Talk:Yuan Shikai coinage

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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 18:48, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Yuan Shikai dollar

• ... that the Republic of China produced coins featuring emperor Yuan Shikai (pictured) for decades after his demise?

• Source: https://www.jstor.org/stable/42667176 pp.313–314 https://www.jstor.org/stable/42666643 p. 149

• Reviewed: Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Oxford_(toy_company)

Created by Generalissima (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 77 past nominations.

Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 20:24, 25 August 2024 (UTC).

• I will do a full review shortly. Yue🌙 20:44, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

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:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: References were spot-checked for verification; no issues arose. I would suggest changing "emperor" to "president" though, because Yuan Shikai's tenure as the first president of the Republic is more notable than his brief stint as a pretender to the throne, hence his common description by historians and in his article as the "first Chinese president". Yue🌙 04:32, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

• I was initially going to put President, but I think the fact that a republic continued to put someone who declared himself emperor on their coinage is funny and interesting to me. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 05:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Generalissima I don't believe the article verifies that he was an emperor. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
    • AirshipJungleman29 Fixed. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 20:27, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Yuan Shikai coinage/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 23:29, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Chipmunkdavis (talk · contribs) 05:31, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Will be looking at this. "Fatman dollar" seems a bit unfair! Some design motifs are apparent as persisting to this day, although 壹圓 is in the opposite order. Very kind of Museums Victoria to release its images as it has. An initial question regarding "mainly serving as a substitute for mint marks", this reads as if it was intentional by the mints, but my interpretation of the body is that this it mostly a lucky break for numismatists. "The lower denomination coins", what denominations! Understandable the article focuses on the 1 Yuan, but if there is something more to be said for the others, I would expect to see it here. Broadly happy on the first light read to sign off on GACR 4, 5, and the aforementioned 6, will take a closer look later. CMD (talk) 05:31, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: Oops! Forgot about the other denominations entirely; added the info about them. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 20:06, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

• "dollar coins were produced by various mints across China from 1914 to 1928" should have some sort of qualifier given later exceptions, perhaps "regularly produced" or similar.
• Same mintmark comment as before.
  • Wright says this was somewhat intentional, but I added some context.
• The first sentence of "Background and creation" could use some tweaking for wider comprehension. "the domestic production of silver dollars or yuan" does not make it immediately clear what "yuan" refers to. "dubbed Dragon dollars for their design" also feels an anachronism.
  • Fixed. - G
• "the base unit" should probably be extended to "the base unit of currency" for wider comprehensibility.
  • Done. - G
• "The central mint in Tianjin", if we don't have an article on the central mint, probably worth linking just to Tianjin.
  • Okay. - G
• I made a slight tweak to "the republic's early currency", but something more is needed to make it clear that the Beiyang Government is the republic in question.
  • Okay. - G
• "By early 1914, the Ministry of Finance had reopened the central mint, but continued to use the dragon dollar design", not sure there should be a "but" here, and perhaps the wording could be further tweaked to state production restarted or similar.
  • Done. - G
• "A centrally-produced silver dollar issue entered production by the end of 1912", how so given the previous paragraph stated the central mint only reopened in 1914 and still produced dragon dollars?
  • Oops, typo. 1914. - G
• "ceased to recognize the Imperial silver dollars" requires an earlier introduction of "imperial", perhaps the first sentence of the section could be tweaked to say "imperial China"?
  • Done. - G
• The first paragraph of Design and specifications also contradicts the 1912 sentence. It's also unclear if the commemorative silver dollar was issued.
  • Fixed. - G
• "The final design" for the standard issue presumably?
  • Yep. - G
• "taken from the previous pattern issue", don't suppose there's anything that could be linked here?
  • No, but I linked pattern coin in its first appearance. - G
• "The coin's weight varies by several grains" could this be rewritten in something more plural? The weight varied by mint, or within lines, or similar.
  • Done. - G
• Was the Kuping tael also being produced by the Beiyang government in 1914?
  • Taels did continue to be a unit of trade silver by the late 19th century, but it was mainly a unit of weight; I'm not sure whether the Beiyang government actually produced physical taels or just used the predefined weight to define other coinage; I rephrased to make sure its understood as a weight anyhow. - G
• No comments on the Other denominations subsection at the moment, nice addition.

Stopping for now, but noting I am having trouble spotchecking. Are you accessing these sources offline, or could you point to one or two that can be accessed through something like TWL? CMD (talk) 05:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay! @Chipmunkdavis: About to get to this but re:spotchecking, I sadly can't help much with that, as the best books older sources on Chinese numismatics have not been digitized. :( Kann (1953) is a rare volume I had to get on interlibrary loan, while Shih is a reprint I had to purchase on Amazon. Dean, Jin, and both Wrights are accessible on TWL through JSTOR however. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 17:16, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: And I've implemented your fixes. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 17:52, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

• Might be worth duplicating the term mint mark from the lead in the body too, where "These were intended as a way to identify which mint produced a given coin" does help me. If there is more information on that practice/decision that would be nice, although not required for GA.
• The "Fatman dollar" name should similarly be in the body. Come to think of it, no mention of collecting in the body outside of the gold coins?
• The Anjing mint sentence needs attention.
• Were the Fuzhou mint's 20c pieces Yuan Shikai pieces?
• How do we know Fuzhou's coins were substandard if no identification techniques are known?
• "Although the Nationalist government halted production of the coin" in just the capital? Or elsewhere? What makes production "local", outside of Nationalist control?
• "China abruptly abandoned the silver standard in 1935, with large amounts of paper currency circulating in its place, the circulation of which halted regional production of the Yuan Shikai dollar." Something about this sentence isn't flowing for me.

Production history overall well written. Footnotes are sourced aside from the obvious CALC one. Will try to spotcheck in a bit. CMD (talk) 10:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

For spotchecks, Dean 2018 checks out, doesn't exactly have "begin" by itself out of context, but in context with the December 1914 start date it seems reasonable. I could not find the other 3 mentioned on TWL. Nonetheless, Italian Numismatic Society 2024 checks out GARC2wise for the footnote, as does NGC 2015 for its cited sentence.

One the GACR3, the only clear oddity is the lack of collecting, which is mentioned in the lead. NGC 2015 hints at a wide number of varieties. A potential other gap is when the coins left circulation, but the replacement coins are mentioned so the topic seems broached. Good if something more could be added, but not critical. CMD (talk) 12:59, 10 September 2024 (UTC)