Canada 2 Dollars 2023 PROOF

Should a coin with the same design, but as a PROOF, have a separate page?
From the photo you can see that there are differences in the metal.
For example, 2 dollars Charles III in the PROOF state was not placed on a separate page and was added to the existing page as a variety.

In general…

If the composition is the same, then standard and proof are listed together.

If the metal composition is different then they should be listed separately.

Same page, different Mintage line.

Mike

Doesn't the proof have a different reverse design?

The one in your post is the circulation version.
Wasn't there already a long ass thread about the same topic a week ago or so?

Idolenz

The one in your post is the circulation version.
Wasn't there already a long ass thread about the same topic a week ago or so?

Yes https://en.numista.com/forum/topic147014.html but that was for the Charles III 2023 coin. 

This one is about the QE II specimen and proof (I think, I could be confused.)

The situation looks similar to Charles III coins:

Proof & specimen are similar design and composition (they looks differently but this is only different finish).

Circulation & BU have different design than Proof/specimen (different legend on reverse outer ring). This should be separate page.

Today, we have 2 separate pages which is OK, however Proof version should be the separate yearline on specimen page,  not on circulation one, I think.

Another topic is question if we really should have multiple lines for 2023 BU coins (there are exactly the same but in different sets).

MMowiec

The situation looks similar to Charles III coins:

Proof & specimen are similar design and composition (they looks differently but this is only different finish).

 

No. The reverse design is different as shown above.

Cannot agree. Your photo of specimen is ok but on your second photo is circulation/BU coin, not Proof… see original photos from 1st post in this topic, they are correct for Proof and specimen.

I googled this and found Proof sets on eBay. Doubled checked as I don't have this version in my collection.

I could be wrong.  From N#353889  :

What page is the Proof currently on?

That proof line should be removed. The product reference brings one to the Kit Coleman proof set which contains a $2 piece without the security features.

Exactly, it's what I wrote in my first comment:

Today, we have 2 separate pages which is OK, however Proof version should be the separate yearline on specimen page,  not on circulation one, I think.