Talk:Roosevelt dime

Emphasis

Why is the reference to the devaluation roosevelt dimes in 1965 given such a short mention?? The fact is that dimes used to be worth something when they were 90% silver. As of 9/25/09 dimes are only worth 1.5 cents in actual value. This encyclopedia is supposed to be here to inform and educate the public. Omitting important information like this makes me wonder about the loyalties of those who write these articles. (unsigned post from 2009)

The value you stated of "1.5 cents" is the value of the metallic content of which the dime is made and has nothing to do with the value embossed on the coin itself.

If anything, this is something that should be mentioned/covered in the "Production" section. 2600:8800:50B:6700:C23F:D5FF:FEC5:89B6 (talk) 01:36, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

I am aware that the mint is considering alternative metals for some coins, but until a concrete proposal is made on the dime, I see no point in mentioning it. It's the cent and nickel that are problems because of production cost.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:16, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

"Production" section

Though the section acknowledges that the obverse (front) has undergone some minor changes like Roosevelt's hair, the U.S. Mint (and several coin guide publications) has stated that the size of the bust/portrait has also changed over the years due to production techniques. These are not minor size changes since they can be easily seen when holding dimes together that have the different size busts/portraits.

I think it would enhance the section (and the entire article/entry) if photos/pics of these varying bust/portrait sizes were included.

Also, isn't rather interesting that the Roosevelt dime has NEVER been used as a platform for ANY special issues that were released to the general public like all the other coins. (2009 Lincoln penny reverse, four different designs, 200th anniversary of Lincoln's birth; 2004/2005 Jefferson nickel, one new obverse, four different reverses, 200th anniversary of Lewis & Clark's exploration of the Louisiana Purchase; 1975/1976 Washington quarter & Kennedy half & Eisenhower dollar, new reverses each, American Bicentennial; 1999-2021 Washington quarter, ONE HUNDRED TWELVE different reverses, State Quarters and State Parks programs.) Just sayin'. 2600:8800:50B:6700:C23F:D5FF:FEC5:89B6 (talk) 01:30, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

I'll look for a source on that. i'm aware it has never been a commem but need a source. You are right, all other denoms have been commemoratives, never the dime.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:57, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Roosevelt dime. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170204171752/http://dev.numismaster.com/article/roosevelt-dime to http://dev.numismaster.com/article/roosevelt-dime

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:38, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

To add to article

To add to this article: the material the models were made from. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 23:55, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Incorrect Designer

The true designer of the dime was Dr. Selma Burke, an artist who had sculpted the original facial design. John Sinnock had taken the design and plagiarized it, and had been known for stealing various other titles from other works of arts. Please correct the misinformation with the designer name. 2600:1700:1890:FE60:E096:FD8B:26FA:8459 (talk) 01:29, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

I've got some problems with what you've asserted. First, we don't change things because someone said to. The standard is whether something can be verified with a reliable source, and I'm not aware of any that say he "plagiaraized" the design-much less that he "stole" it. If you've got a source, please link to it so we can check it out.

The other issue is that, other than being left-facing portraits of the same man, they really don't look that similar. Burke's plaque has different hair, is a slightly quartering view, FDR is thinner and has a more pointed nose than Sinnock's Roosevelt. Even if you accept that Sinnock was inspired by Burke's plaque, that doesn't make her the designer of the coin, nor does it make Sinnock unique in using another sculpture as inspiration. The Walking Liberty half borrows heavily from Oscar Roty's "The Sower" coinage in France, Washington on the quarter is based on the Houdon bust of him, and St. Gaudens was inspired by the Nike of Samothrace in his design for the $20 gold piece. Almostfm (talk) 03:27, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

The article discusses the Burke controversy in detail, and includes a photograph of Burke's work to let the reader judge for themselves. Unless they take Sinnock's initials off the dime, I don't see what more we can do.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:52, 5 February 2022 (UTC)