Split Rwanda P#29 [solved]

There are two very distinct sub-types within P#29 of Rwanda (https://en.numista.com/catalogue/note206321.html), as can be seen here:
http://banknote.ws/COLLECTION/countries/AFR/RWA/RWA0029.htm
Can I suggest that these be separated into two entries, P#29a (French only on obverse) and P#29b (French & English on obverse)?

All varieties already exists in the date line, so what is your request?

The difference is quite big. Pick should have assigned them different numbers. I don't think that having the variant in the year lines is enough. There should be distinct pages for this, or at least some photos in the comment section showing the other note.

Quote: "ngdawa"​All varieties already exists in the date line, so what is your request?

​I'm asking that separate pages be created for these two very distinct notes rather than treat them as "varieties" of the same note.

I don't really see the problem, since ot's very easy to see if it's written in English as well or not. I would understand if there were more differences than just the language part.

Quote: "ngdawa"​I don't really see the problem, since ot's very easy to see if it's written in English as well or not. I would understand if there were more differences than just the language part.

​Surely having that much large text added to the note deserves a separate listing? If it were just a signature title it would be a different matter but look at the two obverses:

How different do they have to be? Consider these two notes:

They are put in separate listings, P#35 and P#39. SCWPM is inconsistent here, we can do better.

Krause may not be too inconsistent here--it is possible P#35 and P#39 were split based on their obverses (the first issues have a thick security strip and the latter ones do not, which is consistent with the higher denomination issues). P#29a/b seems rather unique in the fact that its only major difference is the addition of a new language.

Regardless, I would say the inclusion of a whole other language does seem like a significant change, and I am not sure why this was not giving its own Pick number. I would support a split, in this case.

I can't say I care too much to argue. To me it seems a little overkill, but sure, they are visually different so I guess it makes sense.

This is done.

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/note243628.html
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/note206321.html