What about Notgeld variants

Hello,
take a look to this note:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/note211442.html
It´s similar to my note:

Different is the green underprint in numista note.
What do you think: a new page or a new line on the existing page?
Thanks for opinion
Peter

In your references is it listed with a unique number or is it just a variant within the number? I am just curious..

Hello Peter,

I would consider that just as a variant, this was how I handled it with my notes (for example this one https://en.numista.com/catalogue/note210431.html I have in black/white and coloured) and this one https://en.numista.com/catalogue/note210774.html was given with multiple obverse colours but always the same reverse and depiction. On the other hand, we have Notgeld with identical depiction, but completely different printing colour like those two https://en.numista.com/catalogue/note211176.html + https://en.numista.com/catalogue/note210221.html - in such a case I would create two separate pages, but if just a small part of the underprint is different I would go for a variant on the existing page as this was pretty sure a mistake in printing.

Best Regards,
Michael

Hi Michael,
a problem could be:
if you search Illmenau 20: you see 2 notes with 2 colours in 2 pages.
The next note you want to enter is Bad Blankenburg in yellow. The see just a green note and you create a new site.

At cities with a few issues yyou can open the notes, but if you have a city with 200 issues, we´ll have a problem.

Generelly I think your thoughts are right, but there will be a problem in handling.

@Oklahoman: the notes have an own number.
regards
Peter

I think we have a logical problem if we use the lines
for example:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/note214932.html
it´s not validated, so you can see soon.
But here is the problem:

I tried to male 1 page for the 25 Pfennig note with the no GrM:1174.1
and make 2 lines:
GrM:1174.1a-1/2: Drfa on front side
GrM:1174.1b-1/2: Drfa on back side

the problem is the 50 Pfennig page would be this:
GrM:1174.1
GrM:1174.1a-2/2: Drfa on front side
GrM:1174.1b-2/2: Drfa on back side

So you have to write:
GrM:1174.1-1/2
and make to lines:
GrM:1174.1a-1/2: Drfa on front side
GrM:1174.1b-1/2: Drfa on back side

But this no doesn´t exists. Collectors with a lot of notgeld can understand this (maybe). But a collector with just a few notgeld notes, would make the entry wrong in my opinion.
What do you think?

Hello Peter,

I think the question is where to draw the line between own entry and additional variant of an existing entry, which should be decided from case to case first until we have guidelines and criteria for German Notgeld entries. I think with Bad Blankenburg and Bad Sachsa in case, separate entries would be more justified (as I was too lazy when I created them ) than in the Kahla case, where we have only a small part of the underprint where the printery forgot to put the colour on.

Off this topic I see a few problems with German Notgeld here from the missing currencies (I shove for it...) over the city names (C vs. K in Koblenz, Köln, Kleve etc., SS vs. ß, usability for non-German users in finding names with ß, ä, ö, ü, additional parts to differ between same-named cities like "...in Thüringen" and so on), the borders between city and private issues (what about the Stadtsparkassen? Are they private or are they city issues as the cities owned them as public institutes) and what about the Ländernoten from Bavaria, Saxony or Hessen? I would consider them as an own category between municipal Notgeld and Reichsbank standard notes, whereas they are classified together with the Reichsbanknoten under Germany 1871-1948 right now.

Best Regards,
Michael

you are right.
Another point is something like
Drfa: it´s from 'Hans L. Grabowski / Manfred Mehl "
it means Druckfirma. (Printer company)
Can we write Drfa or Printer company

1. Ausgabe or 1. issue (quoting from the note vs. spelling)
without understand German is the info 1. issue not helpful...

Either 'imprint' or just 'printer' not an obscure German abrivation, I had no idea what drfa should mean.

To be honest, I wouldn't work too close with the Grabowski catalogue here as our aspiration should be to create a database of German Notgeld that is helpful especially for non-German (speaking) users and those who aren't specialized on this topic. Among them, those catalogues will be rarely used as I assume and appear somewhat cryptic. Their numbers by far aren't that common like KM# / P# numbers or Jaeger (coins) and Rosenberg (banknotes) numbers for Germany.

I added here some variants:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/index.php?mode=simplifie&p=1&l=&r=altenburg+50+Prinzenraub+Series&e=&d=&ru=&i=&ca=931&no=&se=&v=&m=&a=&t=&dg=&t2=&u=&f=&g=&c=&wi=&sw=&tbb=y&tbc=y&tbl=y&tbt=y&tbf=y&cat=y&ct=banknote
what do you think?

Perfect, thank you :-)

Quote: "Silberschatz"​To be honest, I wouldn't work too close with the Grabowski catalogue here as our aspiration should be to create a database of German Notgeld that is helpful especially for non-German (speaking) users and those who aren't specialized on this topic. Among them, those catalogues will be rarely used as I assume and appear somewhat cryptic. Their numbers by far aren't that common like KM# / P# numbers or Jaeger (coins) and Rosenberg (banknotes) numbers for Germany.

​I'm trying to translate (with my limited ability) and add notes of different variants in the comment sections
like this: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/note216779.html

As a slight side note... I have put in a request to add the other books in the Gietl Verlag series besides band 1 and 2. Am I overlooking them?