Talk:Double Eagle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of the WikiProject Numismatics, which is an attempt to facilitate the categorization and creation of accurate and formal Numismatism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join and see a list of open tasks to help with.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Merge St. Gaudens Double Eagle into Double Eagle 2 Citation for 1933's for display 3 Merge Suggested Part 2 4 How much does a Double Eagle Weigh?

[edit] Merge St. Gaudens Double Eagle into Double Eagle

Seems like two articles describing the same coin. I believe there is a Liberty Double Eagle (1877-1907) and a St. Gaudens Double Eagle (1907-1933). However, I doubt that two (or three) articles are required to describe Double Eagles. nirvana2013 11:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't agree. We have individual articles for different designs of other US coinage, for example, Lincoln cent or Susan B. Anthony Dollar. I see no reason to merge.--Wehwalt 19:08, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

It seems the St. Gaudens Double Eagle has suffecient info to warrent an article on it's own, and being the highest priced and one of the most well known coins around doesn't hurt. Joe I 19:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Alternatively, Double Eagle could become a disambiguation page linking to Liberty Double Eagle and St. Gaudens Double Eagle articles. nirvana2013 12:56, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Damnit, ther's also 1933 Double Eagle, shouldn't that be merged with St. Gaudens Double Eagle, unless I'm missing something. But yes, if no merge, definatly a disambiguation page. Joe I 00:00, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

from the article: "…There are other extremely rare types of St. Gaudens double eagles, minted in 1907."

Still think both articles are about the same coin "design" the St. Gaudens Double Eagle. That article has info about the designer. The 1933 Double Eagle article describes the high auction price and history of that "individual" series of the same St. Gaudens Double Eagle. Suggest changing this article into the disambiguation page (and delete the awkward and mis-capitalized Double eagle (disambiguation) - and also include the link to the Liberty Double Eagle. P.S. The 1933 Double Eagle article is interesting, nearly a Featured article canidate. —dogears (talk • contribs) 04:39, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citation for 1933's for display

Hmmm... I don't know that the mint ever actually "said" that they intended to save the coins for display, but this photo was taken in Atlanta in April at the ANA show. So it would seem their display is a result, but maybe not an intention. Bobby ^{I'm Here, Are You There?} 01:58, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge Suggested Part 2

I've put these two up for merge again because it seems like the information is duplicated in both articles. Although St. Gaudens Double Eagle only deals with the St. Gaudens coins, Double Eagle is for all double eagles, and the information available there on the St. Gaudens' era coins is considerably less. I know this argument was shot down before, and I'd like to suggest an alternative. Make Double Eagle a disambig page with minimal info and consolidate the info about each era (Liberty Head and St. Gaudens) into their own articles.-MBK004 21:32, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

How is it handled with other denominations of coinage? I think we have too much specific info in this article to merge well into Double Eagle. In addition, as I pointed out in the original debate, Lincoln cent and many other specific types of coinage have their own articles, as do specific denominations. I just don't see that it would be worth doing.--Wehwalt 21:37, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

If there is too much specific info, then wouldn't Double Eagle have not enough specific information? What about the pre-St. Gaudens Double Eagles, they deserve their own article, don't they? I agree that there does exist a large amount of information, but between these two and 1933 Double Eagle, there seems to be information repeated several times over when it really doesn't need to be because of the interwiki linking we use. You're right, many specific types of coins have their own articles, along with the denominations, but in this case, there is a visible gap in the amount of information available for the earlier double eagles compared to the later (St. Gaudens). I started this merge suggestion as a way to provoke discussion on ways of rectifying this. I would be perfectly content to see the articles remain separate. I'm just asking for opinions and ways to improve the articles.-MBK004 21:42, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I think a better answer is improving the Double Eagle article, for example, putting in the reasons for starting to coin the denomination (territorial gold, other California gold interests), fictional references. And there should probably be an article on Liberty Double Eagle, as you said.--Wehwalt 11:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree with Wehwalt. A merge is not the appropriate action here. Caerwine Caer’s whines 16:28, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] How much does a Double Eagle Weigh?

This coin wasmoney and made in a time when the weight of gold money, and its purity was absolutely vital. Debts were denominated in gold by weight. So, how much did a double eagle weigh and how pure was it?

This article also needs a lot of cleaning up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.111.71.197 (talk) 20:42, 26 November 2007 (UTC)