Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Topcat7, post: 2255733, member: 73372&quot;]Thank-you ALL (Steve, A.N., T.I.F., Val.), for your contributions. You have confirmed that there is no &#039;Industry Standard&#039; style of &#039;referencing&#039; a coin.</p><p><br /></p><p>A.N. - I <u>appreciate</u> that Ardatirion may have given a wonderful explanation of this, but without a link (or reference) what can I do?</p><p><br /></p><p>T.I.F. - I checked CNG and they rely heavily on a description and the &#039;reference&#039; comes almost as an afterthought, at the end.</p><p>I checked your reference to an offering by Ardatirion, and, hopefully, it is the one that A.N. was referring to. Again, more than I was looking for (unfortunately).</p><p><br /></p><p>Steve. - I do put (most of) that information into my &#039;spreadsheet&#039;, already. It is nice to know that I am on the same wavelength a another in that regard. I am looking to reference the photographs, and the 2x2s.</p><p><br /></p><p>Val. - That is more like what I was talking about. Your &#039;preference&#039; is the same as I am coming across in other places, (Wildwinds etc.). Unlike some other collectors, the &#039;quality&#039; of my collection just isn&#039;t there, so my collection is unlikely to ever be seen by anyone apart from me. Therefore, by adopting a &#039;shorthand&#039; form of &#039;reference&#039; and allowing me, (or anyone else) to look that reference up elsewhere (RIC, Wildwinds, Acsearch etc.) when interested, would suffice for my requirements, and involve less writing than a full-blown description.</p><p><br /></p><p>Again, thank you all.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in