KM#896 UK 1/2 penny addition

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces5824.html

 I am adding to my exchanges, and have eleven 1967 half-pence that are not on the above page. In a book I see they are a known variety - the normal coin is Freeman 494 and I need the wide rim variety adding (Freeman 495). Not sure if it is a different KM number also. Here is a picture (normal on top) ...

                                            

And some other UK amendments please ...

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces855.html
 Coin is  1874-1894  and picture shows  1887  but lettering is  1873

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces4575.html
 Picture  1883   Lettering  1881

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces1867.html
 Only  1902  has tide varieties, so remove (high horizon) from  1903-1910

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces3377.html
 1860  tenth lines reads  withouut

 Finally, while on spelling, here are some others ...

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces21552.html
 Commemorative issue Zodiac Sign Series – Picses

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces21783.html
 1 Rouble Hurdlerss

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces388.html
 Georges > George     worn > wore     leave > leaf

https://en.numista.com/forum/
 subscribe not suscribre   

https://en.numista.com/numisdoc/useful-links-29.html
 Numismatic resources – not ressources
 Other useful resources – not ressources

 Thanks :)

wide and narrow rim varieties added. however: I need more information:
which is the more common variety (to transfer collections to this one in case of...)?
what are the respective diameters so that people could check their coins?

The "high" and "low" horizon comments stay that way - because of a reason:
They're different KM# subtypes the one is .1 and the other .2.
Wouldn't that be this way I would remove them. But the type of horizon is a characteristic of that
subtype. So people can see this while looking at the swap screen or their collection - they will recognize
that they have different types (and what makes that type)

all others got corrected.
except for subscribe and resources. I cannot do that. You might want to contact Xavier directly.
He can do the changes to the sites' interfaces

The 146,491,000 mintage is for the normal coin, and in most collections. So please reverse the two narratives; then perhaps make  narrow rim  that is on there now read  normal rim. The wide rim is scarcer - example in my exchanges I have 94 normal rim and 11 wide rim.
 The diameter of the whole coin is the same for both types - here is a picture of ten of mine where I put the wide rim coin third from the top !

                                                  

no no - I did not make it clear - sorry.
I meant the space between rim and lettering. There must be some significant difference so that people
can check themselves

en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces388.html
 Georges > George

That is still as it was (it is halfway along second line of obverse description). But thanks for rest :)

 I only have a plastic ruler from when at school, so it is no good for measuring such relatively small changes; though as in my picture at the start of this topic, one can be seen by comparing to another. Maybe the measurement is in whatever Freeman means - is it a book that anyone has? Though even so maybe everyone has a ruler like mine! I did also notice that it appears the wide rim is on the obverse only; so if someone has a coin where the rim is not as wide on the reverse, would that do? I did try to measure just the rim, and perhaps normal is 0.4mm across, and wide is 0.7mm across (from edge to end of rim). From my picture it looks as if the lettering is in the same place (and the portrait in the middle), so I guess to allow for the wider rim the individual beading either got reduced in size to compensate, or the number of beads got reduced.
 Whilst writing about only being able to differentiate by comparing two coins, I noticed this ...

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces814.html
 1995 reads small date and large date. Please add these sizes - small date 2.5mm wide   large date 3.0mm wide. So that if you only have one coin, you would then know which one you have. I wonder why they have the same KM number though, as there is a difference. Thanks again.

ok thanks for all this information. maybe you can solve this by counting the beads  
no really. if you have the patience - why not? this might be the first time anyone took care of this
variety - if your Freeman catalog does not have any further information. it is not listed in my
catalogs (WC, and Schön&Schön).

I was thinking the same; so last night counted 111 beads - on both versions. So they must be slightly smaller or closer together or something else changed. The outside diameter of whole coin is normal, as already seen. I counted in groups, say in Elizabeth from top of I to top of H and so on around the coin edge, then added them up; then repeated for the other coin. Then double checked to make sure of counting, and adding, and yes, 111 it is! I show two final photos - one is from the book I have which mentioned it in the first place (I cut out some years inbetween so it would fit in photo).
 Then, as I do, I went off on a tangent as I noticed on there that two years earlier there was an error coin (which I like to collect). The Royal Mint in UK must have made some or all coins for New Zealand in 1965 as they put the UK obverse on a NZ half-penny they were making, with the NZ reverse. So on this site I looked at both (and they are of the same metal and size etc), and used those photos (with whatever dates are on the photos) to see what the error 'mule' would look like. It is not mentioned on either page on this site; not sure if they are counted as real coins, but may be worth adding in case someone is lucky enough to have one and does not realise. If it is added then perhaps put on NZ page as the reverse reads New Zealand so that is where someone would look, and they may not see the obverse has the wrong lettering. Here are the two pictures ...