Talk:Dime (United States coin)

Italian word "dilmashe"
There is no such italian word. The italian word for "tenth" is "decimo". A search on Google for the word "dilmashe" shows that its unique occurence is in this wikipedia article. 213.200.99.158 (talk) 11:24, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

"Dimes with this [90% silver] composition were minted until 1966."
That's a quote from the article. Now, I'm not going to change a FA without a source to back me up, but I know that the latest date which appears on silver dimes is 1964, not 1966. My understanding was that they started minting the current crap-metal in 1965, immediately stopping the use of silver, which had spiked in price. RobertAustin 02:37, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Misc.
A tiny little American coin, worth one-tenth of a dollar, or ten cents. The smallest coin, with a diameter slightly smaller than a penny. A silver color, though I don't recall which metals it is minted from. Like all American currency, contains the phrase "In God We Trust".

Symbolism
Does anyone know the symbolism of the oak branch, olive branch and torch?


 * It's actually Laurel, oak, and torch, representing Victory, Strength, and Freedom
 * No. See below. There is no laurel on the current dime.--chris.lawson 03:01, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * According to the Mint:
 * The Roosevelt dime torch, olive branch, and oak branch portray liberty, peace, and strength and independence.
 * I'll add this to the page somewhere. -Chris Lawson 07:34, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Value of a dime
I removed this statement: "The dime is highly unusual in that its value is not stated anywhere on the coin; only the name is given." The reason is that it does state its value, namely, "one dime". When the US currency system was established five units were defined: the eagle, dollar, dime, cent and mill, with each one having a value one tenth of the previous value. If one were to state that the dime does not give its value then one would also have to state that the cent doesn't either (which would also render the removed sentence inaccurate because the dime would not be unique in this respect). Nibios 17:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * According to United States dollar, "only cents are in everyday use as divisions of the dollar; "dime" is used solely as the name of the coin with the value of 10¢, while "eagle" and "mill" are largely unknown to the general public"


 * So you don't give a price as 3 dimes 6 cents, you give it as 36 cents; you don't write $2/4/3, you write it $2.43. Compare this with pre-decimalisation UK currency, where amounts were given with shillings as a genuine unit: £3, 2s and 4d was written £3/2/4; 2s and 6d was written 2/6, pronounced "two and six".


 * I'm not going to change this § back, cos I'm not that interested in this article, but it is highly unusual today to have a coin in everyday circulation without a value in the everyday currency. I'd bet even Americans learn that a "dime" (coin) is 10 cents before they learn what a "dime" (historical currency) is: to the rest of the universe it's just... odd. JackyR | Talk 22:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't see how learning that a dime=ten cents (or dime=1/10 dollar) is any different than learning that a dollar=100 cents (or dollar=10 dimes). The comparison to pre-decimal UK currency is not apt, because US currency has always been decimal. Spark240 (talk) 23:12, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It is confusing to the occasional user (like a tourist), to say the least. Why doesn't it say "10 cents"?--Oneiros (talk) 16:11, 30 May 2010 (UTC)


 * You're committing the Historian's fallacy. Back in 1792, when decimal currency was a new thing, the pronunciation of amounts hadn't been firmly established.  Why wouldn't we say "2 dollars, 3 dimes, and 4 cents"?  DanBishop (talk) 06:10, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

The comparison to Pre decimal £sterling is apt because it demonstraits a system which genuinly uses two subdivisions of its main unit of currency and the poster was pointing out that prices aren't written out as you would with Pounds Shillings and Pence, the fact that the currency wasn't decimal isn't relevent to at all (There may be a currency which is both Decimal and uses a multiple sub divisions in a De Facto way). The point is that the Dime doesn't say what its worth in cents, yet nothing is Priced in Dimes (A shop keeper wouldn't say, that'll be 7 dimes please).(92.40.140.49 (talk) 08:26, 28 August 2010 (UTC))

Why is the dime the smallest US coin?
Why is the dime the smallest US coin?

''--Historical reasons, mostly. Even in the 1790s, making a one-cent piece that contained one cent worth of silver would have been highly impractical, as the coin would have been tiny. Even the half-disme (the original US five-cent piece) was almost impractically small. When the half-dime (as it was then spelled) was phased out in 1873, the dime was the smallest-denomination precious-metal coin remaining in circulation. As silver prices rose over the years, the dime (and other US silver coinage) got marginally lighter to prevent intrinsic value from exceeding face value. In the early 1960s, with silver prices on the rise yet again, the Mint could no longer keep producing the coins (dimes, quarters, and half dollars) in their then-current form and maintain the value relationship. When "coin silver" (.900 fine) was removed from circulating US coinage in 1964 (half dollars remained silver-clad for another six years), the coins then in circulation all remained the same size so as to avoid confusion. This is why the dime has retained its historical size, and why it's historically the smallest US coin.''

''Incidentally, the one-cent piece underwent a similar transformation in 1982. Copper prices had risen to the point where the intrinsic value of a copper one-cent piece approached one cent, and the Mint decided it would be more economical to use copper-plated zinc planchets. Modern cents are less than 10 percent copper, but have retained their historical (since 1856) size and appearance. --clawson''

some mention of the 'dyme' tithe ought to be referenced here, as i believe that led to the name of the coin.


 * The article is quite clear about the origin of the name. It has nothing to do with the tithe, though the tithe and the coin likely share a common root ("one-tenth").&mdash;chris.lawson (talk) 03:29, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

From the US Mint, http://www.usmint.gov/faqs/circulating_coins/index.cfm?action=Body: Why is the one-cent coin (the penny) larger than the ten-cent coin (the dime)? What determines the sizes of our coins?

The sizes of United States coins can help you to identify each one, but have nothing to do with their value. The first U.S. five-cent coins (nickels) were made of silver, and were smaller than the ten-cent coins (dimes) in circulation today. You may be interested to know that our coinage system, to a certain extent, has grown out of custom or, in other words, out of daily use. When United States coins were first produced in 1793, our standard coin was the silver dollar. The United States Mint produced the rest of our coins (except the one-cent coin) in a proportionate metallic content to the dollar, with the sizes regulated accordingly. The half-dime (or five-cent denomination) had 1/20th the amount of silver contained in the dollar. Our 10-cent coin contained 1/10th the amount of silver, the quarter-dollar coin (the quarter) contained 1/4th the amount, and the half-dollar coin contained 1/2 the amount. Mint officials recognized the need for a larger five-cent coin because the half-dime was exactly half the size of the dime. This proved to be too small for convenient handling by the public. Adoption of the five-cent coin as we know it today occurred in 1866. The Mint increased the coin's size and changed its metallic content from silver and copper to a combination of copper and nickel.

Sholom 13:48, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I would like to note that while the dime currently is the smallest us coin in size, historically it is not. The half dime, and the silver 3 cent coins were both smaller then the contemporary dime.

65.167.146.130 (talk) 18:41, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Mass change with new composition (1965)
The passage in question:


 * This composition was selected because it gave similar mass (now 2.27 grams, the ratio to the old size is the same as the ratio of 2 lb to 1 kg, or of a short ton to a metric ton)

How it formerly appeared:


 * This composition was selected because it gave similar mass (now 2.27 grams)

I can assure you that the new mass was not chosen because it matches the ratio of a short ton to a metric ton, nor because it matches the ratio of two pounds to a kilogram. It had nothing whatsoever to do with the metric system, and everything to do with coincidence. The dime planchet of the proper thickness, made of cupro-nickel clad, just so happens to weigh 2.27 grams. The composition was chosen for its electrical properties and thickness, not its mass. That its mass is fairly close is a nice side effect (one of the reasons aluminum has never been used in U.S. coinage is its light weight, which causes serious problems in vending machines) but was not the primary reason for the compositional choice.

Unless you can cite sources that prove the above assertions wrong, the horribly awkward wording is getting reverted back to its original form.&mdash;chris.lawson (talk) 03:16, 7 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Of course it has something to do with the metric system. From 1873 through 1964, all of the U.S. dimes, 20-cent pieces, quarters and halves were, by design, worth $40.00 per kilogram.  Of course, our 5-cent nickels have been, by design, 5 grams, ever since they were introduced in 1866.  Of course, you express even those measurements not based on the metric system in metric units, to make the comparison easier.


 * With the adoption of the sandwich dimes and quarters. the U.S. mint wasn't satisfied with the two different systems they had been using in the past, troy and metric. They made these sandwich dimes and quarters worth $20.00 per avoirdupois pound.  Why that odd number, 2.27 grams?  Because that dime was by design 1/200 of a pound avoirdupois, or 0.08 oz avoirdupois.  (1/200 lb)(453.59237 g/lb) = 2.26796185 g, but coins aren't so precisely made that even the third figure is really significant.


 * The design ratio is exactly the same as the ratio of a short ton to a metric ton; it is a ratio many people are have a pretty good feel for, something fairly easy to understand. The old dimes were 10.2% heavier than the new ones, but saying that doesn't make the point as clearly as saying it's like a short ton to a metric ton..  That's not really all that similar, if you are going to use the weight of the coins as part of the validation for use in vending machines.  Gene Nygaard 05:06, 7 August 2005 (UTC)


 * As it has been nearly a year, and no reference has been provided, I removed the debated text. --cholmes75 (chit chat) 17:10, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

More pix?
OK, I'm new at this, and so this may have previously been discussed and/or discussed elsewhere. My question is: why aren't there pix of older dimes (Mercury, etc.)? -- Sholom 13:42, 7 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Good question. Im not really sure, I would assume no one either has old ones, or cant take a pic. I have a few mrecurys and barbers I can try to do pics from, if no one else does.  But last time I tried pics my sliver eagle looked gold :(   Joe I  21:13, 7 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I have some advice to anyone who might try this. Use a scanner, rather than a camera. I've had great success with using a scanner for circuit boards and I much prefer it to a camera. You can get better resolution with a scanner in most cases, too. (Unless you're one of those guys who has a $5000 digital camera and a photography studio.)--chris.lawson 04:13, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, so, the main answer is that if pix are available, there's no problem putting pix of older coins on all these coin pages -- at least that's how I'm understanding this. -- Sholom 04:19, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I learned the scanner trick a couple weeks ago :). Anyways, no problem with the old pics.  Please don't clutter the page, and check to see if the seris coin has it's own page, such as United States Seated Liberty coinage, mercury and barbers should have thier own page as well, but don't.  But this article sure could use some pics.  :)   Joe I  04:23, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, so I found a Mercury Dime image on a US Mint Page, uploaded it to commons (but it has the file name as the name -- can I rename it), and then linked to it here. Success.  (But it took too much work! ;) ) Sholom 14:16, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * And I messed up. I accidentally uploaded another obverse image to the reverse image name.  I didn't know how to delete it.  So then I uploaded the reverse image to yet another name.  Oy! Sholom 14:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm sure you can rename it between the download and upload, or on the upload, not sure. If you can/do, please make it something recognizable, like 1905MerceryDimeRev or something like that.  THNX :)   Joe I  21:42, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * The question is: now that it's already there, how do I rename it? Or delete it and start again? -- Sholom 21:50, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Damn, lots of colons, hehe. Anyways, Im pretty sure can't remane once it's on the servers, have to reupload.   Joe I  22:30, 8 February 2006 (UTC).

Failed GA
I failed this article for WP:GA for several reasons


 * Lack of references
 * Nothing much in content, like importance, etc, only explains it's history
 * Should the List of designs section go on the bottom?

Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 21:52, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I've addressed the issues. Have another look?   Jo  e  I  07:41, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Roosevelt section
I cleaned up the text in this section a bit. One of the things I did was remove the bit about Roosevelt being afflicted with polio, as this apparently was an incorrect diagnosis. --cholmes75 (chit chat) 16:37, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

US not first with decimal coinage?
OK, I'll bite. Who was first to decimalise their coinage?--chris.lawson 00:43, 22 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Decimalisation --Chochopk 03:02, 22 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I read that about five minutes after I posted the query here. Thanks. :) --chris.lawson 03:20, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Image request
If anyone can find a picture of the Roosevelt bust designed by Selma Burke, I think it would be a great addition to the article. --cholmes75 (chit chat) 14:49, 22 July 2006 (UTC)


 * The original plaque is still in the Recorder of Deeds Building at 515 D Street, NW, in Washington, DC. Perhaps a DC-area Wikipedian with a digicam could be convinced to stop by and photograph it. Don't we have a page somewhere for this sort of thing? (If not, we should.)--chris.lawson 16:10, 22 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I will keep an eye here. I'm waiting for a date for tax court in DC, if we don't have a pic by the time I go, I'll stop by and snap off a real good one. Bobby 19:55, 22 July 2006 (UTC)


 * The requested Image has been added by someone. Wikidenizen 19:12, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Mercury dime
Regarding the passage - "Although most commonly referred to as the "Mercury" dime, the coin does not depict the Roman messenger god, nor does it contain any mercury."

I have never heard of anyone thinking that the dime contained mercury, which is why I removed the text in the first place. Are there any references available that indicate that this was actually an issue? --cholmes75 (chit chat) 20:00, 22 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I've personally been asked a few times by non-numismatists if it did include any mercury. It's not really hurting anything, I don't think.--chris.lawson 22:18, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. When this does get put for review as a Featured Article, I was just thinking that they might ask that very question.  --cholmes75 (chit chat) 22:35, 22 July 2006 (UTC)


 * As a "non-numismatist(?)" I wondered that very thing, so I'm glad I read it here. I think it's also interesting how some of my foreign friends have been confused as to the coin's value, since it says nowhere on its face or back "10 cents".--Jd147703 15:16, 1 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I think what would be interesting to include (although it might be tough to research and/or verify) is how long the "Mercury" dime remained in common circulation after the Roosevelt dime began to be minted? I'm sure there was an overlap of at least several years in which both the Mercury and Roosevelt dimes were in circulation. Briguy52748 12:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)]]


 * I'm going to add to the article the point, mentioned above, about the coin not showing it's value. I'm glad I'm not the only one to have noticed this: as a Brit who's travelled in more countries than I can remember right now, this is the only piece of currency I've ever handled (yuan included) that didn't show its value - I had to ask the guy at the till what it was. JackyR | Talk 19:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Mercury dimes weren't hard to find in pocket change right up to the late 60's when all silver coins disappeared from circulation. Nibios (talk) 02:14, 8 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I can understand how this would be unclear to foreigners, but to us Americans it's a non-issue because "one dime" has been used here to mean "ten cents" for far long than any of us have been alive. In fact, the dime does have its value marked: it's defined by US law that "dime" is the term for a 10 cent coin. When US currency was created, it was given 4 base units. The cent, the dime, the dollar, and the eagle (10 dollars). The eagle is now defunct, but the rest remain intact. Think of it like with British pre-decimal currency: everybody over there knew that a shilling was equal to 12 pence, so there was no need to mark a shilling coin with anything other than "one shilling". 75.76.213.106 (talk) 08:52, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Collaboration
Dime is the Numismatic Collaboration for the month of August. This article is very close to FA, with only a few minor technical things to be fixed(I believe). You can find a peer review here. Jo e  I  11:57, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Good article review
I'm currently (at this moment) reviewing the dime article for a good article status. There are some issues with the lead section (see WP:Lead section) as well as some other minor details that need to be changed. I am currently working to fix these issues (as a reviewer, I am allowed to make non-significant contributions to the article). --Kurt 00:22, 30 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I rewrote the lead section of the basis of WP:Lead section which states "The lead should be capable of standing alone as a concise overview of the article", and also added some silver dime date freeze info as well. The article is well written and well referenced but the General History is section is a bit repetitive. I can see that it was somewhat intended to do what a lead section is supposed to do.  The only thing IMO that is preventing this article from being a good article is what to do about the General history section.  I will post this on the Numismatics talk page as well. --Kurt 05:42, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Failed again, issues not resolved. Rlevse 19:53, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Can you please elaborate on these issues. List them out, so they can be addressed and crossed out as they're worked on. And with all the particapation we have on this page, could you please allow us a week lead time, to fix these issues.  Most GA nominees(especially long ones) are placed on hold for curtesy reasons, and really trying to improve this page instead of just shooting it down, which has happened twice now.  We would appreciate it, and we will work on any and all issues.   Jo  e  I  23:21, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I came here to edit
because I thought that I saw that this was a serious article and I thought I might have a couple of small points to add. Oaky, I added them, but, you got to be kidding! There are sentences in here with 3 and another with 4 footnotes or references or WHATEVER - -  for one sentence. What sort of BS is that? If anyone wants this article to be seriously considered for anything except for printing and recycling through the outhouse, those footnotes have to be. . . . slashed and burned. The preceeding is a drunken opinion by  Carptrash 06:44, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Fixed the one sentence with four refs(moved two to another sentence). I don't three viable refs on one sentence is to much.  Thanks for your edits tho.   Jo  e  I  16:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Nice work all!
It seems the Featured Article reviewers have seen fit to promote this article, which makes the rejections by the Good Article reviewers that much more baffling. Anyway, congrats to all who helped! --cholmes75 (chit chat) 14:20, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The article was top notch for a long time. I'm just glad it's all over with minimum fuss. Thanks for all your help. :)   Jo  e  I  05:40, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

COST?
I cant find the cost of production

Immcarle163 (talk) 00:12, 15 January 2021 (UTC) How would you go about finding the cost?

Obverse
Ten points to whoever edited that in. A lot more professional than "the front side" or worse, "the top". Paul Haymon 00:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

FDR
The term "former president" generally is reserved for living ex-presidents, and is not necessary or usual in the case of someone like FDR, who is an internationally known figure in history and who has been deceased for more than 60 years. One would not say "former President Abraham Lincoln" is on the penney, and even in the case of JFK, who was much more recent, one would not refer to "former President Kennedy" being on the half-dollar. Sca 03:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Motto E pluribus unum
I was bold and included a link to the motto E pluribus unum including some text (since I at first had no idea what it meant and why it was on the reverse).

Since I put it at the end of the first paragraph I am not sure this is a suitable location - perhaps this should be in a section of its own? Has there been many mottos (is it mottos in plural?) or always this one?

Perhaps the motto should be in the info-box? I know many coins have mottos and perhaps they need links to mottos aswell. // PER9000 07:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

"Brother, Can You Spare a Dime?"
No one's going to mention this famous Depression-era song? Brutannica 18:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Table of design history
The article for the Canadian dime has a nice table summarizing the changes made to the coin's composition and size. Perhaps the list of designs that appears in this article could be expanded into a similar table? 153.104.209.224 00:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, I know this is topic necromancy. I came to ask if someone could provide the history of composition and mass for the various changes in design, and found the comment above. I've just checked the Canadian dime article's table, and I must agree that such a table, showing the designs, dimensions, masses, and compositions through the years would be a welcome addition here. Indeed, it would be a welcome edition to all articles about coins that have gone through similar changes over the years. Joe Avins (talk) 13:59, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Fat German mistress
When I read that description for the model of the "Capped Bust" dime I was SURE that was vandalism. Then I checked the reference. It isn't. Startling. Bigmac31 21:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

If you had a project wat will you do it on pennies or dimes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.105.227.157 (talk) 02:35, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Seated Liberty Design Varieties
This section was modified to provide more information regarding two significant varieties in this design: the Small Date and the Large Date, both minted on the No Stars variety in 1837. Surprisingly, there is extreamly limited information, anywhere, on just exactly distinguishes the Small Date from the Large Date on the 1837 Seated Liberty (No Stars) Dime. The included text provides a description, and will allow the reader to determine a Large Date from a Small Date. Parenthetically, both the Philadelphea Mint and the New Orleans Mint produced this dime, but only the Philadelpha Mind made both date varieties, and so a minor mention is made about this as well. The source is cited; it is the clearest picture of what a Small Date and a Large Date looked like. Oddly enough, not even the Red Book of US Coins (Yeoman) includes this information. Thus, Wikipedia represents the most informative source on this subject, as of March 2008.

Do not revert. Reversion will cause loss of highly significant information.

1996-W dime
I have added refs to the sentences on the 1996 West Point dime. I have rewritten and removed this clause: they are not particularly scarce. To me this does not seem NPOV. - Thanks, Hoshie 05:22, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

CoinSite links
All repaired. Collect (talk) 13:10, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Bullet list
That huge list at the bottom of the article looks... um... ugly. What are the conventions pertaining to this? Should we change it to a table? Leon math (talk) 00:19, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I've hated that list and others like it for a long time. If you would like to take a stab at making it presentable, please go for it. I'm sure anything would be better.   Joe   I  06:21, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


 * could I suggest a separate article pertaining to mintage figures on all coins? The US Quarter page has this type of list too, so this may not be an isolated event.  Penguinflag (talk) 09:55, 13 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree, the list is awful and should be be split off. Tempshill (talk) 19:58, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * It'd certainly look prettier as a table, but I'm not sure it's appropriate for the article regardless - it's just too detailed. Drop it on wikisource somewhere? A graph of mintings over time might be interesting, though, as an illustration... Shimgray | talk | 20:05, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

FA?
Ugh, what a mess. Nearly every other paragraph is unsourced, there are maybe 17 cites overall, half to the seemingly unreliable coinsite.com. Furthermore, I'm seeing maintenance tags and at least one external link within the text of the article (under "Seated Liberty (1837–1891)"). Does anyone wanna take this one to FAR? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 02:27, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Mintage figures
Is this section really necessary? More than half the article is a list of data taken directly from a single site. That might be worthy of a link, but I don't see a need for complete inclusion. The nickel article has the same issue. (Several Canadian coin articles include mintage figures, but only for commemorative editions and in tables with more information.) Kanhef (talk) 04:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Cleaned up the article
I cleaned up the article and removed some of the repitive information. RHM22 (talk) 18:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I also did a little clean-up. I changed the sentence "Dimes from 1965 to the present are composed of 75 percent copper and 25 percent nickel". to "Dimes from 1965 to the present are composed of outer layers of 75 percent copper and 25 percent nickel, bonded to a pure copper core."Almostfm (talk) 08:07, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Misleading Sentence Placement
The inclusion of this sentence: "2009 saw the lowest dime production since 1955 with just 146,000,000 dimes being made," at the end of the paragraph talking about the campaigns to have Ronald Reagan's image put on the dime seems odd, and it could be misleading to some people. First of all, it's not relevant to the rest of the information in the paragraph. What does low dime production have to do with the campaign to put Reagan on the dime? Second, the sentence's inclusion in this paragraph could seem to imply to some readers that these two unrelated facts are somehow related--that since the campaign to put Reagan on the dime eventually failed, that has resulted in low dime production--but there's no evidence anywhere to support that. I suggest moving this sentence to a different, more appropriate paragraph. 150.108.160.61 (talk) 02:12, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Capped Bust
The article claims that the Capped Bust dime is "the only dime minted with an explicit indication of its value", since all subsequent dimes have been marked "ONE DIME". But this isn't accurate because "one dime" is the value. "Dime" is the official term for 1/10 of a US dollar, just like "cent" is the official term for 1/100 of a dollar. 24.214.230.66 (talk) 06:32, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

United States Coin? huh?
So no other countries use the term "dime" for a coin with a vwlue of 1/10 of a dollar? Where are the articles for those other denominations? Where are the disambiguation links?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dime  Bobby  I'm Here, Are You There? 03:51, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Good to see you! There is the Canadian dime, but I would have no objection to a move to ... dime.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:18, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Would like to move the Roosevelt section to its own page
I'd like to move the Roosevelt dime section to its own page. If the Mercury dime, Washington quarter, and others have their own page, there's no reason that the Roosevelt dime should be its own thing as well. Objections?

Selma Burke "controversy"
Under the heading "Franklin D. Roosevelt (1946–present)", it states "Another controversy surrounding Sinnock's design involves his image of Roosevelt. Soon after the coin's release, it was claimed that Sinnock borrowed his design of Roosevelt from a bas relief created by African American sculptor Selma Burke, unveiled at the Recorder of Deeds Building in Washington, D.C. in September 1945. Sinnock denied this, claiming that he simply utilized his earlier design on the Roosevelt medal." There are a few problems with this. First is the undue weight it places upon a claimed controversy for which there is one rather weak source provided (and one that cannot be examined in context unless one happens to own or obtain a copy of a magazine issue from 8 years ago). Where are the contemporaneous mentions of this "controversy"? The second problem is the claim itself, and third is the way it states that Sinnock responded to it, using the phrase "Sinnock... claimed that he simply utilized his earlier design..." "Claiming" something implies uncertainty about something being factual (e.g., Bill Clinton claimed that he did not have sex with Monica Lewinsky). Sinnock's portrait of Roosevelt for the Presidential Medal and for the dime are far more similar to each other than to Burke's portrait. Both of Sinnock's designs differ from Burke's in the shape of the forehead, nose, eyes, lips and hair and are as different from hers as is possible from two different bas relief portraits in profile, of the same person at the same age. Since the onus is upon the editor who is making the assertion of a "controversy" from 70 years ago, I think we need to see more than just one source from 2006. If that can't be provided, the paragraph should be significantly edited down. Either way, Sinnock's response should be stated without violating WP:NPOV. Occam&#39;s Shaver (talk) 00:27, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

2014 dime


This page seems to have the 2013 dime as its obverse image. Why hasn't it been replaced with the new design created by the US mint? I uploaded the 2014 dime to add to this page if anyone feels inclined to update the current image. Replaceinkcartridges (talk) 03:40, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dime (United States coin). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130618083824/http://www.usmint.gov/faqs/circulating_coins/index.cfm?flash=yes&action=faq_circulating_coin to http://www.usmint.gov/faqs/circulating_coins/index.cfm?flash=yes&action=faq_circulating_coin
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060820055606/http://www.usmint.gov/faqs/circulating_coins/index.cfm?action=Body to http://www.usmint.gov/faqs/circulating_coins/index.cfm?action=Body

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:56, 10 September 2017 (UTC)