What should go an insert when a medal is listed in multiple references??

keets

I have always been one to think that a more economical use of the space on a TPG insert is good, too much information can give a cluttered look to me and I tend to get information overload. There are exceptions, of course, and I saw one in an auction this morning. It seems to be at the intersection of at least three references: it is a So-Called Dollar but is also listed by Julian and Baker, so it could have all three numbers. As a medal dedicated to Washington I suppose it should be expected that it has been well researched by multiple writers.

So should the TPG only place information requested by a submitter?? If a medal has multiple listings should they all be put on the insert??

Al H.

LanceNewmanOCC

.
this is applicable to many series imo and i am on the fence. i do enjoy the cross-referencing but the inserts can tend to get a bit cluttered, especially the

more esoteric a numismatic item gets.

imo, the biggest debate about this is; "which reference deserves that precious real estate?" - rather subjective in my mind.
.

keets

that's a good point, so I guess unless someone asks for a specific reference perhaps it would be the first or all.

messydesk

Large amounts of information can be presented in an aesthetic manner. Look at NGC labels for ancients. Detailed breakdown of grade, attribution, weight, provenance... When deciding how much stuff to put on a label, you need to lay out the worst case such that it still looks good. Heck, there's even some guy that puts date, attribution, detailed descriptions, and a micro-photograph on a label the size of a TPG insert!

For deciding between attributions that show up in multiple references, the Cherrypicker's Guide overlaps the exhaustive references (Snow, VAM, etc.) for the series' it covers, as well as CONECA references.

LanceNewmanOCC

<< <i> Heck, there's even some guy that puts date, attribution, detailed descriptions, and a micro-photograph on a label the size of a TPG insert! >>



lunatics abound in this field scro.....

and somehow they still manage to achieve a high office!

on that subject, another lunatic is preparing an order for mr. ssdc prez literally as we post.
.

numisma

it is a So-Called Dollar but is also listed by Julian and Baker, so it could have all three numbers. As a medal dedicated to Washington I suppose it should be expected that it has been well researched by multiple writers.

For medals and exonumia I always use ALL references. As long as the information is accurate, it can only help. I understand the space limitations of some labels, but for certain medals I will write in fine print on both sides of a 2.5X2.5 flip insert. Sometimes I even have to use 2 or more inserts.

DeliaBug

Personally, I would like no attributions on the labels. Maybe back in the Flintstone days this was needed, but now I would rather have this information in the on-line database. And the when a cert lookup is done, multiple attributions can easily be listed. Another plus - if the attribution is wrong, you don't need to send it in for a re-holder.

LindeDad

If it's worth anything the buyer is going to have a loop to read it, and look at the medal.

They even have micro printing on some labels now.

But when all else fails remember the KISS rule.

keyman64

I would want on the label whatever makes it the most saleable!