Numista is inconsistent in its geographic, historical overlays. Was Belgian Congo ever an issuer (like Malta never was), but their coins had the country's name written on it. Why does Numista not group all of it under “Congo Democratic Republic”?
Zaïre does, of course, need to be restored to Numista. The problem we're currently in is that there are so many mistakes that Numista has lost credibility. Therefore, when a change is made relative to KM or Pick, many will quite reasonably assume it is just another mistake by Numista. If we restore credibility by restoring Zaïre, Ceylon, British Guiana and all the other issuers that have been deleted, changes such as the recent one in Malta are more likely to be understood in their correct light, as a correction of a mistake in another catalogue.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
A shame, that numista thought they could do it better than the countries defined by KM! Numista has become a nightmare by “mixing” issuers and countries for some occult reason.
An issuer may have different currencies, governments and names throughout its history. For example, "Ceylon" and "Sri Lanka" are considered as a single issuer in the Numista catalogue.
Only when the territory of an issuer suffers a sudden, significant, and long-term change, resulting in a discontinuity of its currency, then the change result in a different issuer. For example the Soviet Union and modern-day Russia are listed as different issuers.
The issuer “Belgian Congo” also contains coins from when the country was called “Congo Free State”, before Belgium took over its administration from Leopold II. It also includes the coins which mention both Belgian Congo and Ruanda-Urundi.
Until 1960, Rwanda-Burundi was administered by the Belgian government together with Belgian Congo. They had their own coinage between 1960 and 1964, which makes a separate issuer.
The split out of Rwanda-Burundi and the change of coinage justified creating a separate issuer for the successor of Belgian Congo called “Democratic Republic of the Congo”. It gathers the coins since the independence, when the country was successively called Republic of Congo (Leopoldville), Zaire, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Estado cambiado a rechazado(Xavier, 16 oct 2023, 9:11)
Zaïre does, of course, need to be restored to Numista. The problem we're currently in is that there are so many mistakes that Numista has lost credibility. Therefore, when a change is made relative to KM or Pick, many will quite reasonably assume it is just another mistake by Numista. If we restore credibility by restoring Zaïre, Ceylon, British Guiana and all the other issuers that have been deleted, changes such as the recent one in Malta are more likely to be understood in their correct light, as a correction of a mistake in another catalogue.
How about having New Hebrides as a separate section from Vanuatu?
Just because it complies with the guidelines doesn't make it correct. We have to realise that the more real names of issuers are deleted, the less competent those in charge of the catalogue appear and the less likely we are to attract new members. What amazes me is that Djibouti, French Afars and Issas, and French Somaliland are still kept separate. Why is it that a former French colony gets treated properly but so many other issuers have to suffer?
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
We have to realise that the more real names of issuers are deleted, the less competent those in charge of the catalogue appear and the less likely we are to attract new members.
The decisions made as well as the guideliness cannot be classified as good or bad, they are different perceptions of the same reality.
What worries me in this case is that I have the feeling that the decision that has been taken not to include certain issuing entities in the list (Sri Lanka, Zaire, New Hebrides, etc...) I think goes against the opinion of many Numista users (and numismatics in general).
In all the online and printed catalogues, in all the auction and coin sales websites...those issuers are listed as such and I don't think that, in this case, being different makes us better.
The rules, just as they are created, can be modified and I think that, in this case, the Forum could be asked what our community believes is the best solution to this issue that, on the other hand, has already been debated for a long time. In case the decision that was made at the time is the one most supported by the Numista community...the debate is over.
Coin referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea, Marshall Islands, Moldova, Liberia and Spain
Banknote referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea and Spain
The names of those issuers you list did not disappear, we just use them differently when they'are just a name change of the same area. They appear in the search engine, and on coins directly like here with Zaire, and display the right flag by the way: N#7871
The fact they do not show up in country list is completely independent from how we handle the DB structure. It is probable that Xavier will make this feature in the future (appearance of “ruler groups issuers” like Zaire), but it wont change the fact we do not duplicate issuers only for a name change.
I know it may seem obscure but everything in this topic is about DB building. Someone scrolling in RDC issuer can see all the coins which circulate in this country, whatever its name.
What amazes me is that Djibouti, French Afars and Issas, and French Somaliland are still kept separate.
Thanks for reporting, I'll take a look :-)
Djibouti is now fixed too! And it was the opportunity to have the correct Notgeld section (those coins were until now under “French Somaliland”, whereas it is written Djibouti on them; you should be very happy I guess ^^)
What amazes me is that Djibouti, French Afars and Issas, and French Somaliland are still kept separate.
Thanks for reporting, I'll take a look :-)
Djibouti is now fixed too! And it was the opportunity to have the correct Notgeld section: https://fr.numista.com/catalogue/somalis_fr-1.html (those coins were until now under “French Somaliland”, whereas it is written Djibouti on them; you should be very happy I guess ^^)
Of course, we're happy when what's written on the coin corresponds to the catalog entry, just like in KM!
Yes, the catalog is turning to a mess, what is written in a coin is inside a modern user, like “French Somaliland” as Djibouti. Every collector doesn't do that in their own collection.
There is sometimes only name change, ok, but sometimes there is a tottally history and culture change and we should not merge things just for an unclear rule that goes against the common numismatic sense.
We have thousands of catalog entries for notgeld that are basically the same thing, but British Honduras and Belize, or Afars and Issas and Djibouti are merged.
Yes, the catalog is turning to a mess, what is written in a coin is inside a modern user, like “French Somaliland” as Djibouti. Every collector doesn't do that in their own collection.
There is sometimes only name change, ok, but sometimes there is a tottally history and culture change and we should not merge things just for an unclear rule that goes against the common numismatic sense.
French Somaliland is both searchable and indicated on each entry:
So I'm still not sure to understand the issue here :-)
Yes, the catalog is turning to a mess, what is written in a coin is inside a modern user, like “French Somaliland” as Djibouti. Every collector doesn't do that in their own collection.
There is sometimes only name change, ok, but sometimes there is a tottally history and culture change and we should not merge things just for an unclear rule that goes against the common numismatic sense.
French Somaliland is both searchable and indicated on each entry:
So I'm still not sure to understand the issue here :-)
This list is only referencing main issuers indeed; it could change in the future (or not), but anyway information is still there, visible in both searches and pages; I truly believe no visitor use primarily our infinite scrolling list of flags to navigate Numista ^^
Yes, the catalog is turning to a mess, what is written in a coin is inside a modern user, like “French Somaliland” as Djibouti. Every collector doesn't do that in their own collection.
There is sometimes only name change, ok, but sometimes there is a tottally history and culture change and we should not merge things just for an unclear rule that goes against the common numismatic sense.
French Somaliland is both searchable and indicated on each entry:
So I'm still not sure to understand the issue here :-)
It doesn't appear in my coins list. Why?
Yes, this is an issue we spotted already; Xavier has on his technical to do list to fix it
So was working, clear, easy to find, now is broken, hidden and everyone unhappy.
I'm sorry if it's how you feel… Though I doubt everyone is unhappy. Collectors of Djibouti issuers may find handy to see all coins in the same list without having to navigate in 3 different sections. Also Necessity coinage was mixed in the middle of it without anyone noticing; it's impressive how asymmetrical the indignation can be ^^
I'm sorry if it's how you feel… Though I doubt everyone is unhappy. Collectors of Djibouti issuers may find handy to see all coins in the same list without having to navigate in 3 different sections. Also Necessity coinage was mixed in the middle of it without anyone noticing; it's impressive how asymmetrical the indignation can be ^^
Go back some 10 years, I don't think the necessity money was mixed up in the middle, but I might be wrong, it happens all the time.
So was working, clear, easy to find, now is broken, hidden and everyone unhappy.
I'm sorry if it's how you feel… Though I doubt everyone is unhappy. Collectors of Djibouti issuers may find handy to see all coins in the same list without having to navigate in 3 different sections. Also Necessity coinage was mixed in the middle of it without anyone noticing; it's impressive how asymmetrical the indignation can be ^^
Actually I am speaking in the name of several collectors, I suggest you create a poll and will be very clear the dissatisfaction of the collectors community.
So was working, clear, easy to find, now is broken, hidden and everyone unhappy.
I'm sorry if it's how you feel… Though I doubt everyone is unhappy. Collectors of Djibouti issuers may find handy to see all coins in the same list without having to navigate in 3 different sections. Also Necessity coinage was mixed in the middle of it without anyone noticing; it's impressive how asymmetrical the indignation can be ^^
Actually I am speaking in the name of several collectors, I suggest you create a poll and will be very clear the dissatisfaction of the collectors community.
Numista receives 1.2M unique visitors per month; 188 saw this conversation; 5 voted about it… Launching polls requires a big amount of resources: building the deck about pros of cons of each option, presenting it to users by pushing several times the information on several channels; answering questions; etc etc etc
Maybe I'm wrong, but I honestly think we won't do that. We discuss a lot through forum already, but indeed it's not a poll as only volunteers show up here (often the same community).
Maybe you can also consider that Admins, when they discuss organization of the database, take collective decisions after listening to all needs, challenges, tech issues, editorial choices etc etc, and are speaking in the name of many people too ^^
My father and I meet every Sunday with a group of numismatists at the house of one of them. They use Numista and Ucoin, me and my father only use Numista. As you already know from my participation and collaboration on this website, I feel part of this project and very integrated into this community, with wonderful people dedicating a lot of time to improving this website. That's why it saddens me when my friends criticize me Numista for topics like this. None of the seven friends I meet understand changes like this and that saddens me since, as I said, I feel part of this great family.
All the people in Spain with whom I have spoken about numismatics (and Numista) do not understand these decisions, but they are only numismatists who do not intervene (nor will they) in the Forum but, I can assure you without fear of being wrong that the vast majority of collectors does not understand that these issuers are not present in the main menu.
This is the last comment I make on the matter, since I see that there is no intention to change this topic and I do not want to confront or bother people who I already consider almost as friends.
Coin referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea, Marshall Islands, Moldova, Liberia and Spain
Banknote referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea and Spain
My father and I meet every Sunday with a group of numismatists at the house of one of them. They use Numista and Ucoin, me and my father only use Numista. As you already know from my participation and collaboration on this website, I feel part of this project and very integrated into this community, with wonderful people dedicating a lot of time to improving this website. That's why it saddens me when my friends criticize me Numista for topics like this. None of the seven friends I meet understand changes like this and that saddens me since, as I said, I feel part of this great family.
All the people in Spain with whom I have spoken about numismatics (and Numista) do not understand these decisions, but they are only numismatists who do not intervene (nor will they) in the Forum but, I can assure you without fear of being wrong that the vast majority of collectors does not understand that these issuers are not present in the main menu.
This is the last comment I make on the matter, since I see that there is no intention to change this topic and I do not want to confront or bother people who I already consider almost as friends.
Thanks for feedback! Main issuers list structure (showing previous names of issuers somehow) is on the agenda of next Admin meeting :-)
My father and I meet every Sunday with a group of numismatists at the house of one of them. They use Numista and Ucoin, me and my father only use Numista. As you already know from my participation and collaboration on this website, I feel part of this project and very integrated into this community, with wonderful people dedicating a lot of time to improving this website. That's why it saddens me when my friends criticize me Numista for topics like this. None of the seven friends I meet understand changes like this and that saddens me since, as I said, I feel part of this great family.
All the people in Spain with whom I have spoken about numismatics (and Numista) do not understand these decisions, but they are only numismatists who do not intervene (nor will they) in the Forum but, I can assure you without fear of being wrong that the vast majority of collectors does not understand that these issuers are not present in the main menu.
This is the last comment I make on the matter, since I see that there is no intention to change this topic and I do not want to confront or bother people who I already consider almost as friends.
Thanks for feedback! Main issuers list structure (showing previous names of issuers somehow) is on the agenda of next Admin meeting :-)
Thank you very much Compendium for taking into account the opinions commented here. I know that your position is not easy, since someone must make the final decisions...I would not want to be in your shoes. 😉
And thanks also to everyone who has given their opinion (in one sense or another). Just the fact of discussing these types of topics makes Numista great.
We will wait for the final decision. Thanks again for reviewing this topic.
Coin referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea, Marshall Islands, Moldova, Liberia and Spain
Banknote referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea and Spain
As mentioned above, people who uses the Forum are very few. I cannot talk about everyone but I am very active in the numismatics world in my country, we have a group with 232 collectors, Numista is the main source of information and how we to catalog our collections. I guarantee not a single soul is happy with “hidden” or merging important historical issuers, actually our community is in a fuss with those changes and everyone is talking about migrating to Ucoin.
I do not want to migrate, I love Numista, I collect not only coins, but information, friends, and we learn a lot here. Thank you Compendium for at least being open-minded about what we, Numista users think.
Djibouti is now fixed too! And it was the opportunity to have the correct Notgeld section (those coins were until now under “French Somaliland”, whereas it is written Djibouti on them; you should be very happy I guess ^^)
I see you fell into the trap. We now have a complete mess and a lot of angry users. Two issuer names deleted but three currencies created out of thin air:
Djiboutian franc (1948-1967) Djiboutian Franc (1967-1977) Franc (1977-date)
When are you going to realise that this kind of change simply creates nonsense?
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
I think it’s handy this way … just put French Somaliland at the end and it will be nice.
I feel a pity that old countries are remove from country list but decisions is already taken and seems impossible to revert.
I often use the CTRL+F on the country list before I realize it’s almost never work for old countries …
My personal user experience is not great with the country list but I lost any hope to have a good user experience on that topic.
True question: why using ctrl F instead of search engine?
Anyway I reassure you and everyone again: no information is lost; we are working on a way to display periods of each issuer not only in entries and search engine but also in country list. It is just a question of tech analysis for best solution :-)
Anyway I reassure you and everyone again: no information is lost; we are working on a way to display periods of each issuer not only in entries and search engine but also in country list. It is just a question of tech analysis for best solution :-)
The problem is that we keep getting promises like this when information is deleted and the “fixes” never appear. A sensible route would be to develop the “fix”, test it works, then make the changes.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
Or ask the community. It is not a collaborative catalog?
It seems Numista operates a system of one person - one vote. Xavier is the person and he has the vote. (With apologies to the estate of Terry Pratchett.)
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
True question: why using ctrl F instead of search engine?
Habits? I use it on almost all pages to easily find the data I am looking for and not only on Numista but also on Wikipedia ect..
For me it's handy…
Anyway I reassure you and everyone again: no information is lost; we are working on a way to display periods of each issuer not only in entries and search engine but also in country list. It is just a question of tech analysis for best solution :-)
You don't have to argue on that, I don't agree with the editorial decision but I am not complaining anymore, it's just a fact and we can't agree (or don't have to agree) on all as we are all humans with different feelings.
You can call it restistance to change (and it may be right), but I prefer this:
Here the basis of discussion we have with fellow admins (not visual, just structural):
This way we can use date ranges attached to the “periods” we created and use already in search engine and on entries themselves (whereas issuers dont have date ranges) and differentiate sub issuers (like Notgeld section here, but it could also be a local sub state like a duchy or a free city or else) from periods of the main issuer; before the changes we operated, we were mixing periods of the entire issuer with actual sub-issuers, which was the core of the DB structuring issue from my perspective.
I agree ofc that we can do better in terms of project management… I understand the frustration about changing things before actually having developed the other feature; but it is a process. Successive iterations like that is a great way to gather feedback, and make sure we develop the right feature afterwards.
Here the basis of discussion we have with fellow admins (not visual, just structural):
This way we can use date ranges attached to the “periods” we created and use already in search engine and on entries themselves (whereas issuers dont have date ranges) and differentiate sub issuers (like Notgeld section here, but it could also be a local sub state like a duchy or a free city or else) from periods of the main issuer; before the changes we operated, we were mixing periods of the entire issuer with actual sub-issuers, which was the core of the DB structuring issue from my perspective.
I agree ofc that we can do better in terms of project management… I understand the frustration about changing things before actually having developed the other feature; but it is a process. Successive iterations like that is a great way to gather feedback, and make sure we develop the right feature afterwards.
Now we have an improvment!
Should be applied to Zaire, New Hebrides, and all other issuers that made a river of tears of so many collectors when they disappeared.
Can I now throw a spanner in the works and request that we use “French Somali Coast” rather than “French Somaliland”? That's a direct translation of the French name, Côte Française des Somalis. I know it isn't what's in KM or Pick but it was the correct name of the territory between 1896 and 1967. Until 1977, Djibouti was only the name of the capital and appeared on early banknotes in the same way Nouméa appeared on early New Caledonian notes.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
Can I now throw a spanner in the works and request that we use “French Somali Coast” rather than “French Somaliland”? That's a direct translation of the French name, Côte Française des Somalis. I know it isn't what's in KM or Pick but it was the correct name of the territory between 1896 and 1967.
Sub issuers for periods is now a released feature!! 😃
See below the Djibouti example:
Thanks everyone for iterations and feedback.
Let us know if you spot issuers which need an update. We still haven't finished the work about current known needs (Mali, Isles de France and de Bourbon, French Polynesia…)
Estado cambiado a implementada(Xavier, 27 oct 2023, 9:40)
Sub issuers for periods is now a released feature!! 😃
See below the Djibouti example:
Thanks everyone for iterations and feedback.
Let us know if you spot issuers which need an update. We still haven't finished the work about current known needs (Mali, Isles de France and de Bourbon, French Polynesia…)
In my opinion, the solution that has been given is perfect, I even love the format (in italics and with the dates of each period).
Thank you very much for responding to this request from many users and congratulations. In my opinion, this is a significant improvement for the catalog. Many thanks to those who have made the final decision, to those who have implemented it and to those who have commented on this topic so that it finally became a reality!!!!
Coin referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea, Marshall Islands, Moldova, Liberia and Spain
Banknote referee for: Andorra, Equatorial Guinea and Spain
(I can't capture it).
