Missing issuers

Hello all.
Is there any way to know which issuers disappear from the list? every day someone disappears. A few days ago I had 602 issuers. yesterday 598 and today 597.

Quote: "gabilife79"​Hello all.
​Is there any way to know which issuers disappear from the list? every day someone disappears. A few days ago I had 602 issuers. yesterday 598 and today 597.

​Hello

There is only a regular update on the referee forum.
Recently, the following issuers were merged:

Portuguese Timor + Timor-Leste
Belgian Congo + Congo Free State + Democratic Republic of the Congo (+ Zaire will be combined soon)
Sri Lanka + Ceylon

These are all the same country (same population, territory and with historic and administrative continuity).

You can now find the former names by sorting the coins by ruling authority.

But you can't find them in the list of countries. This is just one of many reasons why hiding different country names is such a bad idea.

Quote: "ceh2019"​But you can't find them in the list of countries. This is just one of many reasons why hiding different country names is such a bad idea.

​I agree, Ceylon should be under Sri Lanka, see case of Germany...
LP

Quote: "mikimaus"​

Quote: "ceh2019"​But you can't find them in the list of countries. This is just one of many reasons why hiding different country names is such a bad idea.

​​I agree, Ceylon should be under Sri Lanka, see case of Germany...
​LP

​Germany is very different:

Before WWII Germany had significant territories from modern-day Poland, Russia, and Lithuania. These were not war occupations, they were simply parts of Germany.

With Sri Lanka / Caylon there are no territorial changes

Quote: "stratocaster"​​
​With Sri Lanka / Caylon there are no territorial changes
​
​

​Why has this been chosen as being more important that a change in name? One could apply this reasoning and demand that the Federal Republic of Germany be split at 1990 because there was a territorial change. This would be just a ridiculous as hiding Ceylon.

We consider that a change of name doesn't make a new country.
The same applies to Swaziland / Eswatini, Burma / Myanmar, etc. (and also for full names, like Republic of the United States of Brazil / Federative Republic of Brazil), for which we always only had one issuer.
We may do further merges like Ceylon / Sri Lanka if applicable in the future.

Only one name appears in the country list, but you can still search for any name in the issuer dropdown list or in the search field.

I'm afraid you're behind the times. Ceylon has already been hidden within Sri Lanka. No one is saying that Sri Lanka was a new country. We're saying it was a new name and that the old name shouldn't disappear from the catalogue. Just beacuse a search on "Ceylon" will throw up "Sri Lanka" doesn't mean it hasn't been removed from the list of issuers on the main Coins and Banknotes pages. This is all about making the catalogue accessible to all, regardless how much history you know. Someone born forty years after this name change occured could easily be looking at this site today with a coin in their hand bearing the name Ceylon and have no clue where it might be found.

For your information, here are the guidelines followed by administrators who manage the list of issuers:

An issuer is any:

• organised community (for example, Australia, Commune of Nice, Abbey of Saint Gall, Rauraci tribe),
  
• association of such communities (for example, Eurozone, West African States, joint notgeld issuers), or
  
• autonomous mint that regulates currency (for example, the Imperial mint of Basel)
  

with a claimed right to issue currency.

An issuer may have several different currencies and governments throughout its history.

When the territory of an issuer suffers a sudden, significant, and long-term change, resulting in a discontinuity of its currency, the issuer is split (example: the dissolution of USSR, but not the reunification of Germany).

When an issuer belongs to multiple groups of countries (groups as defined in the country list), it is listed multiple times, and these issuers are linked together as "siblings". For example, Savoy is listed under Feudal France and under Italian States: browsing French feudal coins will show only the coins of French Savoy; browsing Italian States coins will show only the coins of Italian Savoy; but browsing French Savoy or Italian Savoy will show the coins of both issuers.

Quote: "ceh2019"​Someone born forty years after this name change occured could easily be looking at this site today with a coin in their hand bearing the name Ceylon and have no clue where it might be found.

​What I try to say is that this person could search for Ceylon, find the coin, and learn that the coin is coming from the country which is now known as Sri Lanka.
They would proceed the same way for a Hungarian coin showing "Magyar", and I believe nobody is asking to show "Magyarország" in the country list.

The key point is that they would have to search for it when it should be there for them to see under Sri Lanka. Your guidelines talk about sudden and significant changes. How is the change of a country's name not sudden and significant?

Hello
After reading all your opinions I think that you are all right and at the same time you are not.
If we stubbornly keep this list of countries thinking about historical reasons, sometimes we will be right and sometimes not, just as if we obsess over political reasons, etc...
For some Ceylon and Sri Lanka are the same and for others they are not. But if we limit ourselves to the art of numismatics without political or historical philias or phobias, if we separate those two names of the same country, it is easier to catalog coins in the eyes of someone who does not know.


Also, all those rules are not always used.
In France feudal there are coins issued by kings of Aragon ( and also of Castile) in the name of Provence, Perpignan or Roussillon, city and territories at that time under the sovereignty of the Crown of Aragon, not of France, so some rules are used to Savoy (Italian / French) but not for Perpignan.
In another case, the name change, even sudden, has political reasons, Dahomey was a French Colony and Benin is an independent state, the same happens with British Honduras / Belize, and sometimes the change is merely capricious by decree of the current ruler, either by restitution from the past or by decision of a military power such as Cambodia / Kampuchea, Burma / Myanmar.
If we are based on the fact that an issuer is the one who has the right to issue currency or a tribe / people is in their own way independent to issue currency as it used to happen in ancient times on this website Hispania Ancient was suppressed to integrate the emissions of a lot of issuing towns and tribes within Roman Provinces, something wrong in my opinión, since many of those towns issued coins before the arrival of the Romans to the Iberian Peninsula.
On the other hand, following these guidelines, many coins issued in South America should belong to Spain, since they were Spanish (or rather Castilian) territories, but that would be another debate.
In short, more issuers are better for me.

Quote: "stratocaster"​There is only a regular update on the referee forum.

​

Why this useful information is not shared with us, the ordinary collectors?

Every day is a struggle to find out what was merged or splited or changed in our collections.

I agree

I lost another issuer today, wich one was?

Quote: "Geison"​Why this useful information is not shared with us, the ordinary collectors?

The log is now in the general forum, you can find it pinned here:
https://en.numista.com/forum/topic103988.html

I keep there a log of the database changed that are not documented in other threads.
For issuers, I will add the changes requested in referee threads too.

Quote: "ceh2019"​The key point is that they would have to search for it when it should be there for them to see under Sri Lanka. Your guidelines talk about sudden and significant changes. How is the change of a country's name not sudden and significant?

​I agree completely. This is a massive and terrible change of policy that moves the catalogue backwards, in my opinion.

This makes sense...



Why can't Ceylon be visible as a child of Sri Lanka, or the Belgian Congo be visible as a child of the Democratic Republic of Congo? That is what is going to make sense to most people. Remember, most people still use KM numbers and now we have duplicate KM numbers under the same country. This is very, very confusing. Please reconsider.

Quote: "andrewdotcoza"​

Quote: "ceh2019"​The key point is that they would have to search for it when it should be there for them to see under Sri Lanka. Your guidelines talk about sudden and significant changes. How is the change of a country's name not sudden and significant?

​​I agree completely. This is a massive and terrible change of policy that moves the catalogue backwards, in my opinion.
​
​This makes sense...
​
​
​
​Why can't Ceylon be visible as a child of Sri Lanka, or the Belgian Congo be visible as a child of the Democratic Republic of Congo? That is what is going to make sense to most people. Remember, most people still use KM numbers and now we have duplicate KM numbers under the same country. This is very, very confusing. Please reconsider.

Agreed this has caught many people off guard (me included) and interrupted the way everyone organises their coins for example I’ve organised the coins by country/issuer so Ceylon would be with Canada in the Cs and Sri Lanka with Serbia in the Ss.

At least there should be a dedicated topic post with all of the changes to the issuers or revert back to when they were under the current name.


I arrest my case.​

One more thing was Germany 1871-1948 listed differently in the past such as German Empire, Weimar Republic and the Third Reich?

Quote: "Worldwide collection"​One more thing was Germany 1871-1948 listed differently in the past such as German Empire, Weimar Republic and the Third Reich?

​Not that I remember. I think the Germany divisions are a left over artifact of how Krause catalogued Germany.

Quote: "andrewdotcoza"​

Quote: "Worldwide collection"​One more thing was Germany 1871-1948 listed differently in the past such as German Empire, Weimar Republic and the Third Reich?

​​Not that I remember. I think the Germany divisions are a left over artifact of how Krause catalogued Germany.

Ahh I just bought this up to see people’s opinion on this.