Is a referee permitted to reject the addition of a new coin file solely because it has no pictures? I recently tried to add a new coin into the system but it was rejected by the referee only because it had no photos. This particular coin is somewhat rare and hard to find any photos from an authorised source.
I was told it was up to us. I accept without photos because if I reject it somewhere is a collector who wonders why their coin cant be found...do they know you are a fellow ref?
Library Media Specialist, columnist, collector, and gardener...
The particular referee should know that I am also one. I do understand why an addition request without an image would be rejected but I feel this particular referee has done it in the wrong way. Personally I do accept addition request without images only after sending in an edit request asking if they can supply an image and if that doen't work I may try to find one myself. Also with the coin I tried to add it is somewhat hard to find making authorised images of this coin very hard to find (obviously I have not been able to find one). Surely exceptions can be made for such coins. Ironically the only coin in the county that this person referees that does not have an image belongs to him.
For me it's better to have the information in the catalogue than out of it. So I would definitely allow coins without pictures submitted, as long as the rest of the information is filled out as completely as possible.
Same - I always accept without pictures, if the rest of the information is acceptable but I write a short remark that it would be nice if they could provide a picture soon after.
If you like coins, medals and tokens with ship motives follow my new instagram account with regular updates @numisnautiker
From time to time I sell some coins on Ebay make sure to follow me @apuking on Ebay.
I did include detailed information of the coin's obverse and revers along with a reliable reference number. Any suggestions on how to convince this particular referee to validate the coin (and others) if I send it in again? As I am just a referee I do not have the high enough authority to force him to do so.
Guidelines say pictures should be included WHEN the requester is the owner. It does not say anything about it being rejectable if the pictures are missing.
My authority is to ensure referees are abiding to guidelines. I know many referees are quite on the edge, bending guidelines or interpreting them little differently or looking for some legal holes in them.
My problem is not that one referee does something differently, my problem is when others would want the same.
That is why I was against New Zealand sets, German names on currencies or separating proofs from circulating coins (when there is no difference in design).
I am trying to balance order and innovations. Order brings no progress at all, while innovations bring chaos, if they are not managed.
I had a funny case rejected on me about a year ago - I provided catalog links and everything, but couldn't find any authorized pictures (the coin was uncommon), and my example was very low grade and badly tarnished, making a photo close to useless. The referee wanted photos, I explained how bad my example was.
While we were discussing, a slabbed example came up on Heritage, but the photos there were of the slab, and the coin was tiny, so I wasn't sure I could recover proper pics. I offered to send the full slab photo; the referee didn't like that either.
A month or so ago, checking the new additions, I found that my variety had already been entered (as its own type - it was a PLC coin, which apparently follow the rules of "one page per year/mint"... which in retrospect might explain why my entry wasn't accepted, since it had one page for several different years, as in Krause). I immediately moved my checkmark to the newly entered variety, and kept the request because I don't really know what to do with it anymore (it's not like I can modify it properly).
Next time I sent an addition request (to a different referee, of a different country), I did include the photos of my own low-grade example (it wasn't quite as awful as the other one), and it was rejected anyway, with the request of better photos. I explained that I couldn't find any authorized pictures for that one either, the referee didn't believe me and told me to check a certain website.
I replied that the website (Bibliothèque nationale de France) wasn't on the "authorized" list (it wasn't, I checked, several times), but still tried it, just in case, and couldn't find my particular type there either.
I think that request is also still in limbo (and, unlike the PLC coin, isn't likely to be independently added anytime soon).
The third time I added a coin, I knew the referee was nice, and I knew that my example was on the upper end for the type. (But I still tried to find it on authorized websites anyway, and failed.)
It was, indeed, accepted - though surprisingly not by the referee that I expected (though both were apparently happy).
Cita: "Jarcek"That is why I was against New Zealand sets, German names on currencies or separating proofs from circulating coins (when there is no difference in design).
I am trying to balance order and innovations. Order brings no progress at all, while innovations bring chaos, if they are not managed.
But there are no hard and fast rules about the catalogues and we are told that it us up to us how we approach the countries we are referees for. That is why we have situations where the same things are handled completely differently in different countries, and some referees are more set in what they accept than others.
The author of this thread himself turned down my request to add Australian trader tokens into the Australian catalogue as he claimed they are not official currency, but similar tokens are included in other countries as they were a universally accepted unofficial currency.
If you want people to do things the same way, then as the administrator it is up to Jarcek to decide how all entries should be handled, draw up the rules to ensure they are handled the same, and then make sure the rules are adhered to. You can't let referees do whatever they want in their countries and then complain that you didn't want it done that way.
Also the way innovations are handled on this site is the reason why referees take things into their own hands. Suggestions that would greatly improve the catalogue just take far too long to run past Xavier and put into effect. I thought the idea of having an administrator was that we could bypass Xavier so changes can be implemented far more quickly.
Cita: "neilithic"I thought the idea of having an administrator was that we could bypass Xavier so changes can be implemented far more quickly.
And we can do many things now. Just not everything. And in the cases where I do not have the freedom of act, and I have to wait, I am trying to create some peace. Creating Guidelines that should set some things right is one of those things.
The issue of rejecting new additions in the catalog just because it's an entry without pictures returns again and again and will float around until the referees will have clear guidelines in this particular issue. As all above already emphasized, there is no doubt that the catalog will be better having the information yet without a picture. So you can't tell to a referee it's up to you if you accept or not a new entry without pictures. There must be a very solid signal sent from the administration team that we need information about coins even without pictures, at least for those coins that are pretty hard to find pictures. If you are really concerned about the users that work to improve the catalog of Numista then stop frustrate them in situations like this one just because the lack of a strong guideline regarding this issue.
Cita: "Jarcek"There is nothing that suggest that request without pictures should be rejected.
I am pretty sure about but this does not imply they should be accepted. Some might accept them because it's simply common sense to appreciate the work of another user trying to improve Numista and some might not accept them just because nothing suggest they should do it. This is what I tried to said, make it clear to all referees that this is the right way.
About asking for pictures it's a fine line. But here I can talk just about myself, why I should add an entry without pictures if I can make a complete coin page with full info and pictures? For me submitting a new entry without pictures imply that I could not find a picture for that coin so there is no reason to ask me again "are you sure you don't have a picture?". But this is just my way, I saw few times when I was referee that some users didn't submitted new entries with pictures just because the images has to be prepared (cropped, etc) but in this case I still accepted their requests and I upload the images for those entries. On this issue I am agree with you, maybe asking for pictures it's not necessary a bad thing but also be happy with what you get, it's better than nothing.
Cita: "Andy289"The issue of rejecting new additions in the catalog just because it's an entry without pictures returns again and again and will float around until the referees will have clear guidelines in this particular issue.
So you can't tell to a referee it's up to you if you accept or not a new entry without pictures. There must be a very solid signal sent from the administration team that we need information about coins even without pictures, at least for those coins that are pretty hard to find pictures. If you are really concerned about the users that work to improve the catalog of Numista then stop frustrate them in situations like this one just because the lack of a strong guideline regarding this issue.
Exactly, that's why I said the administrators should set up some hard and fast rules rather than leaving things up to the discretion of individual referees.
At the moment the catalogues are a mess with some referees doing things completely differently to others, there's no continuity across the countries at all and I would say that the catalogue is suffering for it, as users have to negotiate all the differences within the countries when managing their collections.
I know the Admin team want to please everyone and keep the peace, but sometimes management has to put their foot down, set the rules and kick butt to get the rest of the people into line. All we need is for a decision to be made. I may not like it if you put your foot down and said "We will not have sets listed in the catalogue" But I would respect the decision and comply.
Imagine if A CEO ran his company the way Numista is run and told his departmental managers "you can run your departments however you like" and then complained when they did things in a way that he didn't like.
Perhaps it would help for us, both the referees and the users, make a list of all the things that are done inconsistently across the different countries and some decisions can start being made about how they should be done, to bring some uniformity to the catalogue.
I understand. I wish it moved faster. Admins for writing up new and strong guidelines are selected, just not appointed....
When I forced some decisions from my own authority, I wasn't prepared for unforeseen consequences.
1. Numisdoc admin quit.
2. Some old referees are keen on guidelines (e.g. They say I do not have higher authority) or even hanging on old team members, who are/were inactive or even already gone.
3. Some referees (even those there for a long time) did not know basic things and had to be teached.
4. I have spent a year trying to get rid of inactive referees and team members and getting new people here. Only now I have free hands to solve something, since new master referees were appointed.
5. But since there are more people now on board, I have more communication to do, that is why I am writing FAQ for referees.
6. In the end, time is my greatest enemy. That is why "free reign" is enacted.
PS: I also want something to be implemented, and if some new thing will be struck down, as for example New Zealand sets should be (Xavier did not liked them in current way), there will be hardly any pressure to implement feature to include them in future. In other words, you pressure me, and I am sending some of the pressure upstream.
There were several times I wanted to quit already, but I still have hope thing will get better.
"Discretion is great until someone uses it." - Phil Nightingale
The referee's role is subordinate to that of the administrator, any referee who doesn't accept this ought to resign. I wonder if it's possible that some of the refs don't have a good grasp of either English or French and are unaware of recent changes / current thinking?
Rejecting an entry due to a lack of a photo is flawed thinking. There are countless examples of coins listed in the catalog which it's absolutely certain not one of us actually owns. So we're depending entirely on third party sources for images and in the case of rare issues, it might take decades for a decent example, from which a clear image can be made, to appear on the market.
Non illegitimis carborundum est. Excellent advice for all coins.
Make Numismatics Great Again!
Cita: "Jarcek"There were enough admins who thought they can dictate anything on their mind and be arrogant in the process. I certainly do not want to be like that.
Agreed. It's unfair that you've inherited hostility which belongs to the spiteful juveniles who have mercifully been fired. I'm quite content with things now and as the more grown up style becomes familiar I reckon most people will eventually forgive and forget the bad old days when the kiddies ran things.
Non illegitimis carborundum est. Excellent advice for all coins.
Make Numismatics Great Again!
Cita: "Jarcek"There were enough admins who thought they can dictate anything on their mind and be arrogant in the process. I certainly do not want to be like that.
Agreed. It's unfair that you've inherited hostility which belongs to the spiteful juveniles who have mercifully been fired. I'm quite content with things now and as the more grown up style becomes familiar I reckon most people will eventually forgive and forget the bad old days when the kiddies ran things.
Glad to see we're back on the same wavelength Phil and it is plain for anyone without their head up their own backside to see that Jarcek's style is much more mature and knowledge-based and the benefits of this approach are as plain to see as the nose on ones face.
Just because you can't see it ... doesn't mean it isn't there - Anon.
There's a difference between hostility and pushing for some rules to be set up.
We so often have these threads where referees have been rude, officious and unreasonable in processing requests and the answer is always that it's up to a referee how they run their catalogue. I have a respect for Jarcek, I certainly wouldn't want his job, and he has got a lot done since becoming administrator. But it would be so easy to rectify all these complaints by making a decision and setting up rules about what we do and don't allow into the catalogues and the basic structure of the catalogues. I feel that Jarcek's problem is he is too nice, he doesn't want to step on toes to bring all the referees into line and get them on the same page. Sometimes you need to step on some toes.
Cita: "neilithic"But it would be so easy to rectify all these complaints by making a decision and setting up rules about what we do and don't allow into the catalogues and the basic structure of the catalogues.
I feel that more clearly set rules are needed for Numista so these types of issues can be solved much more quickly and efficiently and not present too much of an issue in the future.
Going back to the original issue of this thread. The referee has asked for a modification request saying, "I don't know the coin you are talking about and furthemore I have no reason to publish a useless page due to the lack of photos". he then goes on to say "I just realize that the page you want to add already exist (link provided). You just have to add the mint and the years". These is indeed a similar coin but I will have to check if they are in fact closely related enough.
I understand. I wish it moved faster. Admins for writing up new and strong guidelines are selected, just not appointed.... 
