Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/First strike (coinage)

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. After a substantial rewrite of the article, the early "delete"s probably don't apply any more. The article in its new form would need a new AfD if that is still desired. Sandstein 18:36, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

First strike (coinage)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

First strike (coinage) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Besides the tags (no sources, original research), most of the article states what "First Strike" is not, rather than what it is. Ultimately, the definition comes down to what the two major coin grading companies (PCGS and NGC) decide for their own labeling purposes. With no consistent definition or notability on its own, "First Strike" should just be mentioned as a service description on each company's article. HalJor (talk) 03:16, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 04:08, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or merge to Coin grading. The fact that the US Mint has to issue a press notice about the term[1] shows that it is in widespread use, regardless of how nebulous the definition is. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:28, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Clarityfiend: What sources would you base a keep or merge on? The article has none at all, and that press statement is not sufficient basis for an article. Not all terms merit coverage in an encyclopedia, even if they are supposedly in widespread use.----Pontificalibus 12:00, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

*Selective Merge to Coin grading. 1 might be an RS, but it's just information about a lawsuit over the usage of this term. There's also the government press release Clarityfiend found. A very short section at the Coin grading article explaining that there is no strictly defined "First stike" grade, and that the grade has been disputed, would explain the usage of the term to readers. Hog Farm (talk) 15:10, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note re
Third party grading where designation is done, rather than coin grading which can be applied to uncertified coins as well. HalJor (talk) 16:10, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply
]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:07, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would keep or merge in some form. It's a term that occurs out in the world enough that someone might want to know what it means. BD2412 T 12:45, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, but wikipedia is not a dictionary. buidhe 15:20, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    There is already substantial material in the article that goes beyond a dictionary definition. That said, I have no objection (as already reflected in my !vote) to merging this somewhere rather than maintaining a separate article. BD2412 T 00:50, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or merge to Coin grading, As a long time coin collector I know that these coins are usually the highest relief, and the finest examples. They command a premium. The term is easily researched. It is a service to our readers that we keep the entry. Lightburst (talk) 19:39, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: I'm a collector as well, and that these "are usually the highest relief, and the finest examples" is false, or at least is not inherent in the "First Strike" designation. There are examples which grade lower than those without the designation, and if you removed these coins from the slab, you would not be able to discern the difference as far as "First Strike" is concerned. HalJor (talk) 21:32, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: @Pontificalibus, BD2412, Buidhe, Clarityfiend, Hog Farm, HalJor, My very best wishes, and BD2412: Please take another look at the article. I have made some improvements and hopefully brought it up to encyclopedic level. I believe it merits a stand alone - and there is more research to be found. Lightburst (talk) 20:57, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 20:59, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Changing vote to Keep per User:Lightburst. Additions and rewrite provide enough for a reasonably sourced, GNG-passing stub. Hog Farm (talk) 21:13, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Lightburst: That’s definitely an improvement to the article, but it is still totally US-centric. So much so that it could be merged to United States Mint because it’s all about how they designate their output. If this was a section within the US mint article I don’t think anyone would argue it ought to be split to a new article. Any reliable sources discussing the term in relation to other mints? ---Pontificalibus 21:21, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Pontificalibus It is actually marketing. Clever marketing. And the lawsuit likely helps make a case for a separate article no? I will look for other mints using the term. Lightburst (talk) 21:32, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Pontificalibus It's marketing by third-party graders that are US-based, and has nothing to do with the US Mint, nor coin grading in general. The article is improved, but I still question whether it warrants its own article or should redirect to Third-party grading even though some of those graders don't offer the service. HalJor (talk) 21:36, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agree it is a 3rd party grader marketing strategy: HalJor The question is whether the marketing strategy is notable. Several other companies use the strategy as well. But perhaps it merits a stand alone. I will wait to hear from some other participants. I actually changed my own hypothesis while researching the term. And was surprised to learn it is some sales strategy. Thankfully in my own collecting I did not seek out coins with this designation. I would also say that perhaps it is a service to our readers that that can easily find this topic and know the reality of what a First Strike is before purchasing. Lightburst (talk) 21:43, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I can't argue with "it is a service to our readers", but is it encyclopedic? Side note -- it's not just US coins that get "First Strike". Here's one given to a Chinese Gold Panda [6] HalJor (talk) 23:56, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/First_strike_(coinage)&oldid=939786561"