Numista Entry: Location versus Issuer

Good day.

I come across new entry in Numista coin catalog.

Ukrainian coin (KM# 4a) had “Location” where other coins usually have “Issuer.”

Please kindly advise what is the reason for the difference.

Thank you.

It helps to understand if you edit that Location coin and compare it to the edited version of an Issuer coin. The Ukraine Location coin has the Issuing entity field filled in, but coins that just say Issuer don't.

Good day.

Thank you for prompt reply, bjherbison.

Sorry, but I fail to see how this reason justifies use of world “Location' in place of “Issuer”.  if  ”Issuing Entity" has to be added the Issuer will still be the same. and so far this term was applied by the current political geography. Yes it is not always perfect and not to everyone liking but gives sense of common reason and respect.

If using term of “Location” serves only purpose to flag entries updated on ”Issuing Entity" for ongoing database update, it would be a rather poor choice of word, given today circumstances of Russian aggression against Ukraine. I personally found it diminutive and offensive.

Please kindly provide other samples if you know any, maybe it will help me to find some missing parts of your argument.

Thank you

Nicholas

I was only providing you with understanding, I don't have a argument. I didn't design the system, I haven't considered whether the terminology could be improved, and I don't think I've ever filled in the Issuing entity.

The field is discussed in the guidelines:

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/contributions/instructions.php#issuing_entity

Issuing entity should not be filled on this coin.

Jarcek

Issuing entity should not be filled on this coin.

Ok, so why is it filled in N#8966 then? That should be the same as N#19904 right?

And if the issuer is not Ukraine, why are the coins listed in Coins from Ukraine?

Issuing entity should be empty. Issuing authority is ok.