Editorial policy

How records are made

Accuracy is valued above scale. A small, properly sourced catalogue is worth more than a large speculative one.

Source-first workflow

1
Identify sources
Locate standard catalogues, museum records, archives and specialist literature for the field before any record is written.
2
Evaluate sources
Rank each by authority, primary or secondary status, edition and coverage.
3
Build the master taxonomy
Extract the classification the sources actually use, rather than inventing one.
4
Cross-reference
Compare at least two independent sources wherever possible.
5
Record conflicts
Where authorities disagree, both readings are published with attribution.
6
Publish with status
Publish documented types or sourced museum examples with an explicit confidence level. An unverified broader type stays marked research required.

A documented museum object, not an authentication

Photograph: Hecte: Head of Omphale (obverse); Incuse Square (Cleveland Museum of Art 1916.973) — Hecte: Head of Omphale (obverse); Incuse Square (Cleveland Museum of Art 1916.973)
387–326 BCE
Cleveland Museum of Art · CC0 1.0 (public domain dedication) · source

What a record’s evidence actually supports

Photographed specimen: Record and compareRetain the source object page, photograph credit, licence and caption identifying what the image shows.; Limits of the evidenceOne photographed museum object cannot establish every variant of an issue, and an institution’s metadata licence may not cover its photographs.
Type attribution: Record and compareKeep the named catalogue system, edition and exact entry locator alongside the proposed type identification.; Limits of the evidenceAn accession number is a museum identifier, not a standard catalogue number. Wider type attribution can remain research required.
Conflicting evidence: Record and comparePreserve each attributed reading and explain which date, number or classification is disputed.; Limits of the evidenceRepeated wording across sources may trace to one original account; repetition alone is not independent corroboration.
Research gap: Record and compareState the missing evidence and the question that a future source or examination needs to resolve.; Limits of the evidenceNo photograph, date or specification is invented to make an entry look complete. Confidence is separate from the number of populated fields.

Confidence levels

VerifiedSupported by authoritative primary or institutional sources.

Well documentedSupported by multiple reputable specialist catalogues or publications.

DocumentedSupported by at least one credible specialist source.

ProbableCredible evidence exists but classification is not fully established.

DisputedReliable sources disagree.

UnverifiedInsufficient reliable documentation.

An entry supported only by Tier 4 material, such as an auction-platform listing or an encyclopedia article, is shown as Probable until a museum, archive or specialist reference is linked, however detailed the listing is.

What is never invented

Catalogue numbers, mint marks and serial formats
Dates, denominations, weights and dimensions
Manufacturers, rulers and issuing authorities
Rarity, prices and auction results
References and photographs

Where evidence is missing, the record says “research required” instead of guessing.

Identification is not valuation

Identification, condition, rarity and market value are four separate things. A rare object can be inexpensive; a common one can be valuable in exceptional condition. This catalogue answers what an object is — not what it is worth.

Images

Only photographs of real objects are used. Each lists its source page, credit and stated licence. Some images await rights clearance and must not be assumed reusable; check the individual record. Machine-generated images never depict real objects.

How sources are ranked

Tier 1: Museums, national archives, central banks, mints and postal authorities — the issuers and keepers of the objects.
Tier 2: Standard printed catalogues and peer-reviewed specialist literature.
Tier 3: Established auction houses, professional grading services and specialist dealers; supplementary evidence only.
Tier 4: Community and collector knowledge, used only as a lead to be checked.

Auction and dealer listings are supplementary: they can show what an example looks like, but they never establish a date, attribution or rarity on their own.

When authorities disagree

Different catalogues sometimes give an object different numbers, dates or attributions. Both readings are kept on the record with the source of each, and the record explains the disagreement rather than choosing silently. A record in this state is marked Disputed.

Historical names and calendars

Objects stay under the authority that issued them — the Austro-Hungarian Empire, not modern Austria or Hungary. Dates are given as written on the object, including Hijri, regnal or other calendars, alongside a normalised equivalent.

See the source register

Review and revision

Submissions from collectors enter a pending queue and are never published automatically. The workflow is: submitted → reviewed → sources checked → approved → published. Records keep their revision date, and changes of attribution are recorded with the source that justified them.

Submit a correction or a missing type