Talk:Centennial half-crown/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Reidgreg (talk · contribs) 16:41, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Nominator: at 04:31, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Reviewed version:

I'm going to start working on this review. – Reidgreg (talk) 16:41, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I've made some minor edits to the article, changing some hyphens to dashes and fixed a left/right. If you disagree, feel free to revert and we can discuss as part of the review.  I've posted the full review below.  Much of it is checklists/comments to help myself keep track as I progressed.  I've marked with  where I'd like your attention. I'm willing to discuss any of the changes I've suggested, I know you're a lot more experienced that I am and that you're more familiar with the sources and the topic. You can leave comments in new bullet points below or at the very end. – Reidgreg (talk) 16:10, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Criterion

 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
 * a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * Would appreciate a few tweaks . One last fix (yellow tick)
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:

Review comments

 * Referencing & verifiability
 * ref name=":3" Encyclopedia of New Zealand chapter Coinage. Verifies standard half-crown design (coat of arms + carvings), half-crown weight and diameter. I'm a little unclear from the source on when coins were first issued. The source has Distinctive New Zealand coins, issued since 1933 when the Coinage Act was passed, are the crown, half-crown, florin, shilling, sixpence, threepence, penny, and halfpenny. I'm uncertain if "since that year" is intended to mean that the first coins were issued in 1933 and, ifso, whether all the listed coins were issued that year or only some of them. I'd like to see an additional source there. (see next bullet)
 * Regarding additional sources, Stocker2010 may be sufficient, p.177: "a letter dated 17 October 1933 [...] It had recently been working with the Royal Mint on New Zealand’s first national coinage, which featured new reverse designs from the half-crown to the threepence, by George Kruger Gray. These were on the verge of completion and circulation at the time." Also p.182: "1933 was initially used [for the Waitangi Crown] to be consistent with the other new coins, but this appeared odd in view of the fact that the crown could not hope to be struck before late 1934."
 * Added Stocker '10 p. 182 - G✅
 * at 31.75 mm in diameter and 9.45 g in weight I seem to be having a problem with the coin weight/diameter figures. In this line, I've put the original figures from the source (1.272 in and 218 2/11 grains) into convert templates (run "flipped"), with different metric results: 1.272 in and 218+2/11 gr. As I rechecked the lead (last thing to do) I noticed that infobox numbers are closer to what I have (32 mm and 14.14 g).
 * You're right, I think I accidentally gave the Florin's weight in the lede! - G
 * , need to repeat the figures at the bottom in section Mintage and production. It might not be bad to also have the Imperial figures there at the bottom. You can use the convert templates I have above. – Reidgreg (talk) 16:10, 3 April 2024 (UTC)✅
 * ref name=Stocker 2010 British Numismatic Journal used 4 times. p.185 945+10+173=1128 coins struck. All good.✔️


 * Unnamed reference, Penguin Hisotry of New Zealand by Michael King. Preview at Google Books. Used for verification of basic facts about the Treaty of Waitangi.✔️


 * Unnamed reference, "Te Tiriti o Waitangi – Treaty of Waitangi" at NZ Ministry of Justice. Used for deeper commentary of the treaty's significance.✔️


 * Unnamed reference "The first Waitangi Day" at NZ History. Used for commemoration of the treaty, 1934.✔️


 * ref name=Stocker2011 British Numismatic Journal. Used 10 times. p.205 proposals.✔️ p.206–207 commemorative coin proposals✔️ p.207 design competition❌ p.207–208 selection committee✔️ p.208 Richardson design✔️ p.208–210 Shurrock and Berry designs✔️ p.210–211 Metcalfe and Gray designs✔️ p.207–211 Mitchell selection❌ p.216–217 Mitchell design✔️ p.221 popularity✔️
 * By August 1936, the New Zealand Numismatic Society began pursuing the creation of commemorative coinage to be issued for the centenary It looks to me that the half-crown was pursued from that time but there remained questions regarding the merits of the penny and half-penny proposals through to at least October 1937. Striking this, it's good.✔️
 * The citation to page 207 doesn't verify the design stipulations which are on page 208. The easiest thing would be to remove the citation and rely on the citation to pages 207–208 at the end of that paragraph.  Or if you want the 'quote' to have a citation, change that to p. 207–208.
 * Fixed, thank you! - G✅
 * Around twenty New Zealand artists submitted designs for the competition, although British Royal Mint designers Percy Metcalfe and George Kruger Gray were both granted permission to participate due to their work on the prior New Zealand coinage. Two problems:  first, twenty New Zealanders plus Gray and Metcalfe were invited to participate.  The following page (208) can only confirm 5 New Zealanders plus Gray and Metcalfe had actually entered the competition.  Second, the word although doesn't really fit since it isn't earlier made clear that foreigners were to be excluded.  Suggest:  About twenty New Zealand artists were invited to participate with at least five of them known to have submitted designs, along with British Royal Mint designers Percy Metcalfe and George Kruger Gray who were both granted permission to participate due to their work on the prior New Zealand coinage.
 * Good call, corrected phrasing. - G✅
 * The New Zealander Leonard Cornwall Mitchell's designs were selected for all three denominations. I think this is more simply verifiable from page 204 rather than 207–211
 * Fixed. - G✅
 * pp.216–218. Ah, this was driving me nuts. The source describes the progression of changes to the design in moving toward production, assuming that the reader is already familiar with the design, and doesn't actually describe the design itself until the very end of page 218.✔️


 * ref name=":22" Standard Catalog of World Coins: 1900–2000 Archived at Internet Archive (registration required). AGF.  Also in Stocker 2011 p.204✔️


 * Unnamed reference "The 1940 New Zealand Centennial Half-Crown" New Zealand Numismatic Journal #101.✔️


 * There's a little bit of information only appearing in the lead/infobox that isn't sourced: The .500 fineness silver (found in ":3"), the milled edge, the 2 1/2 s value, and Humphrey Paget as the designer of the obverse.
 * Added cites for all of these.
 * ref Humphrey Paget at Royal Mint Museum.✅
 * ref Proof Coin - 1/2 Crown New Zealand at Museums Victoria Collections. Milled edge, dimensions, description.✅


 * Prose

All prose points below:
 * the half-crown's reverse features the coat of arms of New Zealand surrounded by Māori carvings. To avoid confusion, can this be qualified to distinguish it from the Centennial half-crown? Something like "the standard half-crown" or "the [year] half-crown"? Depending, it may need a source.
 * Qualified this and gave a cite. - G✅
 * New reference Stocker 2005 good, used this once.✔️
 * James Berry's combined the Treaty House with the Cook Landing Site obelisk for his half-crown submission. The possessive is used in ellipsis for "James Berry's submission" so it doesn't need "for his ... submission" again at the end. Or you could remove the 's, but I assume you were trying to give some variation in phrasing.
 * Ooh, good point. - G✅
 * Three prototype examples are known of a proposed box set of the 1940 coinage, featuring the half-crown, which was ultimately declined before general production. Was the half-crown declined before production? To avoid possible confusion, suggest: featuring the half-crown. The government declined a production order of the boxed coin set.
 * Good point. - G✅
 * Breadth & focus

Seems quite thorough and focused. In my own effort to be thorough I found the following which don't have much to add (save for FAC if at all):
 * Nothing really new, probably picked it up from a press release. It does say that Mitchell is from Wellington.
 * Mentions the 100,800 minted in a general story about NZ coins taken out of circulation. Mentions a 1940 half-crown selling for $16.50 the week of publication.
 * Thank you for finding these, will add these when I take this to FAC (eventually)!
 * Media

Three images, all tagged with CC licences.

General discussion
Very nice article! Just looking at a few tweaks of citations and phrasing. Please ping me here when you're ready for me to go over it again. – Reidgreg (talk) 01:30, 31 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi! I think I responded to everything. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 14:37, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Great! Just need the diameter–weight dimensions in the last body section to match. (see yellow tick above) – Reidgreg (talk) 16:10, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Ope, forgot that part! Fixed. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 16:15, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ to have passed the GA criteria. – Reidgreg (talk) 16:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC)