Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1804 dollar/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 02:28, 26 March 2015 (UTC) [1].[reply]

1804 dollar

[edit]
Nominator(s): RHM22 (talk) 02:29, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the Fantastic 1804 Dollar (as it was described in the title of the landmark work by Eric P. Newman and Kenneth Bressett). Also famously lauded as the "king of American coins," the 1804 dollar is among the most famous and controversial coins in American history. Although they were dated 1804, they were actually first struck some thirty years after that date. Although it was widely believed at one time that the coins were struck in 1804, numismatists began questioning that by the late nineteenth century. In truth, they were initially created in 1834 for inclusion in diplomatic gift sets for the Sultan of Muscat and Oman and the King of Siam at the behest of a diplomat named Edmund Roberts. Two additional sets were created for officials in Cochinchina and Japan (twenty years before Matthew Perry's forced entry into that nation), but they remained ungifted due to Roberts' death in Macau. Later, clandestine restrikes were created to satisfy collector demand, and those too are very valuable today. In 1999, one example (probably the one presented to the Sultan) sold for over $4 million at auction, which was the highest price ever paid for any coin at the time. In total, fifteen specimens are known today. The contributions of Godot13 are hard to overstate, both for this article and for coins in general, as most of the images in this article as well as some of the formatting are due to his hard work. Wehwalt's assistance was also vital, both as a set of skilled eyes to look over the article and for his help in supplying sources. I believe the article meets all FA criteria, and I thank you in advance for reading, and for any comments or suggestions you might be willing to offer.-RHM22 (talk) 02:29, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support I did some tweaking of the article. It is comprehensive, thorough, and well-written. And well-illustrated :) --Wehwalt (talk) 09:25, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Image review:

Source review - spotchecks not done

Comments by Dr. Blofeld

[edit]
  • "Though dated 1804, none were struck in that year; all were minted in the 1830s or later. They were first struck for use in special proof coin sets used as diplomatic gifts during Edmund Roberts's trips to Siam and Muscat. Some silver dollars were struck " -rep of struck x 3 Years of production also the same problem " 1804 dollars were struck in 1804 was not widely accepted by numismatists until the early twentieth century.[56] Before such time, the actual year in which they were struck remained contentious among numismatists. Early on, collectors assumed that the 1804 dollars were struck " -can you find a way to reword one or two?
That's a good catch. I've reworded it to cut through that redundancy a bit. Do you think the current wording is acceptable?-RHM22 (talk) 18:56, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, fine.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:00, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "was passed down from the King of Siam " -which particular king was this? Also Siam should probably be linked if you're going to link Macau and the others,
I added the King's name, but I already have Siam linked in the first paragraph of the lede.-RHM22 (talk) 18:56, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "specimens of pattern pieces of coin, and rare types" -why the quote, and by whom?
Hmm, I see what you mean there. The quote was by Patterson, but it's not really necessary, so I removed and paraphrased.-RHM22 (talk) 18:56, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • William T.R. -no gap?
  • "Newman & Bressett " -why are these historians referred to as if they're a coin company or something? I think it should be written in as "and".
I'm very glad that you noticed that. It definitely should not have been written with an ampersand, so I've corrected that. What a hideous mistake! I always judiciously correct that in other articles, but it managed to sneak into mine!-RHM22 (talk) 18:56, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sale prices -it would be good if you could be more specific with some of the auctions and find where they were.
I added the auction galleries, but I don't know the precise locations of the sales in most cases.-RHM22 (talk) 18:56, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "was sold at auction for $4,140,000." -again it would be useful to know if this was at Sotherby's or whatever..
  • "More modern replicas were commonly offered as original at low prices to American soldiers on rest and recuperation leave in Thailand during the Vietnam War.[" -interesting, anything to elaborate on here?
Unfortunately, I don't have anything else to add there. I've seen fake 1804 dollar hailing from the Orient myself, but there's not a lot of good information available to me about the recent fakes. They can sometimes be had at various markets, and will often stick to a magnet.-RHM22 (talk) 18:56, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should there be a more detailed description of the coins in the prose? I'd have expected a deeper description.
I think that's a good idea. I've added a description of the design to the body of the article. They utilized the Draped Bust design, but people who aren't numismatists would probably not be familiar with that.-RHM22 (talk) 18:56, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All good, interesting article. The sourcing is as a sound as a pound if you'll pardon the pun :-) Await your response.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:17, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for adding your two cents worth, Dr. Blofeld! I've implemented all of your suggestions, and I've also added some responses above.-RHM22 (talk) 18:56, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks, that's all from me. Meets all of the FA criteria, most interesting learning about its Thai connections. Good luck!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:00, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Dr. B! I appreciate your thoughtful review and support.-RHM22 (talk) 02:08, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support – As a non-numismatist I have resisted the natural temptation to assume that the Wehwalt seal of approval says all that needs to be said, and have scrutinised the article as objectively as I can. It meets all the FA criteria, in my view. A fine piece of work – full marks! Tim riley talk 01:22, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, Tim, for your support and kind words. I only wish that I had gotten to yours in time!-RHM22 (talk) 02:08, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support. The page meets the FA criteria, it is well-written and well-illustrated. --Carioca (talk) 22:14, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, Carioca!-RHM22 (talk) 22:48, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/1804_dollar/archive1&oldid=1138452897"