The dates are not in order as seen here:
The dates are not in order for 2 reasons: 1. the coins' mint dates are actually listed in the mint mark field instead of the date field and 2. the entries in the mint mark fields are inconsistent.
Regarding 1 above: Many Spanish coins, including this one, depict a complete year representing the year of authorization for the coin type BUT depict the year of issuance as a two-digit value incused on a star. All of the pages of such coins that I have looked at list the authorization year in the date field and the 2-digit issuance year in the mint mark field. This may be helpful for new collectors in finding the coin in the catalog (if a coin exists that was not issued in the year it was authorized) because oftentimes the issuance year goes unnoticed until pointed out on the page. This is mildly troublesome beyond the beginner stages because the date range searching feature does not expect the issue date in the mint mark field. This also is a partial cause in the incorrect auto ordering of this coin because all lines list 1957 as the issue date leaving the ordering to the mint mark.
Regarding 2 above: All other pages I have seen list the 2-digit issue date as the mint mark, which resolves the incorrect ordering problem. This does not resolve the problems of issue date searching however. On this page, some of the lines follow the 2-digit year standard (e.g. "1957 74"), but other lines follow a different standard that is perhaps more clear to intent (e.g. "1957 (1960) 60"). This inconsistency yields the incorrect ordering because the mint marks are auto sorted with parenthesis after numbers.
I attempted to modify the page to follow the standard used on other pages, but the actual mint mark text seems to be the 2-digit value, so I am unsure of how the inconsistency is being injected. My modification request was rejected because the dates are auto sorted.
Interestingly enough the sorting issue caused some confusion to klei92 in this request: https://en.numista.com/forum/topic103571.html
Personally, I would like to see the date field being used to represent the issue date (as that would resolve all of the problems). Then the authorization date could be listed in the mint mark field if desired. Perhaps something like this "1960 60 1957". My only concern then would be the possible existence of a coin that was not issued in the same year it was authorized. This should be carefully reviewed to ensure new collectors can easily identify their coins.
Alternatively, I think it would be acceptable to identify how the inconsistency is occurring and convert all lines to display the mint mark with the more descriptive model (e.g. "1957 (1960) 60" or "1957 60 (1960)"). This naturally still leaves the date range search problem unaddressed. If this approach is taken, all similarly-dated Spanish coins should be updated to be consistent.
At a minimum (and perhaps in the meantime), the ordering problem can be corrected in the form of "1957 60".
I am willing to do some of the leg work in this endeavor, but I may need some detailed explanation/discussion to better understand the date list section of page modification. I am also willing to split this into multiple requests, but figured they are closely related enough (and a large enough undertaking) to be one request. Also, the preferred resolution would resolve all related requests with one change for each year/coin pair instead of having to change the same fields multiple times for all separate requests.
