a security feature?  Answer: yes.  Are we breaking out coins into new pages for these edge differences?  Not to my knowledge.

 

I have no relevant/current knowledge discussion of watermarks being split, so I don't know why.  If that is in fact the case, I also disagree with it.  This is why I want more discussion on this with referees and possibly Xavier.

Stop comparing coins and banknotes, we don't list them the same. I made a simple request based on the guidlines, which I didn't wrote but try to follow. I don't understand what is it so unclear that you have to consult with other referees. Very well do that, meanwhile there will be duplicates in the catalogue because the new pages were already created.

Oklahoman

I definately think differences should get there own pages.  But I think we should look at this differently.  Watermarks, security devices seen and unseen, lathwork, engraving varieties…are almost always what we find when a banknote has a different imprint, or place of manufacture.

 

If numista would use imprints as a reason for a different page, then these concerns of threads, watermarks, etc. Would be moot.

 

I disagree with less pages for banknotes and false equivalency to coins.  Imprints are proprietary and compete with other imprints.  So they each have their own master matrix, engraving, security features that are often copyrighted.  They should be be treated to their own page by imprint and then none of this other nonsense matters.

 

I agree but I don't think this is the case here. I belive the imprint is the same. 

Hello,

If there is only the security thread, in fact it is not enough to create a new request, the modification is minor.

All you have to do is add a line/comment "with security thread" or "without security thread " in one of the existing banknote, and add a photo in the "comments" section.

For example a banknote in exonumia:

N#227111

There is a 0€ tourist banknote with 7 different security threads, I would not understand the creation of 7 requests when the substance of the banknote is identical and that is the only thing that changes. 

Hello,

this is from guidelines: 

The same type may include:

• Minor and unsignificant changes to the design (for example, small colour or alignment variations)
• Different security features, when they result in no visible changes to the naked eye in daylight

See here: https://en.numista.com/help/banknote-types-143.html

Jarcek

Hello,

 

this is from guidelines: 

The same type may include:

• Minor and unsignificant changes to the design (for example, small colour or alignment variations)
• Different security features, when they result in no visible changes to the naked eye in daylight

 

See here: https://en.numista.com/help/banknote-types-143.html

 

The difference is visible to the naked eye in daylight though. Also for the $20 note there is a design change. Building not flower at centre.

All done, thanks!