Sorry for the extra work it means but I think as long as physically separate coins each have their own denomination, each requires a page, just as a set of coins that cannot be linked requires separate pages. If you actually had physically separate (unable to be linked) coins there would be no question.
Do these coins actually circulate? If so, I think the case for separate pages is even stronger as collectors may not always obtain the set as a whole.
Mints will always continue to come up with ways to challenge and aggravate us.
Separate, just like the Congolese spoon. I believe separating them would be better because they are not the same coin. They have different denominations.
At least they decided to be creative!
Hong Kong has not given us any commemorative coin designs after 1997 because they are so lazy and they do not even care about the society of coin collection.
Citeer: "SquareRootLolly"Separate, just like the Congolese spoon. I believe separating them would be better because they are not the same coin. They have different denominations.
At least they decided to be creative!
Hong Kong has not given us any commemorative coin designs after 1997 because they are so lazy and they do not even care about the society of coin collection.
SRL
Not strictly true;
I know as referee of Hong Kong that there's a 1998 1000 dollar coin about the Airport, and a series of 5 $50 Dollar coins about Chinese New Year from 2002.
And yes, it looks like I'll have to add them all separately.
As a Hong Konger, I believe all those coins cannot be easily found even in the coin markets - they are technically extinct.
Also,
Citeer: "CassTaylor"I know as referee of Hong Kong that there's a 1998 1000 dollar coin about the Airport, and a series of 5 $50 Dollar coins about Chinese New Year from 2002.
As compared to Singapore... look at the difference.
Citeer: "CassTaylor"And yes, it looks like I'll have to add them all separately.
I'd say it's a single coin and the 13 coins in 1 is just a gimmick to which we ought not to pander.
The cross on medieval short and long cross pennies served a dual purpose: a symbol of faith and an easy guide to cut it in half or quarter as needed during trade. As the coin in question here is not intended to circulate it's unlikely that we will ever see it broken down into it's component parts, unlike the silver pennies which are commonly, not to mention regrettably, found cut. Even if it were legal tender I doubt any shopkeeper in the 21st century would accept a part of a coin in payment.
We don't add four separate listing for coins which actually were used in this manner. It seems inconsistent then, and contrary to sound numismatic practice, to do so for a "coin" which isn't.
Non illegitimis carborundum est. Excellent advice for all coins.
Make Numismatics Great Again!
Citeer: "pnightingale"I'd say it's a single coin and the 13 coins in 1 is just a gimmick to which we ought not to pander.
[...] As the coin in question here is not intended to circulate it's unlikely that we will ever see it broken down into its component parts [...]
I suppose those "coins" were sold as one item, not individually, somewhat like the popsicles or Cornish pasties in a box which, we are warned, are not to be retailed individually. So, it should be a single page in the catalogue. As for me, I would side with red smith and not add any of the money-grabbing output by national or private mints, but I am aware there are collectors who would want them in the catalogue.
Thanks to everyone for their input; I have yet to make up my mind on the issue.
To be honest, it will most likely depend on how much time and effort I have when it comes to adding them (currently queued after another 24 Singaporean coins).
Wait until they have allocated KM numbers. If they issue one number for the set then create one page. If they issue KM numbers for all the coins, make one for each.
The old Niue puzzles ended up with separate KM numbers, and eventually, IIRC, with separate Numista pages (though I do not recall any of them having any pictures).
I vaguely recall having heard of those "34 dollar" puzzle coins before in a thread about unusual denominations. I don't recall any specific details, however.
Citeer: "pnightingale"As the coin in question here is not intended to circulate it's unlikely that we will ever see it broken down into it's component parts,
Don't be too sure about that. The Kiribati/Samoa coins (https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces128998.html) are sold more often divided in stead of together as 1 coin.
And I guess this Singapore coin will be an expensive one. If dealers can't sell it quickly enough because the price is too high, there is a great chance they will sell it in parts to lower down the price. And the total price when selling it in parts probably will be higher than selling it as one piece.
Anyway, if they are physically separated they are 13 different coins and they all need their own coinpage.
Citeer: "redsmithstudios"I would recommend NOT adding these to the catalog!
I understand a lot of people don't like this kind of coins. But whether we like it or not, it's "progress" and can't be stopped. And they are legal tender coins, even if they will never circulate. When we are refusing official coins, just because some of us don't like them, we'll take the wrong turn. You don't have to like them, you don't have to collect them, but you certainly can't refuse them in our catalogue. Like any other official coin they deserve their place in our catalogue.
Besides, the solution is so easy. You only have to make a choice once which kind of coins you want to see in our catalogue:
And afterwards you'll never see the kind of coins you don't like ever again.
Hi,
If each piece is legal tender separately, then one page per piece with links between pages through the section "Links to other coins" and a short note within "Comments" section stating the 13 pieces together form one bigger coin (which as a whole is/is not legal tender?).
Sapientiae plerumque stultitia est comes.
Si c'est un grand plaisir d'être reconnu par ses amis, c'est peut-être encore plus flatteur d'être reconnu par ses adversaires.
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken.
It looks like these are destined to be an annual series after starting in 2014. I see that the illustration at start of thread is for third series. On the Internet there are ads for first and second series, so already there are 39 coins. The ads I saw had 1 left of 2014 and were sold out for 2015 so it does not seem there is a lack of buyer even at thousands of dollars for each set of 13. I did not see any mention that these are actually legal tender, even on Singapore Mint site.
Citeer: "pnightingale"As the coin in question here is not intended to circulate it's unlikely that we will ever see it broken down into it's component parts,
Don't be too sure about that. The Kiribati/Samoa coins (https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces128998.html) are sold more often divided in stead of together as 1 coin.
And I guess this Singapore coin will be an expensive one. If dealers can't sell it quickly enough because the price is too high, there is a great chance they will sell it in parts to lower down the price. And the total price when selling it in parts probably will be higher than selling it as one piece.
Anyway, if they are physically separated they are 13 different coins and they all need their own coinpage.
Yes, I've decided to add those in 13 parts as suggested by pejounet. There are at least 39 coins (possibly 52) by now!
For your information: the first and second Almanac Puzzle Series are already (and separately!) in Krause: the 2 dollars coins of the first Almanac Puzzle Series have KM# numbers 320 till 331 and the 10 dollars coin has KM# 319. The 2 dollars coins of the Second Almanac Puzzle Series have KM# numbers 333 till 344 and the 10 dollars coin has KM# 332. The Third Almanac Puzzle Series are not yet in Krause.
Krause, Standard Catalog of World Coins, 2001 - date, 12th edition (2018), page 1252 and 1253 for the 2 dollars coins, page 1255 for the 10 dollars coins.
By the way, what should I put in the 'Shape' line for the 12 puzzle pieces and the 1 'centre' piece?
I'm thinking 'Interlocking Puzzle Piece', or is there an existing convention/better suggestion for this?
Citeer: "CassTaylor"By the way, what should I put in the 'Shape' line for the 12 puzzle pieces and the 1 'centre' piece?
I'm thinking 'Interlocking Puzzle Piece', or is there an existing convention/better suggestion for this?
Maybe 'Polygon' might be suitably all-encompassing?
Just because you can't see it ... doesn't mean it isn't there - Anon.
Citeer: "redsmithstudios"I would recommend NOT adding these to the catalog!
I understand a lot of people don't like this kind of coins. But whether we like it or not, it's "progress" and can't be stopped. And they are legal tender coins, even if they will never circulate. When we are refusing official coins, just because some of us don't like them, we'll take the wrong turn. You don't have to like them, you don't have to collect them, but you certainly can't refuse them in our catalogue. Like any other official coin they deserve their place in our catalogue.
Besides, the solution is so easy. You only have to make a choice once which kind of coins you want to see in our catalogue:
And afterwards you'll never see the kind of coins you don't like ever again.
I would slightly disagree with this, but in a huge way.
The problem is that we don’t delineate from what was historically coinage, used for buying and selling. And what today is often used to raise money for a government, and never intended to be used as money. It doesn’t matter if it’s “leagal tender” that doesn’t magically make them coins.
I think it’s fine to collect whatever you want. But it’s a mistake to mix historically valuable artifacts with collectible trinkets. I own plenty of commemoratives that were not intended for circulation, I like them, I just know that they are not actually coins. We should call them “commemorative tokens with leagal tender status”
I only say because they are right next to 1775 Mexico 8-R.
But that just my opinion and I don’t write any catalogs....
Taking a break from swapping for a while, but still interested in pre 1799 Spanish coins, I will make time for that!
Citeer: "CassTaylor"By the way, what should I put in the 'Shape' line for the 12 puzzle pieces and the 1 'centre' piece?
I'm thinking 'Interlocking Puzzle Piece', or is there an existing convention/better suggestion for this?
"Interlocking Puzzle Piece" is how the individual coins are described in Krause. And that's exactly what they are. With all the roundings I think "polygon" isn't the ideal description.
I completely understand and am quite sympathetic to your point of view, but perhaps we should change the definition of coins instead, away from being purely 'physical representations of currency'? We made the baby steps away from them with commemorative coins, then changes in dimensions, and in material, value, shape, etc...
Not trying to start an argument, just so you know; I can understand the 'ewww' reaction to stuff like the Starship Enterprise shaped coin, being a classic collector myself.
While "interlocking puzzle" sounds like a good description, a Google search of the term brings up mostly or only interlocking 3-dimensional puzzles, while "jigsaw puzzle" seems more dominant for the interlocking type of the coins. So I think you should consider "jigsaw" for the shape.
