As I couldn't find it at any catalog, on or off-line, I guess that its a "moments of freedom" with the reverse painting removed.
I saw this coin, or another cleaned "moments of freedom" coin, being sold here in Brazil and, when asked, the seller (scammer) gave the link to this page as a reference, despite the warning that the page was not published as the publication was rejected by you.
I would recommend that:
1/ Change to red background the area saying "This page has not been published. The publication request has been rejected by a referee.";
2/ Add more information about why it was rejected;
3/ As it may not be a isolated case, maybe adding these pages to a special section about fake coins / scam attempts?
4/ As the page is not published, and can't be found by search engine, I suppose that the scammer is the same person who tried to add the page in first place. (who else could know the link?). What could be done about it?
Hello,
I just prevented search engines to list unpublished pages of the catalogue. It will take some time for existing pages to be removed though.
Cita: "juliofcampos"I would recommend that:
1/ Change to red background the area saying "This page has not been published. The publication request has been rejected by a referee.";
Done, with an orange background.
Stato cambiato a implementato(Xavier, 4 Gen 2021, 23:05)
When a user requests the addition of a new coin to the catalogue, they can add it immediately to their collection. The goal is to not block users when they are registering their collection.
In case the request is rejected by a referee, the page is not deleted immediately, to leave time to the user to adjust their collection. As of today, there is no mechanism to delete the page at all.
I can imagine 2 possible solutions:
Delete the page after a defined period (1 month?) after the request is rejected (or cancelled). If we go for this solution, there should probable be some mechanism to warn the user(s) who registered the coin in their collection in advance.
The coin page is not referenced in Numista and it should be referenced in Google or other search engines in the future. However it is still visible if you share the link. We could make the page only visible to the user who requested the addition of the coin and to the referees until the request is accepted. Other users would just see the message informing about the status of the request.
I have always been reluctant with the solution #1, which seems complex. The solution #2 seems to be a good compromise to avoid users to refer to a non-accepted page of the catalogue. What do you think?
The problem with users being able to add coins to an unpublished page is that they can practically create anything they want like the troll with his 'what's his name is the best' "Token" then delete the request or let it be rejected and it stays in Numistas bowls.
The second thing especially if the page is a stub or simply erroneous as far as I know a referee can't edit the year owned anymore then you have to ask a catalog admin to edit something so small which is a pain in the butt .
Cita: "Xavier"The coin page is not referenced in Numista and it should be referenced in Google or other search engines in the future. However it is still visible if you share the link. We could make the page only visible to the user who requested the addition of the coin and to the referees until the request is accepted. Other users would just see the message informing about the status of the request.
I have about 30 change requests pending since end of January/beginning of February (all Nicaragua). But I don't think they're not visible since a lot of others (also Nicaragua) have been validated (but not by the referee). No idea why some have and some haven't been validated.