Paddy

As I understand it, none of these are genuine mint errors. The two parts of the coin are put together as blanks, before they have the design pressed into them. The minting machines would not be able to process separated pieces, so there is no way the patterns could be minted onto incomplete blanks. It is far too easy to knock the centre out of a coin and then claim "mint error" for a premium. Even worse are the ones where they have re-inserted the centre rotated or even back to front - again all impossible in the minting process.

This just to record the issue several of us are experiencing when posting attachments to threads: When an attachment is dragged into the appropriate area, it appears there correctly, but when we go to save the post, the system jumps to an unformatted page with a "Forbidden" error. The detail talks about being "unable to access that page". I have tried many times, coming out of the thread and back in, even logging completely out of predecimal and back in, with the same problem. If I delete the attachment, the words of the post save fine. Can someone please look into this? It has now been several weeks since I was last able to post a picture.

I have only ever posted .jpg and my recent success was also.jpg. There is not difference between .jpeg and .jpg. This is what Google has to say: "There is no practical difference between JPEG and JPG files; they both refer to the same image file format created by the Joint Photographic Experts Group. The shorter, three-letter "JPG" extension originated from a legacy limitation in older versions of Microsoft Windows, which only allowed three-character file extensions. Modern operating systems no longer have this limitation, so most applications can open and interpret both file extensions interchangeably, making them identical in function. "

I picked this up at a recent auction as it and its fellows seemed to be going very cheap. Comes described as a Mauryan Ashoka 1/32nd Karshapana from around 250BC. Measures about 4mm - Five pence for scale.

I agree. Anything not a circulating coin is just a gimmick in my view.

Ah well, works for me and prior to this I also have been unable to post anything.

It seems I have found another work round and it might explain why some people get errors and others don't. If I drag and drop the image into the post, I get the error. If I then delete the picture from the post, but leave it in the attached files at the bottom of the screen, it posts fine. So I tried it by not dragging and dropping but simply going to "choose files" to add the picture, and this also worked fine. So don't drag and drop, just choose file!

This is one of the other coins that came with it. Also Mauryan Ashoka c200BC and a more reasonable size at 15mm across.

I picked up a 2021 £1 coin a few days ago which was the first I had seen. Yesterday I got 2 2025 £1 coins in change, so some new stuff is getting out at last.

I agree with @Sword on the lamination error. I think the odd feature on the reverse corresponds to Victoria's lips, so possible a partial double strike?

But when I tried to edit to add a cooment, it wouldn't have it! Comment was: "Wow! Worked first time without having to delete and retry. Maybe a fix has been applied?"

I'll try it with this 1927 penny upgrade picked up the other day - nothing special and a pity about the spots, but still an upgrade on the incumbent.

Yes - I can see them. Odder and odder!

I have PM'ed Richard direct and he does not see the same error at his end, so he has suggested I ask here if anyone else is getting it. Two specifics: 1. In the George V Varieties page, the list of varieties appears twice, one straight after the other. 2. In the George V Obverses page where it offers images to distinguish types A,B,C and D, the images are missing with the broken link icon. Can anyone seeing this try on their machines and see if they have the same error? https://headsntails14.wordpress.com/george-vi-varieties/ https://headsntails14.wordpress.com/george-v-obverses/

I'll try again. This 1889 penny F127 is my old one recently replaced with an upgrade. Any reasonable offer, to include postage, will be considered. Maybe £2 plus postage? https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JTE8XOLzPp3g5gmt4icxzo8KU0stdXs5/view?usp=sharing

I can't spare the time to go through the whole site - it is huge! But a few I have spotted: Victoria Obverses, 3 images just after "Some other indicators of Obverse B on very worn specimens are shown below:" 5 images under Obverse L, just after "with an obverse 7 that seems to have a marginally thicker outer tie ribbon (see below)." 1 image just after "Some specimens of 1875 F80 are found with a circular raised dot below the first I of VICTORIA" 4th and 5th image on Obverse M just after "outer tie ribbon points outwards towards the F of F:D: and the legend is in slightly higher relief with slightly thicker letters" That seems to be all on that page. Maybe others can invest a little time on other pages?

This was another lot at the auction with the Charles II shilling that I was bidding on. The 1722 halfpenny in the lot looks to me to be A over inverted V on the obverse. Any thoughts? I didn't win it in the end - I was unsure of the variety and I didn't want all the other junk in the lot! https://www.easyliveauction.com/catalogue/lot/e61eb2a077e214d818bf2cf0d1bc2e8a/0af8d24542e81eb9357e7ef448a6646f/timed-general-household-furniture-antiques-bric-a-b-lot-976/

I have seen this shilling at auction and I am struggling to be sure what variety it is. Described as Charles I shilling and weight given as 5.65g. It appears at first glance to be Group F, but then the mintmark of a Crown does not make sense in the books. For the Tower mint the Crown should be Group D. For Aberystwyth mint it lacks the plume in front of the bust. I even checked the milled Charles II shillings, but that also doesn't seem to fit. Or is it just a fake? Please don't ask for better pictures - these are what the auction house has loaded! https://drive.google.com/file/d/1orBt9X3of0XOuY-SxK8cLWV3drCbMlPk/view?usp=sharing

Here is the link to the Charles II shilling I was querying. Now sold for £160 hammer, which was a bit more than I wanted to pay: https://www.easyliveauction.com/catalogue/lot/3e8b94d42749dbfeb5cada4abe437cca/0af8d24542e81eb9357e7ef448a6646f/timed-general-household-furniture-antiques-bric-a-b-lot-974/

Yes. I just checked the Victoria Copper Obverses page and many of the pictures showing varieties of date numbers are missing, starting with the ones after "Two kinds of 5 are found on the 1854 pennies".

It is a small house clearance auction that only very occasionally has coins. I am impressed they even managed to recognise it as a British hammered coin. Last year they listed large quantities of GB pre-47 coinage without even realising there was silver content! I will post the name after the auction is over - I don't want anyone else on here bidding against me...

Ah, thank you - yes that fits. I saw S3308 and S3314, which lack the denomination marks and so did not work. I failed to turn the page and see S3322 which does have the XII. Thank you.

I can't see anything wrong with it, but some of the recent repros are very difficult to spot. If you have had it more than 30 years, I would think you are safe. Check the weight against Numista. Check the silver content with the sliding magnet test, or better still if you have a jewel nearby that has the Xray gun thingamajig.

The missing obverse identification pictures have now been restored - thanks to Richard.

Yes, the duplicated Varieties list has cleared - thank you. I still get the missing images though.