The coins devices particularly the reverse was full of dirt and grime which detracted, but the colour was as per the pics.

Thanks for the explanations WT and Triggers.

Growing pains, or is it just me?

The way I'm used to transferring images from my folders to a thread is to copy the forum linking code URL and paste it into the relevant message. Presto, image appears and all is good. My latest attempt to do this resulted in a link being created in the message, not the image. I guess it all gets there in the end, click on the link and you're taken to the photo in my folder. I'd rather the photo appear in the message though. 

Thanks Basil. The cost including postage was $16, so just a little gamble.

I didn't know if I should start a new topic or post it here. This recent 1920 penny dot above bottom scroll Indian obverse ebay find from Europe, definitely has a feel of underweight or thin planchet to it but I have no means to weigh it these days. Maybe a thinnish planchet could explain the poor strike up of rim denticles.

The coin was remarkably grubby with most of the reverse devices filled with gunk while the obverse was just as remarkably clear. The obverse does have fresh scrapes to the high points as if it had been slid along the concrete, but the fields for both reverse and obverse display little or no sign of circulation. It could easily have spent 106 years bouncing around in a car's ash tray.

After a five-day soak in olive oil the gunk was easily removed with a fine wooden probe giving a surprising result. Who knows, could it be a fake?

https://www.australian-coins.net/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=22204

https://www.australian-coins.net/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=22202

 

Thank You Krash 

Yeah, that's it, unapproved. The size of my pic was 1260 x 945. file size was 331KB

Is there a new trick to uploading, or size limit when uploading photos to coin folders. A notation of unallowed or something like that appears at the bottom of the pic and nothing much else happens. I'm using the same sized files as previous.   

Quote from: gweidion on October 07, 2026, 11:36:40 PMNot well versed on British coinage. What was the planchet supposed to be?

It should have been a 2P copper coin but looks as though it was minted on a 5P cupro-nickel planchet instead.

Yes, Steve. I acquired the coin back around 2008-2009, a while ago now. The coin weighed 5.6g which is close to that of a 5P planchet at 5.65g. The diameter was 24mm-25mm. I have seen other 2P coins on the net where they were minted on foreign planchets, maybe South African, but well centered. I remember seeing another well centered one at VP coins a few years back when they still had a shop front. 

Not sure if I posted this before. A 2p on cupro nickel planchet.

Post deleted

Sorry, it was a MS66. $2318 including commission.

You've done well. There was one of these in similar grade at the most recent Roxbury"s auction. It sold for serious money.

These may be sleepers. Reminds me of some short-term visitor gallery press offerings in the early to mid 90's, when the dies were loaded for just a very short period. If not for a CAB article by Ian McConnelly in July 2007, would be buried in history.