Talk:Penny (New Zealand pre-decimal coin)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton talk 17:13, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that a 1930s design for the New Zealand penny depicted a rugby player? Source: https://www.britnumsoc.org/publications/Digital%20BNJ/pdfs/2011_BNJ_81_8.pdf, pg. 208-209
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Leo Bagrow

Created by Generalissima (talk). Self-nominated at 18:55, 12 November 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Penny (New Zealand pre-decimal coin); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Really cool article and interesting hook. Sohom (talk) 20:32, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

@Sohom Datta and Generalissima: I am not sure our article states the hook fact, in particular the bit about 1930s. I think 1930s is mentioned in the proceeding paragraph but it needs to be together. From DYKCRIT in a nutshell The hook fact should be cited in the article, no later than the end of the sentence it appears in. We should put the hook together in a sentence followed by the citation in our article? Bruxton (talk) 19:01, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

@Generalissima and Bruxton: I wonder if we can just reword the hook ? Something like:

ALT0a ... that a design for the 1930s New Zealand penny depicted a rugby player?

would satisfy DYKCRIT (and was actually how I interpreted the hook). That being said, I will keep DYKCRIT's nutshell's strict wording in mind for future reviews. Sohom (talk) 19:29, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

I would support this hook change, it's more clearly stated than my original suggestion anyhow. Generalissima (talk) 19:30, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

@Sohom Datta and Generalissima: I would like to see the hook stated and cited in the article. As it is a reader has to search for the hook facts which are not connected in our article. Bruxton (talk) 21:22, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

@Bruxton: The hook is already stated and cited in the article. Generalissima (talk) 21:32, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

@Bruxton: It is definitely cited and in the article.

Francis Shurrock, a local sculptor and art teacher, submitted multiple designs. One penny design showed a Māori tekoteko figurine[b], with the other featuring a fern and a triumphant rugby player holding a ball.[4]

and if you specifically want the fact that the coin was released in the 1930s

High Commissioner Bill Jordan approved the design in June 1939, and the coin entered production.[4]

My understanding of DYKCRIT is that the exact wording does not have to be used. However the fact mentioned must be present. Sohom (talk) 21:34, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the messages. For such a short hook I should not have piece together hook facts from different areas of the article. I will leave this to another promotor. Bruxton (talk) 21:51, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

@Sohom Datta and Generalissima: I am sorry that the nomination has been idle almost a month without action so I will promote the hook and leave notes for the promoting administrator:

In the Design and introduction section 1938 is mentioned as the year a committee was formed to accept designs.

In the Design proposals section the 2nd paragraph contains the Rugby design fact,

in the fourth paragraph of that section is the 1939 design approval.

Note to admin: Earwig is not working for me today. Bruxton (talk) 17:12, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Penny (New Zealand pre-decimal coin)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Schminnte (talk · contribs) 01:22, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello Generalissima! I'll take this review as I have a bit of an interest in numismatics. My general method in GA reviews is to use a large list (see Talk:A-flat clarinet/GA1); please indent under each point to answer and use this section for comments on the review itself. Expect first comments within a couple of days. All the best, Schminnte ^{[talk to me]} 01:22, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Generalissima, that's my review finished now. Not much to deal with, just a few points. I'm putting the review on hold for now: due to the holidays I'll set a time limit of 10 days (until 5 January in the new year), which should be plenty of time. Thanks for this great article, was fun to review. All the best, Schminnte ^{[talk to me]} 01:06, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Comments

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):

   I feel like some important information from §Design and introduction could be included in the lede, e.g. design competition, winning design - S

   Noting the use of redlinks here: could you clarify that the biographies would be likely to meet notability standards? Also, I'm uncertain on the rather opaque link to Tokens of New Zealand. Is this an intended future project? - S

   Oh, yes. It would be specifically about pennies and halfpenny tokens which formed the primary bronze coins in circulation for much of the 19th century, so I figure it would be a useful article to eventually write. A better name might restrict it from like, gaming tokens. As for biographies, Jenkin is given a biography in a Concise Dictionary of New Zealand Artists and referenced in various histories of art in New Zealand, so I feel he is notable. Cornwall Mitchell has various coverage in the New Zealand Numismatic Journal, a short bio from the National Library of New Zealand, and is covered by the book Mitchell & Mitchell : a father & son arts legacy, published by Potton & Burton. - G

   Usual laundry list of copyedits follows:

   §Lede

   The New Zealand penny is a large one-cent bronze coin issued...: shouldn't this be "was" since the coinage is not used any more? - S

   • From what I can tell looking at coin FAs, the standard is to use present tense, since the coins still physically exist. They just are no longer tender.

   §Background

   Silver coinage might be a nice wikilink - S

   • Added!

   §Design and introduction

   In 1936 the New Zealand Numismatic Society, often serving as an advisory body to the national government on coinage issues, began...: "which often served as an advisory body" seems less awkward to me - S

   Wikilink Royal Mint for people unfamiliar with subject matter - S

   Wikilink Greenstone - S

   Per MOS:LANG, for accessibility please use {{lang}} for italicising foreign terms - S

   • Made changes as requested.

   §Mintage and production

   Wikilink decimalisation to this subsection - S

   • Done!

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   All sources used appear to be RSes - S

   Please use sfn or rp for journal articles to aid verifiability - S

   There are still some journal articles and books with large page ranges that could be more specific, Hargreaves (1972) would benefit from the sfn treatment as well - S

   Fixed. - G

   Could "Mar 2003" be made "March 2003", or is this on purpose? - S

   Fixed - G

   A few citation parameters appear to be missing from book cites: (not GACR, but for uniformity this would be good):

   Familton & McLintock (1966) is missing a title link, publisher, and place (OCLC 1014037525). An author link for McLintock might also be nice - S

   Hargreaves (1972) would benefit from a link to John McIndoe (printer) - S

   John McIndoe died in the 1910s; his publishing house which presumably published Beads and Banknotes would just be a red link. - G

   My bad, the printer around that time would be the son, John McIndoe (artist) - S

   Cuhaj (2014) needs an ISBN, publisher, and place (OCLC 848049219) - S

   Infobox statements that don't appear in text trouble me. Per MOS:INFOBOXREF, please consider including these (with references) in text or at least add references to the infobox - S

   Fixed. - G

   References are needed in the footnotes please - S

   Ope, fixed. - G

   Earwig's flags no copyvios - S

   Source spotchecks (half of the eight sources):

   Ref 1 (Ken 2003) is a pass for copyvio and verifiability - S

   Ref 2 (Familton & McLintock 1966) is a pass for copyvio and verifiability - S

   Ref 5 (Stocker 1998) is a pass for copyvio and verifiability - S

   Ref 6 (Stocker 2010) is a pass for copyvio and verifiability - S

   I'm gonna go through and fix the citation style. Generalissima (talk) 05:13, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   I was concerned when I saw that the only comparable existing GA (Penny (British decimal coin)) was twice the size, but after looking at the comparable availability of references and my own search for other sources I am satisfied in its usage of all major sources. I will assess coverage based on these sources during spotchecks. Update: I'm satisfied with the level of coverage after spotchecks - S

   Article remains focussed on the topic throughout - S

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Seems to represent all viewpoints fairly, not much coin drama to balance anyway. This is fine - S

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Clean page history, no edit warring visible - S

6. 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):

   All images tagged with appropriate licenses, verification shows that these are all correct. I took the liberty to add a more specific source to the 1940 proofs - S

   Images are pertinent to subject matter and use appropriate captions. Alt text is a nice bonus for accessibility - S

7. Overall: A nice article with not much to correct until it meets the criteria fully - S

   Pass/Fail:

   • @Schminnte: I made all the changes that were suggested. :3 Generalissima (talk) 07:12, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
     • @Generalissima, I've struck points I feel are fine now. There are still some unaddressed points in sections 1 & 2. Schminnte ^{[talk to me]} 14:50, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
       • @Schminnte: I think I have addressed these now. Generalissima (talk) 16:50, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
         • @Generalissima, replied to one, just the points in criterion one about the lede and redlinks now. Schminnte ^{[talk to me]} 16:57, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
           • Ope, forgot that one. Responded! @Schminnte: Generalissima (talk) 17:10, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
             • I'm happy with this now. Happy holiday, and congratulations! Schminnte ^{[talk to me]} 17:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.