Talk:Three-cent piece

message: I'm not sure whether the three cent silver and three cent nickel need seperate pages or not. They were not seperate denominations, like the half dime and the nickel were. The three cent pieces are odd ducks.Brian Schlosser42 21:19, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  (Page per material?) 

message: What postal rate changes in 1889? First-class was still three cents as far as I know. Stan 05:49, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  (Postal rate) 

message: Just added some images. They seem to work better side by side; with a separate entry under obverse/reverse/obverse/reverse the table is too long. Should the size of the silver images be proportionally smaller to the nickel, to keep the scale? Splarka 06:27, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  (Images) 

message: It would be nice to see some indication of how much this coin is worth today (to collectors, I mean, not its legal value, which I suppose is still just three cents). --Trovatore 21:10, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: They range anywhere from $14-$28 dollars low grade, to $485-over $3000 for up to proof grades.  I'll see if I can find a good site for price listings, but those things change and range way to much for use to put them on every type of coin in wikipedia.  Joe I 21:23, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: current value?

message: I found
: One reason often given for the discontinuation of the three cent nickel piece in 1889 is that this coin and the dime (10 cent silver coin) were identical in diameter, and hence caused confusion upon the introduction of mechanical vending machines.
and consequently tagged : "Confusion" is a bizarre word here: machines are reasonably described as "fooled", and since there is no reason that the introduction of machines should fool or confuse people about coins, it must be presumed to mean the fraud that would make the coin problematic in light of the low capabilities of 19th-cent'y machines. But addressing this by ceasing issuance of the 3¢ would not protect vending machine operators from up to $770,000 of fraud against dime machines, which was not then, uh, chump change for a nascent industry. Give us the source for this hardly credible assertion, and someone will be in the position to reword it in a way that doesn't send readers away shaking their heads.--Jerzy•t 21:12, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The page can be cleaned up by removing the sentence that has gone unremedied for 9 months, and the one following it that no longer makes sense when it's removed, and placing copies of them in this talk section to support future work by others more interested than i (and apparently than you).    Verifiable reasons for withdrawal (i.e. chain of events that caused it) would be relevant to the history of this coin; the fact and substance of speculation about it would only become relevant if we had evidence that qualified experts have tried and failed at verifying how withdrawal came about.--Jerzy•t 15:45, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious 

message: I've edited the information on the redesign. First, I've added the information that an olive sprig and a bundle of arrows were added to the reverse. Second, I've corrected the number of lines that surrounded the star on the obverse. The first redesign added two, not three lines. What appears to be a third line is actually the edge of the star. Likewise, the second redesign reduced the number of lines to one, not two, although it's arguable that what really happened was the merging of the edge of the star with the inner line, since star is now larger and the edge of the star is raised. Mrrhum (talk) 22:35, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redesign 

message: A trime is really thin.  It is thinner than a dime, and a dime is 1.35mm in thickness.
An good estimate based on density and surface area says that the trime is ~0.5mm
For the three cent nickle, given the confusion with the dime, it too is probably ~1.35mm thick.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.118.126.154 (talk) 12:02, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thickness of Trime incorrectly listed as 1.55mm