Below I am compiling a list of errors--typos capable of causing confusion,
misclassifications, accidental omissions, etc.--in the Ecuadorian sections
of the Standard Catalogs or other references for Ecuadorian materials that
I have noticed or that people have pointed out to me. If you have an error
to add to the report, see the bottom of the page.
Carrión
Letort "Las Monedas del Ecuador"
1988 1 Sucre coin (KM 89) inadvertently omitted
Krause-Mishler
World Coin Catalog, 19th century
(No error reports for
this book so far)
Krause-Mishler
World Coin Catalog, 20th century
There are two "1914 FG" KM 51.3 coins listed, with different values but
no explanation. Presumably the first one is for the variety with no period
after Lima, and the second is for the variety with a period after Lima.
The 1981 1 Sucre coin (KM 78b) is listed in my copy of the 1996 catalog
with a mintage of 70000 and a value of 0.10 in VF, 0.25 in XF, and
0.50 in UNC. However, it is omitted from the 1999 edition of the catalog,
apparently accidentally. [I would like to thank DT for bringing this to
my attention.]
Pick
World Banknote Catalog, Vol. 1 specialized issues
S172--1sucre, Banco International. They say it is available as series B/A
and G/A. I've seen a number of F/A and G/A but never any B/A. This was
from the 1994 edition. Does anyone know if it's been fixed in the new edition
that just came out?
Pick
World Banknote Catalog, Vol. 2 gen. issues to 1960
#99.b in the 8th edition of this catalog has two problems. First, its date
is listed as "15.6.19566-27.4.1966". They apparently intended to write
"15.6.1956-27.4.1966". They then claim that 99.c is from "24.5.1968-2.1.1974".
I have compared numerous examples of notes that are clearly 99.b and found
them to all have old timey ink and the series is directly to the right
of the date; I have also looked at a number of 99.c notes and found them
to have thinner modern looking ink and the series is raised up and to the
right of the date. Well, my note from 1.1.1966 matches 99.c perfectly in
both of these characteristics. Apparently 99.c starts earlier than they
indicate.
#113 in the 8th edition of this catalog is a 5 sucre note, but #113 is
also used in their Vol. 3 (at least the 4th ed.) for a 1000 sucre note.
I already emailed them to tell them about the overlap but never heard back
from them.
Pick
World Banknote Catalog, Vol. 3 modern issues
#113 in the 4th edition of this catalog is a 1000 sucre note, but #113
is also used in their Vol. 2 (at least the 8th ed.) for a 5 sucre note.
I already emailed them to tell them about the overlap but never heard back
from them.
#123A. In the 4th edition they attempt to define three subvarieties of
the P123 100 sucres note based on the colors used in the serial #. However,
they don't bother to mention the color in one of the three varieties, and
mislabel it for the first two dates.
What they say:
a. Blue serial #. 8.6.1988; 21.6.1991; 11.10/1991.
b. 9.3.1992; 4.12.1992; 20.8.1993.
c. Black serial #. 21.2.1994.
What they should have said:
Blue-black serial #. 8.6.1988.
Black serial #. 21.6.1991.
Blue serial #. 11.10.1991; 9.3.1992; 4.12.1992; 20.8.1993
Black serial #. 21.2.1994; 3.4.1997
Scott
Stamp Catalogue, 1999
Four airmail stamps for the 1968 Summer Olympics (759B-E) are listed with
regular issues
See also the following
pages for related listings:
Have you found a
possible error in any of the above (or another) Ecuadorian numismatic or
philatelic reference works? If so, use the form below to report it or click
on the "email me at" link at the bottom of the page. Thanks!Please
enter the subject of your mail:
Please enter your email address (optional):
Please enter your name (optional):
What book did you find an error in?
What is the date and/or edition of the book with this error? (if applicable)
What is the error?
Have you already tried to report it to the author or publisher? If
so, what was their response, if any?
