Connecticut Tercentenary half dollar is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Numismatics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of numismatics and currencies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NumismaticsWikipedia:WikiProject NumismaticsTemplate:WikiProject Numismaticsnumismatic
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts
I grouped the images of the stamp and quarter since they are both other uses of the tree. But now I'm questioning if either of these images should be included if they are not mentioned in the article's prose. @Wehwalt: Thoughts? Wonderful work on this article expansion! ---Another Believer(Talk)03:36, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I could probably add something in the design section on each, if you think that would be better than cutting the images. Thanks for your work as well.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:07, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi User:Wehwalt, I'm back and translating this article to Chinese now, but can't understand this part, "Kreis's design was a Public Works Administration project", why? I already translated over fifty articles about US coins, never hear anything similiar, why would Kreis' design to be a public works administration project, because sculptor have some special identity, or private project can't have a theme on eagle or that tree?--Jarodalien (talk) 06:52, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It is good to see you back, Jarodalien. I hope you are doing well and staying safe. I just looked at the sources and did some quick research. I don't have an explanation as to why they let it be a PWA project but it was certainly known very early on, as David Bullowa says in his 1938 work on commemoratives, "It is interesting that although the Act specifically states that the Government shall not pay for the expenses of the designing of the models, it did finance this as a Public Works Administration project." Kreis was involved in other PWA projects, such as his friezes for the Bronx Central Post Office. My guess is it was a case of the left hand of government not knowing what the right hand is doing, in good faith, with the pieces put together after the fact, possibly by Bullowa. Bowers' book, on which the statement in the article is based, is available online, with the relevant part here. I'm not aware of any restriction on the use of an eagle by private sculptors; for example the Stone Mountain Memorial half dollar, or of the oak.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:46, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am well, hope you and your families too. So the best guess is: the sculptor was hired by federal goverment for other project that time and get payed, so all his work at same time regardless his intention, should consider as goverment property?--Jarodalien (talk) 14:26, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Very well, thanks and hope the same of your families. The major expense for any commemorative was hiring an artist to design the coin. By today's money, it would have been in the range of $10,000. The government did not want to get stuck with the bill. So for most commemorative coin authorizing legislation, there was language saying that this wasn't the government's responsibility. The WPA, a federal government program that did a lot of artwork to keep artists employed in the Depression, paid for this. The purpose was to keep an artist like Kreis from starving, not to pay expenses at the Mint, but it was still paid for by federal tax dollars and so was a violation of the statute. So the government was paying the bill when it should not have. It does not look like anyone intended to break the law, but I'd be curious, once things are open here, to know if the Connecticut State Archives have any relevant documents. Commemorative coins are often badly or minimally researched.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:46, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Very good. There are still about ten classic commemoratives still to be really written, they are mostly the complicated, multi-year issues. I hope to finish this year though.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:34, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
