US Civil War Patriotic Tokens [resuelto]

In particular, this type:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces30397.html

This is an admittedly minor issue. In my opinion, the Reference line on that page should be removed. In explaining why, my information is from my copy of "Standard Catalog of United States Tokens 1700-1900" but I'll give an online source here for obvious reasons. Please forgive what I'm sure will be a lengthy post, but I understand the need for documentation before we change our pages, so I'm going to give it. Better too much than too little.

Under "References" on our page we see "Fuld# 208/410a". This number isn't quite like a typical KM number. The two numbers in fact refer to modern names for die types that were used for these tokens. In this case, die #208 was used for the obverse while die #410a was used for the reverse. My example of this token is struck with obverse die #207 and reverse #409. The differences can be very subtle.

The possible obverse die numbers for this token range from #203 to #218 for a total of 15 possible dies. They can be seen here:
http://coinhelp.net/flag-design/

The reverse die numbers range from #408 to #416 with a sub-variety #413a for a total of 9 dies. (I can't find a #410a as mentioned on Numista's page anywhere.) Here are the reverses:
http://coinhelp.net/dix-design/

That many possible combinations means a lot of individual pages, even though I'm sure that not all possible combinations exist. I would suggest that the reference number be dropped, and each person can enter the die numbers of their token in the comments section if they so desire. That should apply to all tokens from that era with similar possible die combinations. For example, I also have one of these:

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces7956.html

The situation with various possible die combinations is the same as before, but there's no reference number. That seems to be the best solution in my view, especially since this is a typical situation for these token types.

Finally, did I come to the right place with this, or should I have just tried to change the page and sent this to the ref? (Or perhaps not even bother.) By the way...I can't find a ref for tokens. Do we have one?

Hello.
If there are differences, but they are barely noticeable, you can add a new year line with a comment (ref #) in the existing coin page. And add your images to the comment field, for example.

Yes, I agree with Cyrillius

You can add these information (in the post) into the comments section of the page. Request it, and we will validate it.
And the perfect situation would be having a year line for each combination that exists.
So if you own one, and know of other combinations that exist, please do add them. And detailed pictures and explanations can go into the comments section.

For tokens and exonumia, there is no referee. Master Referees (like Cyrillius and myself) can validate the requests.

All input is appreciated, so thanks a lot :)

Just on the off chance that I somehow wasn't clear, I'll try again.

The coin listed at the Numista page is a variety. It's not the base model of the coin, because there is none. Think of it this way: if this were a website documenting differing types of animals, we would have a section called "Dogs" and then under that section we would have a list of the different types of them. The way it is now is the same as having a page called "Rottweiler" and then having every other breed of dog listed under that. It just doesn't make any sense to me to do it that way.

Another more relevant example would be the US Franklin half dollar. We have the main heading "Franklin Half" and under that we find the variety know as a "Bugs Bunny" along with all of the proofs, Type Ones and Twos, and the other typical yearly issues. We don't have a page called "Bugs Bunny Franklin Halves" with the proofs and regular issues listed under that heading.

And no one is going to add the 134 other possible (and existing) die combinations to that token page.

I do understand you.

The reference could be written like: Fuld# 203-218 / 408-416

In the comments section will have an explanation of the meaning of that reference number + the 2 links you mentioned in your original post, in addition to any further needed comments.

Also in comments, pictures of each variety added by members or authorized sources.
and a line asking members to add their pictures in the comments section + add their variety as a new year line if it's not listed already.

Now, year lines should exist for each combination.

This is how a good catalog should look like - in my opinion at least.

And the same goes for the other token that has its reference number removed

Hello,

I went through the issue when creating the sheet for my Trade and Commerce token not long ago
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces112534.html

For some dies, the numbers of variations are such that it is impossible for us to fit them in our system, moreover, the problem is not so much with variations but with combinations. Those tokens are crazy combinations of one obverse and one reverse, sort of any with any !!

There is that very good online resource for those: http://www.cwtoken.com/Civil_War_Token_Type_Set/Home.html
It gives a good idea of the problem.

When possible, if the reference can be written with a range of numbers "Fuld# 203-218 / 408-416" as AmerSalmeh suggests, would be best. Adding in the comment section, the exact refs of the pictured coin. Plus the link to the website above.

Create new sheets only for large enough differences in dies, or for different combinations.

I think we cannot aim to a complete cat of those but a good enough sample and a help for people who try to identify them. Remo, if you can help to do that, I am sure any of us will be happy to support and validate your requests.

That sounds like a workable solution. I'll do what I can.

I've done my part.

Thanks a lot :)

They should be listed in the coin catalogue,as they circulated as coins,as did the Hard Times tokens.

Aidan.