Problem with registering new sets!

Dear master referees,
I'm having trouble posting new sets on the website.
Moderator @Peterjhalford explained the issue to me:

“

With regards to the sets, I’m unable to approve this set at this time. Until formal guidelines are established, I’m holding off on approvals to avoid potential duplication. I’ve added this set to my list and will revisit it once the guidelines are in place.

Please post in the forums to help get the master referees to confirm the guidelines. The sooner they are confirmed the quicker I can approve the sets!

”

Please resolve this issue!
Thank you very much in advance!

 Already asked and answered 

https://en.numista.com/forum/topic170423.html 

Could you please tell me how soon the guidelines for registering sets on the site will be published? Who is responsible for this, and what is the correct course of action for moderators in this situation? Some moderators are refusing to approve sets!

Elick74

Could you please tell me how soon the guidelines for registering sets on the site will be published? Who is responsible for this, and what is the correct course of action for moderators in this situation? Some moderators are refusing to approve sets!

Elick24 please remember that Numista is a community run website, referees, moderators, etc are volunteers who give up their time to make this website what it is. No one is responsible to answer your demands, publish guidelines or pander to members wishes. If a moderator or referee is holding off publishing your set, then wait, he or she will do their best to resolve the issue in time. If the Master Referee hasn’t published the guidelines yet, then have some patience and wait.

I understand that this issue might be frustrating to you, but no one is being paid to sort out your first world problems! 

Thank you for your comprehensive response!
Let's all work together to make this site better!

Elick74

Thank you for your comprehensive response!
Let's all work together to make this site better!

Yes you have done your part, other people will do theirs all in good time.

Please stop using exclamation marks out of their intended context, it can be construed as being rude or passive-aggressive, when someone is not getting what they want. I appreciate that different languages use it slightly differently, or when someone’s first language is different to what they are writing in, it can be used in misunderstanding, but these two sentences; Please resolve this issue! and Thank you very much in advance! imply impatience and bossiness.

Some moderators are refusing to approve sets! is correct, however only indicating surprise (which you shouldn’t have) as you already have an informed answer, which you quoted in your post. In this case it is indicating annoyance and disdain towards the moderators and referees. 
 

I fully understand English may not be your first language, however I think my assumption of your intended use of the punctuation mark in these cases is obvious. Please just have a little patience, sets are a relatively new concept for being entered as a combination on Numista. Alternatively you can always enter each individual coin with notation they are part of a set, like the old days.

Sorry, but yes, English is not my native language.

Thank you very much for the clarification. I've noted it.

Now, let's get to the point, please.
I'm sure you're familiar with the coin set registration form.
It contains the following fields:

Name (similar for coins form)
Locality name (optional)
Quantity issued (similar for coins form)
Reference number (similar for coins form)
Images (similar for coins form)
Content (from the Numista database)
Comments (optional)
Sources * (similar for coins form)...

...and nothing more (no exclamation marks)

Do you really think special guidelines for moderators are required to fill out such a form? It's already exist - see coin's guidelines.

If the Numista team is a group of enthusiasts, volunteers, and like-minded individuals, then the question arises: where does this lack of self-confidence and nomenklatura come from?
To be fair, I should note that only one moderator chose this approach. The Numista team is overwhelmingly a team of professionals (no exclamation points).

This is purely my perspective.

Thank you for listening to my cry from the heart.

P.S. If formally it's impossible to accept a form without instructions, then why did you make it accessible on the website? And if it is, then requests for set registration should be accepted.

I'll repost what I posted on the other forum:

There are over 3,800 sets already in Numista.  Some of those are not yet approved but most are. Sets are moving forward in most countries even without guidelines.  It's a shame that when the guidelines are released some of those won't meet them. It's also a shame that collectors of UK coins can't enter their sets when collectors from most other countries can.

 What other country referees are refusing to validate sets until the guidelines are created?

Elick74

Do you really think special guidelines for moderators are required to fill out such a form?

Greetings, Vladimir.  For what it's worth, I do.  For example, there was a catalog referee a few months ago who wanted to split up what is clearly a U.S. Mint set into his own custom sets and then register his own custom sets as individual “sets” on Numista.   But that's not how Xavier defined a “set” and his request was denied.  I believe the right decision was made.  It goes to show that there is an ongoing need to clarify what constitutes a “set” and what doesn't.

Elick74

If the Numista team is a group of enthusiasts, volunteers, and like-minded individuals, then the question arises: where does this lack of self-confidence and nomenklatura come from?

I don't know what the word “nomenklatura” means.  I assume that's a Russian word, and I don't speak Russian.   It would be more accurate to say that it's an issue of clarifying guidelines since coin sets from some countries may not be understood very well.   Likewise, some sets are very old and supporting documentation can be difficult to obtain.  Additionally, some members want to define their own "custom sets” when that's not how a “set” is currently defined.

Elick74

P.S. If formally it's impossible to accept a form without instructions, then why did you make it accessible on the website? And if it is, then requests for set registration should be accepted.

Respectfully, you're overlooking the fact that “sets” is a brand new feature this year (2025) and it's impossible to anticipate every single caveat that may arise.  Sometimes it's helpful to launch a new feature knowing ahead of time that you will have to figure out some things as you go.  I don't work for Numista, so these are just my own humble opinions/observations.

TonyCoins

I don't know what the word “nomenklatura” means.  I assume that's a Russian word, and I don't speak Russian.   It would be more accurate to say that it's an issue of clarifying guidelines since coin sets from some countries may not be understood very well.   Likewise, some sets are very old and supporting documentation can be difficult to obtain.  Additionally, some members want to define their own "custom sets” when that's not how a “set” is currently defined.

Dear Tony,

you are absolutely right. You are talking about “during the process”: discussion, questions, proofs (if there are any doubts), and finally at all -  registering or rejection of the set.
However, I am somewhat surprised and upset by the fact that the set's publication is refused even because there are no guidelines.
For example, the Jamaica sets: Krause numbers MS10-MS20, in original boxes, sealed coins, all certificates included (similar to my others
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/set.php?id=3800
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/set.php?id=3771
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/set.php?id=3671
etc.)
If you have questions or doubts, you can ask and clarify, but not simply reject the submission. The reason of moderator for rejection is simple: I have no guidelines. If all moderators reject submissions for this reason, how will the new feature (Registering of Set) be perfected?

@Elick74 why don’t you post images of the coin set and the information that you are trying to enter into the catalogue here on this forum post?

Then maybe we can help clarify why the referee is waiting for „clarification from the guidelines, to stop duplication“ of you set.

I think the OP first post states the problem pretty well.  The referee is not processing any set requests and will not process any set requests until the guidelines for sets are released.  All set requests are in limbo until that happens regardless of the quality of the requests.

TonyCoins

I don't know what the word “nomenklatura” means.  I assume that's a Russian word, and I don't speak Russian.   It would be more accurate to say that it's an issue of clarifying guidelines since coin sets from some countries may not be understood very well.   Likewise, some sets are very old and supporting documentation can be difficult to obtain.  Additionally, some members want to define their own "custom sets” when that's not how a “set” is currently defined.

Dear Tony,

you are absolutely right. You are talking about “during the process”: discussion, questions, proofs (if there are any doubts), and finally at all -  registering or rejection of the set.
However, I am somewhat surprised and upset by the fact that the set's publication is refused even because there are no guidelines.
For example, the Jamaica sets: Krause numbers MS10-MS20, in original boxes, sealed coins, all certificates included (similar to my others
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/set.php?id=3800
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/set.php?id=3771
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/set.php?id=3671
etc.)
If you have questions or doubts, you can ask and clarify, but not simply reject the submission. The reason of moderator for rejection is simple: I have no guidelines. If all moderators reject submissions for this reason, how will the new feature (Registering of Set) be perfected?

King

@Elick74 why don’t you post images of the coin set and the information that you are trying to enter into the catalogue here on this forum post?

Then maybe we can help clarify why the referee is waiting for „clarification from the guidelines, to stop duplication“ of you set.

Dear King,

thank you for advice.

For example: KM MS20 (and I've got others MS10-19 in modification request list similar this)

rsirian1

I think the OP first post states the problem pretty well.  The referee is not processing any set requests and will not process any set requests until the guidelines for sets are released.  All set requests are in limbo until that happens regardless of the quality of the requests.

🤝

Sorry, wrong certificate:

Thanks for the pictures, Vladimir.  I immediately see what the problem is . . . Franklin Mint.  Of course.  I'm not sure what you know about the long-disgraced Franklin Mint, but it's not a government run mint.  It's a private mint.  Do sets from the Franklin Mint count?  I don't know.  That's for someone else to decide.

TonyCoins

Thanks for the pictures, Vladimir.  I immediately see what the problem is . . . Franklin Mint.  Of course.  I'm not sure what you know about the long-disgraced Franklin Mint, but it's not a government run mint.  It's a private mint.  Do sets from the Franklin Mint count?  I don't know.  That's for someone else to decide.

Thank you for comments, Tony.

Fine. But many coins from the Krause catalog were issued exclusively in these sets.
Are you suggesting moving all these coins to the Exonumia section? I don't think that's right. Especially since these sets also have a number in the Krause catalog. This is a very important area in modern numismatics. I'm sure it's best to leave everything in the main section on Numista and simply register the sets.

I really cannot understand the confusion about this. It's not about the set request submitted. It's not about the mint that produced the set or that they are a “private mint.”  Here are 3 examples of Franklin Mint Sets. There are many more. Maybe some are not authorized by the government but many are.  Besides the set submitted by the OP was not rejected (or maybe even not reviewed) by the referee.

1977 Ethiopia National Coinage

1974 - Coinage of Belize

1978 Cook Islands Proof Set 250th Anniversary of Birth of James Cook 

It's about the referee for the UK and Bahamas, @peterjhalford not reviewing sets until the Guidelines are written. Here are two times that was expressed by the referee:

https://en.numista.com/forum/topic108347-2.html#p1263149

https://en.numista.com/forum/topic76394.html#p1290680

I am not stating an opinion one way or the other about this, just stating facts.  If you read the original post you will see the instructions from the referee to the OP:

Please post in the forums to help get the master referees to confirm the guidelines. The sooner they are confirmed the quicker I can approve the sets!

The OP is doing what he was told to do.  Maybe peterjhalford will reply here and give us his opinion.

Good question, Vladimir.  I think Xavier would need to weigh in and make a judgement call since he's the founder of Numista.  

I personally view “sets” like those as having a very questionable provenance since they weren't issued by a government backed Mint.   The famous American news program “60 Minutes” exposed the Franklin Mint for their disingenuous business practices back in 1978, and they never fully recovered after that . . . 

rsirian1

I really cannot understand the confusion about this. It's not about the set request submitted. It's not about the mint that produced the set or that they are a “private mint.”  Here are 3 examples of Franklin Mint Sets. There are many more. Maybe some are not authorized by the government but many more.  Besides the set submitted by the OP was not rejected (or maybe even not reviewed) by the referee.

1977 Ethiopia National Coinage

1974 - Coinage of Belize

1978 Cook Islands Proof Set 250th Anniversary of Birth of James Cook 

It's about the referee for the UK and Bahamas, @peterjhalford not reviewing sets until the Guidelines are written. Here are two times that was expressed by the referee:

https://en.numista.com/forum/topic108347-2.html#p1263149

https://en.numista.com/forum/topic76394.html#p1290680

I am not stating an opinion one way or the other about this, just stating facts.  If you read the original post you will see the instructions from the referee to the OP:

Please post in the forums to help get the master referees to confirm the guidelines. The sooner they are confirmed the quicker I can approve the sets!

The OP is doing what he was told to do.  

 

Dear @rsirian1 , I'm absolutely agree with you🤝

P.S. @TonyCoins If you look closely at the certificate, you will read the following: Issued under authorization of the government of Jamaica (Bahamas, Belize, Barbados, British Virgin Islands, Malta, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Solomon Islands, Trinidad and Tobago etc.)
In this case we have to move a kind of half of Krause catalogue in Exonumia section.

I believe these are absolutely legal coin sets.

TonyCoins

Good question, Vladimir.  I think Xavier would need to weigh in and make a judgement call since he's the founder of Numista.  

 

I personally view “sets” like those as having a very questionable provenance since they weren't issued by a government backed Mint.   The famous American news program “60 Minutes” exposed the Franklin Mint for their disingenuous business practices back in 1978, and they never fully recovered after that . . . 

 

I don't know what to say, really🤷

TonyCoins

questionable provenance since they weren't issued by a government backed Mint.

 

? This mint made most of the standard circulation coins for the Jamaican government from 1969-1990.

 But that doesn't matter here.  Mint sets for the UK made by the Royal Mint are not being processed either!  There are no sets in the UK catalog.