Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numismatics/Archive 2

More moves needed (Historical currencies)
I assume we want to apply this standard to historical currencies as well? Here are some examples, but I haven't compiled a complete list or put them at Requested moves. Also, is "Yugoslav dinar" a British-ism? I'd use "Yugoslavian dinar", or am I just wrong?:
 * Gulden (historical denomination) &rarr; Austro-Hungarian gulden? It's also about the German gulden (see above)
 * Paisa &rarr; Indian paisa


 * Well, I moved Schilling to Austrian schilling some time ago, and it's still there. ;) What I'm not sure about is whether it should be Austro-Hungarian gulden or guilder; the articles on the Dutch currencies are at guilder, and I think guilder is the English word, so... Either way, I agree with all those moves, of course. And I'd also use Yugloslavian, not Yugoslav. [[Image:Flag of Austria.svg|15px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 09:12, 1 December 2005 (UTC)


 * You're right about schilling -- I noticed a link that was wrong & didn't see that the article was right, sorry. The whole guilder/gulden/florin thing confuses me. I guess gulden/guilder is just a translation into English I guess, but are all florins guilders, or just some? Is there a more standard usage? It's over my head. I've added a couple more. What's the system here? Since the style has consensus, should I move them myself/request moves? Should I be sure to list them all here? Why do I always seem to have more questions than answers? Mom2jandk 15:52, 1 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm not quite sure, myself... Regarding Slovak and Slovakian, though: The first defeats the latter 33:1 in Google; however, Czechoslovakian defeats Czechoslovak... Mh. ::shrugs::
 * Gah. Yugoslav defeats Yugoslavian by 10:1 on Google, too, so we don't need that move. [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|20px]][[Image:Flag of Austria.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 16:17, 1 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I just realized that we should be using "gulden" instead of "guilder" just as we use "koruna" instead of "crown". Sorry to keep changing it. Thanks for checking google. I'll do that in the future when I'm not sure. Mom2jandk 21:08, 1 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm as much to blame as you are - after all, I moved the Dutch and Dutch dependency shtuff to guilder instead of gulden. My bad. [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|20px]][[Image:Flag of Austria.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 23:13, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I moved Aruban gulden, Dutch gulden and Netherlands Antillean gulden to where they belong. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:43, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

I boldly moved a few of them (those which didn't require an admin). ナイトスタリオン ✉ 15:41, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * A problem with the paisa is that it's not exclusively Indian... [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 15:46, 3 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Rhodesian Dollar &rarr; Rhodesian dollar
 * Hwan &rarr; Korean hwan

I requested moves for these two at Requested moves, so let's hear some support here. ナイトスタリオン ✉ 15:53, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Support both moves. User:Mom2jandk Mom2jandk 04:43, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Support Good idea (aren't there three listed on the Requested moves page?) Markkawika 21:04, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Oops, yes, sorry. Forgot to re-add Czechoslovak crown, at first I was able to move it without a vote. I'll have the vote on this separately, for reasons given by Juro on his talk page; please review our discussion there before voting.


 * Czechoslovak crown &rarr; Czechoslovak koruna


 * 1) Support, naturally. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 21:59, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Support per coinage locality language.  Joe I  22:23, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Support Mom2jandk 22:28, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Support I understand Juro's points, but since the standard is "local name" it should be koruna. Markkawika 00:16, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Result
Hwan moved to Korean hwan as requested. WhiteNight T 21:36, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm sure there's a good reason that you're moving all of these articles around, but it would be nice if you could explain the reason why longer article names are supposed to be better. Thank you!  -- Visviva 09:20, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

More move discussion
I just went through the list at currency, and the following questions remain open:


 * The Roman and Ancient Greek currencies: Should the standard apply? (Roman denarius, Ancient Greek drachma, ...)
 * Gulden (historical denomination) &mdash; in both 🇦🇹–🇭🇺 and 🇩🇪. Split?
 * Perper is about two different currencies. Split?
 * What to do with the Holy Roman Empire's currencies? Holy Roman vereinsthaler?
 * What to do with continental (currency) and trade dollar?

Suggestions welcome. ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:22, 2 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I'd think "Ancient Roman denarius" even though "Roman denarius" is not ambiguous, just for style consistency.
 * I just tried to split "Gulden" and got so confused. It seems that although the gulden had different values in Austria (not Austria-Hungary yet) and Germany (and would thus seem to me to be a different currency), they were used with Vereinsthalers which appear to have been the same currency in Germany and Austria. I followed a bunch of links about History of Austria, Holy Roman Empire, Thaler, Conventionsthaler, etc. Some of the information is incomplete, some is inconsistent. It's all way over my head, and I think it'll need to be left to someone who wants to really update the whole section (or at least certainly not me).
 * I vote for splitting Perper.
 * I'd call it Holy Roman conventionsthaler (I don't believe the vereinsthaler was Holy Roman, but am not sure -- see above).
 * I think it should be Continental currency (I can't think of what country name to use -- maybe United States continental currency even though it wasn't yet, or United States colonies continental currency) and maybe United States trade dollar or United States trade dollar coin. See my questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numismatics/Style. Mom2jandk 04:43, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

More questions: Mom2jandk 22:35, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Should Euro be Eurozone euro? It seems more consistent, but I don't think anyone ever refers to it that way.
 * Should West German mark be separated out of German mark? East German mark is already a separate page, but West German mark is included in German mark. Seems biased.


 * Eurozone euro, British pound and Chinese yuan are the three cases where I'm not sure myself whether our standardization will be accepted by the majority... [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 23:11, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh, and yeah, we should probably make German mark about the post-reunification mark and West German mark about the pre-unification currency of FRG.
 * To summarize:


 * 1) split Perper into Montenegrin perper and Serbian perper
 * 2) split Gulden (historical denomination) into Austrian-Hungarian gulden and German gulden
 * 3) carve out West German mark from German mark


 * Right? [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 23:17, 5 December 2005 (UTC)


 * As User:Dove1950 pointed out at talk:Currency, German mark is not necessarily the right name for that page or the right way to refer to the currency. I mentioned at the currency page that the coins (some of them anyway) show a denomination of "deutsche mark", so one could argue that German deutsche mark is the right name for the page. I'm not completely happy with it, but I don't see a better choice. I asked on the Currency talk page that future discussion happen here. Mom2jandk 21:47, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Rhodesian Dollar needs to be moved to Rhodesian dollar. Mom2jandk 00:43, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Remember, make can make a redirect instead, i.e.:

On the article Rhodesian Dollar you can type: #REDIRECT Rhodesian dollar and it will automatically redirect. This is a good alternative to moving articles. I hope this is useful to anyone who needs it. Johann Wolfgang 02:46, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Categories
Our categories seem pretty disorganized right now. Lots of articles are in numismatics and also its subcategories. As I understand it, this is not good form without good reason. I'm happy to work on fixing some of it, but as a newbie, I'm afraid I might be misunderstanding. I don't want to do a lot of work just to have someone else have to revert the changes. See New Orleans Mint which I just fixed (hopefully). currency is another example, although I didn't do anything to it. The article is in Numismatics, but the category is not (it's in Money instead). Should it be in both, or what? I'm not sure exactly how we should be related to the Money category. If Numismatics is part of Money, and lots of articles relating to coins are part of Money, should this be WikiProject Money? Or is the Money category part of the Numismatics project even though the Numismatics category is part of the Money category? Mom2jandk 22:20, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
 * hmmm, I think Numismatics would be under Money, and Money under Economics. This is the way it is described in most coin guides. Numismatics is the study of real (physical) money, like bills, coins and tokens, however medals and awards have made there way in for some reason. I would leave the categories as they are but also make a list of all numismatics related categories and double chack to see if anything is missing. We should also search for terms like 'coin', 'money' and 'bill', etc, to find numismatic related articles that have slipped trough the cracks in terms of categorizing and stubbing them. About the Money category in the Numismatic category and vice versa, this may actually help people find articles. If someone is thinking that coins would be in the money category, and it isn't, they may have a hard time finding the numismatics category. So having it in both categories may be complicate matters though, and this will have to be worked out once WikiProject Numismatics starts getting larger in scope and reach. For now, I find it alot easier to find an article with this current configuration.

Johann Wolfgang [ T ... C ] 21:50, 22 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I have now moved my proposal for a new category structure to the project pages (from my user pages). Please look at it here WikiProject Numismatics/Categories. Comment on it. Edit it. If no one says anything, I will start implementing it. Mom2jandk 01:26, 3 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Still no comments on my proposal. I used my new structure to update the numismatics infobox that appears on our project page. Since that's shorter than the full category structure, maybe someone will give me some feedback??? Mom2jandk 00:33, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Don't forget to put Ancient Coins under Category:Coins, example:


 * Category:Numismatics
 * Category:Coins
 * Modern Coinage
 * Same as below
 * Medieval Coinage
 * Europe
 * Asia
 * Africa
 * etc
 * Ancient Coinage
 * Byzantium Coinage
 * Roman Coinage
 * Greek Coinage (an article on this subject has been proposed)
 * Ad infinitum....
 * Primitive Money

(Sort by continent or civilization)

This is sorted the way most coin guides/books do it. This should work well. If you want, feel free to change things around. Have a nice day! Johann Wolfgang 23:19, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


 * While that seemed like the right approach to me at first, I ran into some problems when I tried it. First of all, there are lots of articles that are about the currency in general (not just coins or just banknotes). Second, there are lots of articles about banknotes alone. If I were to use the structure you've got there, I'd have to duplicate (or triple) the place structure. The way I see it, there are three ways to categorize our main (currency related) articles. One is by location (e.g.,Category:African currencies). Another is by type (e.g., Category:Coins). The last is by time period (I used 4, "modern circulating", "modern obsolete", medieval, and ancient). The way I handled this in my proposal was to make the place a hierarchical structure, and the others labels. So, each article would be (potentially) in several categories. I'll put together a couple of examples soon, but I've gotta run now. Another point I wanted to make is that since "Numismatics" is (basically) the study of currency, it should not be a super-category of "currency" but rather a subcategory, containing only articles relating to the study of currency (that's my proposal anyway, I haven't started implementing it). The Numismatics project is then basically about many of the sub-categories (but not all) of "Money". I'll write some examples up as soon as I get a chance. Mom2jandk 19:24, 9 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I put up some examples. Mom2jandk 20:02, 9 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Well it doesn't if a certain article is in more than one category, however something like this should be done:


 * Category:Numismatics
 * Category:Articles about/on Numismatics
 * Category:Coins
 * Category:Articles about/on Coins
 * Modern Coinage
 * Articles about/on Modern Coinage
 * Same as below
 * Medieval Coinage
 * Articles about/on Medieval Coinage
 * Europe
 * Asia
 * Africa
 * etc
 * Ancient Coinage
 * Articles about/on Ancient Coinage
 * Byzantium Coinage
 * Roman Coinage
 * Greek Coinage (an article on this subject has been proposed)
 * Ad infinitum....
 * Primitive Money
 * Articles about/on Primitive Money

(Sort by continent or civilization)

This is just an idea, however you are starting to get close to a very good system. This will make it extremely easy to find an article. Johann Wolfgang 04:53, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Can we take this discussion to the Categories' talk page? I'm not sure if this last comment is referring to my proposal or User:Johann Wolfgang's suggestions. Mom2jandk 23:22, 9 December 2005 (UTC)


 * This is refering to a modification of your proposal. Johann Wolfgang 04:53, 11 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I got confused by the IP address signature. I guess you forgot to log in (I do that all the time). I'm not sure what the difference would be between Category:Coins and Category:Articles on/about coins. Aren't all articles in Coins on/about coins? Your new proposal also didn't address the other points I mentioned regarding Numismatics and Coins not being top-level categories. Do I need to explain myself better? Mom2jandk 21:07, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

I implemented the Category:Mints part of the restructuring, and some points have been made at Categories for deletion and Categories for deletion. If you have an interest in the names of the new categories, please share your opinions there. Mom2jandk 21:07, 11 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I was thinking of using Category:Articles about coins or Category:Articles on coins.

Articles in Category:Coins are about specific coins, I am thinking about general topics like metals, dies, and such; something that isn't about a certain coin, but something that applies to all coins. I believe 'Numismatics' is a decendant project of WikiProject 'Money'. Numismatics is the study of bills, coins, militia, bullion, exonumia, etc, therefore 'Currency' in it's correct meaning is a sub-category of 'Numismatics'.


 * Numismatics
 * Currency
 * Category:Coins
 * Category:Articles about/on Coins
 * Modern Coinage
 * Articles about/on Modern Coinage
 * Same as below
 * Medieval Coinage
 * Articles about/on Medieval Coinage
 * Europe
 * Asia
 * Africa
 * etc
 * Ancient Coinage
 * Articles about/on Ancient Coinage
 * Byzantium Coinage
 * Roman Coinage
 * Greek Coinage (an article on this subject has been proposed)
 * Ad infinitum....
 * Primitive Money
 * Articles about/on Primitive Money

(Sort by continent or civilization)
 * Exonumia
 * (We'll have to figure out what goes here soon)
 * Militia
 * Tokens
 * et cetera
 * et cetera
 * et cetera

n. pl. cur·ren·cies -1. Money in any form when in actual use as a medium of exchange, especially circulating paper money. -2. Transmission from person to person as a medium of exchange; circulation: coins now in currency. n. -(used with a sing. verb) The study or collection of money, coins, and medals. n. pl. mon·eys or mon·ies -1. A medium that can be exchanged for goods and services and is used as a measure of their values on the market, including among its forms a commodity such as gold, an officially issued coin or note, or a deposit in a checking account or other readily liquifiable account. -2. The official currency, coins, and negotiable paper notes issued by a government. -3. Assets and property considered in terms of monetary value; wealth. I hope this has clarified my ideas. If this is not what you are getting at, please eloborate further on your idea of implementation of this plan. I added the definitions, for myself and others, for a refreshment, as I often get things confused. Please feel free to modify. Johann Wolfgang 04:34, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * cur·ren·cy Pronunciation (kûrn-s, kr-)
 * nu·mis·mat·ics Pronunciation (nmz-mtks, -ms-, ny-)
 * mon·ey Pronunciation (mn)


 * My understanding of numismatics as the study of currency instead of the study of money comes from numismatics, which says that numismatics is the study of money, but also says: "For instance, the Kirghiz people used horses as the principal currency unit and gave small change in lambskins.[1] The lambskins may be a suitable for numismatic study, the horse is not." which I take to mean that since the horse is money but not currency (or maybe that's not the way to say it?), it's not part of numismatics. As far as the placement of Numismatics in the hierarchy, I just don't think it's helpful to have everything be a subcategory of numismatics. I think splitting it would help clarify the difference between articles about specific coins and articles about coin/currency collecting. Basically, if we agree that Numismatics is the study of currency, it could be argued either way that it belongs as a subcategory or super-category. I think it's most useful to have it as a subcategory, but I could probably be pursuaded.

Another way I think I already handled the issue you've brought up (coin vs. articles on/about coins) is with the category Category:Currency production. But if you think it's important to distinguish, may I recommend using "Coins" (where you've used "Articles on/about coins") and "Coin examples" (where you've used "Coins") which might be a little more clear. In most (all?) cases though, I don't believe there's a need to split them. Can you give some examples of articles that you think my structure doesn't handle well?

I'd like to point out again that using your structure, we'd have to duplicate the place hierarchy for banknotes, and again for articles about the currency in general. Then, an article which was about the currency (e.g., Danish krone) would appear in one place, whereas an article about a specific banknote (e.g., 50 krone (Denmark)) would appear in a completely separate place in the hierarchy. I think that someone browsing through the hierarchy structure would rather find all articles relating to Danish currency in roughly the same place (and I also think authors would be more likely to correctly categorize articles that way). Mom2jandk 15:35, 12 December 2005 (UTC)


 * We can sort it one of three or all three ways:

By Location

 * Currency
 * North America
 * Central America
 * South America
 * Europe
 * Denmark
 * 50 krone (Denmark)
 * Asia
 * Africa
 * Australia

By Type

 * Numismatics
 * Currency
 * Category:Coins
 * Category:Articles about Coin collecting (storage, care, buying and selling)
 * Modern Coinage
 * Articles about/on Modern Coinage (characteristics)
 * Same as below
 * Medieval Coinage
 * Articles about/on Medieval Coinage (" ")
 * Europe
 * Asia
 * Africa
 * etc
 * Ancient Coinage
 * Articles about/on Ancient Coinage (" ")
 * Byzantium Coinage
 * Roman Coinage
 * Greek Coinage (an article on this subject has been proposed)
 * Ad infinitum....
 * Primitive Money (articles having to do with primitive money, i.e. stone circles, beads, horses)
 * Articles about/on Primitive Money (" ")

(Sort by continent or civilization)
 * Exonumia
 * (We'll have to figure out what goes here soon)
 * Militia
 * Tokens
 * et cetera
 * et cetera
 * et cetera

By Name

 * Currency
 * A
 * B
 * C
 * D
 * E
 * F
 * G
 * H
 * I
 * J
 * K
 * L
 * M
 * N
 * O
 * P
 * Q
 * R
 * S
 * T
 * U
 * V
 * W
 * X
 * Y
 * Z

  The same can be done for bills, medals, tokens, exonumia, etc. This may be complex, however it would be a lot easier to find an article when it is in more categories. I may have left things out, so please take what I've made above and add/remove things to get what you are looking for, so I (and others) have an idea of what you would like to see come of the categorization of numismatic-related articles. Again I *hope* this is getting closer to what you would like to be implemented. Johann Wolfgang 23:13, 12 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't think we're communicating effectively. So, I'd like to focus on one issue and see if we can come to a consensus. As I understand your proposal, there would be separate location hierarchies for coins, bills, and currency. We both would also put the articles in other categories, but I want to focus only on the location for now. I've marked your system (as I understand it, please correct me if I'm wrong) with [yours] and my system with [mine].

Thus, Danish krone would be: And 50 krone (Denmark) would be: And 20 krone (Denmark) would be: Mom2jandk 06:07, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Currencies->European currencies->Danish currency->Danish krone [yours]
 * Currencies->European currencies->Danish currency->Danish krone [mine also]
 * Banknotes->European banknotes->Danish banknotes->50 krone (Denmark) [yours]
 * Currencies->European currencies->Danish currency->Danish banknotes->50 krone (Denmark) [mine]
 * Currencies->Banknotes->Danish banknotes->50 krone (Denmark) [mine]
 * Coins->European coins->Danish coins->20 krone (Denmark) [yours]
 * Currencies->European currencies->Danish currency->Danish coins->20 krone (Denmark) [mine]
 * Currencies->Coins->Danish coins->20 krone (Denmark) [mine]


 * Hmmm, well it seems that both (yours and mine) would be effective, however if someone were looking for a banknote they would look for a supercategory called 'banknotes', not a subcategory of currencies. This maybe confusing for some (to find there way around that is), however in my case, I (personally) would find yours just as effective. We should go with yours, as it makes more sense, however as a compromise, we (everyone in the project) should make a directory of your categorization system. This might make it so that anyone wandering through the categories searching for something (not sure what though) could easily press Ctrl-F and type in what they are looking for. However as mentioned ealier this is just my idea and does not have to be implemented, I just think it would be easier to find an article with my system.

Hope this has cleared things up (a bit hopefully). Johann Wolfgang 23:09, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * As I think about it more, it probably does make sense to duplicate the place name hierarchy. All this means is adding European coins, American coins, etc. and the same for banknotes, since the categories like Danish coins can be in Danish currency and European coins without having to mess with individual articles. (I hope that makes sense). I'll update the category proposal when I get a chance. Ingrid 20:01, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

On to another issue, and I would appreciate it if more than just Johann would chime in here. Where does Category:Numismatics belong. I feel that it would be most helpful to have a category just for the study of currency (for clubs, numismatists, collectors' magazines and resources). Currently, many of our articles are in Numismatics, and it's used somewhat as a top-level category. If consensus is to put it at the top level, does that mean that every article in the WikiProject belongs in the Numismatics category, or one of its subcategories? Part of my problem is that I'm not completely clear on the difference between "money" and "currency" from a numismatists' perspective. If anyone can clear that up for me, I'd appreciate it. Ingrid 20:01, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I apologize for not chiming in, but I really have no expertise in categorizing and organizing money or currency or banknotes or coins. I'm a rank novice numismatist, but an enthusiastic and bold wikipedian.  This is why my main focus at the moment is standardizing the Infobox Coin.  Once I get that all decided, I'll go around and add it to all of the coin pages we have.  But I don't feel like I have anything useful to add to the discussion about categorization (though I do find it interesting to follow). Markkawika 00:30, 16 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Categorizing is not easy as one has to decide in this case what is above and below something else. However "money is not numismatics and currency is not money" (quote). With this in mind we should do this:


 * Money
 * Numismatics
 * Currencies
 * Germany
 * German Banknotes
 * German Coinage
 * (German Exonumia?)
 * etc
 * Everything else that belongs under 'Money'

or
 * Money
 * Numismatics
 * Category:Coins
 * Category:Articles about/on Coins
 * Modern Coinage
 * Articles about/on Modern Coinage
 * Same as below
 * Medieval Coinage
 * Articles about/on Medieval Coinage
 * Europe
 * Asia
 * Africa
 * etc
 * Ancient Coinage
 * Articles about/on Ancient Coinage
 * Byzantium Coinage
 * Roman Coinage
 * Greek Coinage (an article on this subject has been proposed)
 * Ad infinitum....
 * Primitive Money
 * Articles about/on Primitive Money

(Sort by continent or civilization)
 * Banknotes
 * Medals
 * Tokens
 * Exonumia
 * etc
 * Everything else that belongs under 'Money'

This would work just fine. Johann Wolfgang 04:44, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Cleaning the talk page
Is it okay to delete old talk sections? What about merging all of the different sections about infoboxes? I'm happy to do it, but don't want to make a newbie mistake. Mom2jandk 03:28, 27 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I think archives would be best for most people, although I don't personally like them :) I dont see a prob with mergin same topic headins, but some may(don't see how yet tho) :)
 * There is also a sandbox link on the front page, if we want to use that for the infobox plaything.  Joe I  21:51, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Archiving is easy. Tell me if you want me to archive these pages anytime soon. Tito xd (?!?) 22:04, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what archiving means.... Do you archive the whole page, or just inactive topics? I think it would be helpful to not have to wade through so many topics, but annoying for active topics to have to be restarted. Mom2jandk 21:10, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

List of world commemorative coins
I put up this page incomplete, as this list just keeps growin and growin. I haven't decided the best way to move forward after this either, so hopes are that someone can. My thought was to have this one entire list, the country headings would lead to a seperate page with the specifics about all of the counry's coins on that page. Some countries have way to many for that I feel, such as Austria, France, Germany, and I think Canada and Australia have more coins than whats on this page. Anyways, any ideas or whatnot, feel free. Joe I 23:09, 6 December 2005 (UTC)


 * We should make the list, then make an article for each countries commemerative coins, and link to it from the list. i.e.:

Australia

 * See Commemorative coins of Australia for more information on this topic.


 * 5 dollar - silver - 150 years of steam railways - 2004
 * 5 dollar - base - Eureka Stockade stamp & coin - 2004
 * 1 dollar - base - Gallipoli - 2005
 * 1 dollar - silver - Silver Kangaroo - 2005
 * 1 dollar - Ag/Au plated - Silver Kangaroo - 2005
 * 0.50 dollar - silver - Kookabura - 2005
 * 4 AUD - gold - 2004-2006 FIFA World Cup - 2006
 * 25 AUD - gold - 2004-2006 FIFA World Cup - 2006
 * 1 dollar - silver - Gallipoli - 2005
 * 3.85 dollar - mixed - Volunteer Year set - 2003
 * 3.85 dollar - silver - Fine Silver Proof Set - 2005
 * 3.85 dollar - mixed - 60th Ann. End of WWII set - 2005

Johann Wolfgang 23:55, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Commemorative coins (2nd)
I have entered most of the Commemorative coins of Spain since 2002 (euro) by value. Is it OK for you ? --Flafla89 11:28, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

POLL

 * -The result of this poll was in favor of inserting the Cataloge number into the infobox-
 * Poll ends 12:00pm -5:00 GMT December 16th 2005
 * (All users are allowed to vote here)

Are you in favor of inserting the Cataloge Number (of a coin) in the Infobox?


 * ~Yes


 * 1) Johann Wolfgang 23:38, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Mom2jandk 00:30, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Markkawika 20:54, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Chochopk 06:01, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Aye, I'll follow the crowd!  :)   Joe I  22:53, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Woo! Late vote! Tito xd (?!? - did you read this?) 23:00, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Hey, the more info, the better. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 23:07, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
 * ~No




 * ~Neutral




 * Comments

It shouldn't be too hard, however it will take a while... Johann Wolfgang 23:38, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Same for banknotes --Chochopk 06:01, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Project watchlist
I was just thinking it would be cool to be able to look at a watchlist of all articles in the project. Sometimes I'd like to know what's happening within the project as a whole, but I don't want to have to add all the articles to my personal watch list. Does anyone know if it's possible to set up something like that? It's way beyond my current abilities, if it's even possible, but I know some of you have been around here much longer than I have. Mom2jandk 20:08, 9 December 2005 (UTC)


 * It is possible, since Searchme (Joe1) and I put up those templates (see below) I realized that you could see every article that had it on it's talk page. You can see the link here.

Also if the article has a stub, you can see every article that has a This is the template that Joe1 and I put on (what we thought) every talk page of every numismatics-related article. Numismaticnotice I hope this has helped anyone interested. Johann Wolfgang 21:31, 9 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks -- that's helped me find some things, but it's such a huge list. What I was hoping for was something in the style of "My Watchlist" which shows only the current activity. But it would automatically include all pages with the Numismaticnotice. Mom2jandk 23:24, 9 December 2005 (UTC)


 * There is nothing in the MediaWiki sofware that has this function you are speaking of, however on Meta there are users that have written programs (Java, Perl, etc.) to do this; none however that I can name off the top of my head unfortunately.

Johann Wolfgang 04:50, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Currency designers
There is now a category for Category:United States currency designers. I was trying to make sure it was relatively complete, and followed some of the infobox links. I found several that weren't in the project. I added them to the category and put the Numismaticnotice in. I'm not familiar with the topic though, so I thought someone who knows some of the names could check. Mom2jandk 00:49, 10 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Added nowiki to the following comment to prevent miscategorization of this page. The original can be seen in the previous revision of this page. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 12:51, 20 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Ok, I or someone else will take a close look. And yes, if there is an article that is numismatics related, feel free to put the notice on the talk page. This one:

Johann Wolfgang 04:56, 11 December 2005 (UTC)


 * For the record, you do that with . Markkawika 00:27, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Categories, categories, categories
It is somewhat fitting that I'm involved in categorization of numismatic articles since I'm a member of WikiProjects Numismatics and Categorization. (NOT that this gives me greater authority or expertise on either coins or categories, just that working on it...well, it satiates a need deep inside of me). Anyways, here's an update on what I've been doing...


 * Hopefully the issues that I notified project members about have been resolved (it appears that way.) Mom2jandk and I will work together towards a glorious, well-categorized future.


 * I created the subcat United States dollar coins as the beginning of an effort to sort out Category:United States coins, which is currently not organized by type, denomination, series, etc. I will hopefully do the same for other denominations (assuming there are enough specific coins in that denomination; the Stella will not be getting its own category.)


 * I would like to create a category for legislation dealing with U.S. coins. From years of reading my Red Book, I noticed many mentions of the Pittman Act, Bland-Allison Act, and others; these are all notable enough to warrant articles, and hopefully I will get around to creating them soon. If anyone has any input on what the category for such laws should be called (perhaps cat:Laws affecting U.S. coinage? clumsy, but I don't know what else to make it) please share.


 * I forget who awarded mom2jandk the barnstar, but it was well deserved, and I would have awarded it myself if not for the awkwardness of doing so (i.e. here's a barnstar from PaulHanson in recognition of your dealing with PaulHanson, that incorrigible oaf.)

That's all for now, keep in touch all. Paul 18:53, 12 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the kind words (and to TantalumTelluride for the barnstar. Paul's original note was so gracious, it's hard for me to imagine anyone getting upset by it (although I know it happens all too often online). So thank you, Paul, for being so thoughtful in how you addressed me to begin with. Mom2jandk 03:24, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I've got to agree. I can almost see the wikilove. ;) [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 07:54, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Wikilove.png|150px |I can see it too...]] :)

Johann Wolfgang 18:44, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I forgot to mention that I can't think of a better name than "Laws affecting US coinage" except you might want it to be "currency" instead of "coinage" if you want to include bills. Please update the project category list so we'll know where to put articles in the future (and so I won't accidentally mess up your plan when I start implementing changes). Mom2jandk 22:16, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

More infoboxes
We need infoboxes on banknotes and currencies. I'm not sure how to create one, or if one can be renamed. So I'll wait and see your responses. But I would like to edit them for sure.

--Chochopk 05:59, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Editing and creating infoboxes is something I enjoy doing, and would be happy to help design a currency one. I do not have any expertise in knowing what to put in the infobox.  Are there any banknote pages that have an infobox now that I could use as an example?  Are there any templates that have been created that could use some polishing up? Markkawika 00:24, 16 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Check it out! The currency infobox is here!!


 * I'm really impressed! It's beautiful, and I don't know how you've managed to find so much detail for the examples you used. My concern is that we won't be able to find as much for all currencies (especially historic). So, to deal with historic currencies (or do people think we shouldn't use the infobox for them), can you add a "succeeded by" and "date succeeded" or some such? Also, can you identify which fields will be there for every currency, and make the rest optional? I'd probably reorder too -- the info I look for first (and maybe I'm unusual) is the country, then what the subunits are (some currencies have more than one, like pound/shilling/pence), then the coins/mint, banknotes/printer (mint and printer are info we may have trouble finding for obscure currencies and historic), then inflation/exchange rate (which definitely need to be optional). Ingrid 05:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Ingrid. Help! I would also like to know how to make a variable (i.e. infobox row, or attribute) optional in an infobox. Does anyone know? There seems to be some Wikipedia expert editors here. --Chochopk 05:40, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I just learned how to make infobox parameter optional, inspired by the "infobox" of Chemical element (See Chlorine for example). (The trick is actually using many smaller boxes). I'll take ownership of the currency infobox and banknote image. But that doesn't mean only I get to edit them =). I'll let someone take coin image and the naming convention, as those are not my strength.

I will make these attributes required: ISO code (required only for living currencies) Using countries inflation rate(required only for living currencies) exchange rate(required only for living currencies) subunit symbol banknote values
 * either broken down as frequently used and rarely used, or as one single attribute if usage information is not available

coin values
 * same as banknote values

established date issuing bank

Optional: ISO code (for dead currencies) pegged with pegged by parent currency most recent redenomination planned redenomination printer mint note

--Chochopk 14:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I think some of those required fields are going to be pretty tough to figure out for historical currencies. What about someone (I hate to volunteer someone else, but it's not my favorite thing to do, and I'm trying to cut back on my wiki-time) try to fill it out for say German reichsmark or even Cambodian tical to see what we can find out about older currencies before we decide what's required (or is this just for current? I think it'd be better if it's for all modern currencies). Also, what about Estonian kroon or Yugoslav dinar (pages that deal with multiple currencies which have the same name), do we split them, or have the infobox for just the latest one? Ingrid 15:59, 21 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I tried to address the first issue (dead currencies) by having multiple templates. See User:Chochopk/Currency_Template. It's far from complete. I still need to figure out how to deal with Estonian kroon or Yugoslav dinar (pages that deal with multiple currencies which have the same name). --Chochopk 16:09, 21 December 2005 (UTC)


 * This is the reason I believe we must split such currencies. I came up with 2 ways
 * Have a small portal page like Chinese. And it redirects to various generations of the currency. In the example of Yugoslav dinar, we can have Yugoslav dinar (1994-present), Yugoslav dinar (1993-1994), etc. This is my preferred method.
 * Let Yugoslav dinar be the page for the most recent Yugoslav dinar. And let it link to older Yugoslav dinars.
 * --Chochopk 08:45, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I think we have to make the distinction between "Preceded by" and "most recent redenomination". Most people would say French franc was preceded by gold louis and silver écu. But the most redenomination was in 1960 at 1 New = 100 Old. I would also like to make the distinction between "established" and "preceded by". If a currency is "preceded by" an older currency, then it was not "established". A currency is "established" only when it has no parent currency. (Can someone think of an example?) --Chochopk 08:45, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Let's say currency A is redenominated into B, which is later redenominated into C. So A->B is a "most recent redenomination" for B, and B->C is a ________ for B? Can someone fill in the blank. Thanks! --Chochopk 08:53, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * You could use "replaced by" or "next (or following) redenomination". Or perhaps just "before" and "after", "previous" and "next", "preceded by" and "succeeded by". Ingrid 15:50, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I was rushing to finish my response, without catching up on all of the previous discussion. I see your point that there's a difference between a redenomination and succession (although some cases are tricky -- like Brazilian cruzeiro -> Brazilian cruzado and back again which was essentially a redenomination with a new name). An example of a currency being established would either be the introduction of modern currency into an area where there was only trade before beginning with colonization, it shouldn't be too hard to find one of those in Africa or the Americas. I would also call it establishment of a new currency when a country switches from a colonial currency to a local one, although this transition can happen in stages, making it more complex (see Malawian kwacha which has succession boxes leading back all the way to British pound). One of the reasons I find currency so fascinating is that it's often so complex. Ingrid 16:10, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Thoughts for the day
1) Ingrid, you get ten points for using the : before linking to a category. 2) What kind of infoboxes are we interested in creating? I'd be happy to help, leave any questions on my talk page. Paul 05:25, 16 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you, thank you, tips in the jar on the right *bow*. Ingrid 20:55, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I have some thoughts for the day too, so I'm going to steal your topic: If only there were a few more hours in the day, I could have take care of all the stuff I think of. Ingrid 20:55, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) infoboxes (numismatics box, coin box, paper money box, boxes for a specific country, e.g., British Coins, etc). We need to decide how these will be used.
 * 2) Obviously, the coin box and paper money box will be on pages relating to a specific coin or note. I don't think it would be attractive on a page relating to multiple coins or notes (which leads to an idea I've been toying with to make a table or infobox for standardizing showing multiple coins/notes on one page -- there are some examples of this throughout wikipedia with no consistent style or content; perhaps just a horizontal infobox instead of a vertical one?).
 * 3) I've also been thinking about whether we should/could make some entries optional. I saw something about this relating to the country box, but don't know the details. The reason is that I'm not sure that we'll know the designer or maybe some other info for all world coins.
 * 4) As far as the numismatics box, which articles do we expect to put this on? Most/all? Would a wide box at the bottom of the page work better than the narrow one at the side? We have both now, but I only updated the narrow one based on the new categories. Anyway, the whole idea needs some thought.
 * 5) Finally, some countries have these boxes, like DK currency and coinage, which we need to standardize (naming and content).
 * 6) updating the to do list. I know I have lots of to do items that I'd love help with (reviewing and discussing categorization, finding and categorizing articles, checking for style, renaming historic currency and single coin/note articles, adding succession boxes, etc.). I suppose I should just be bold and add them to the project to-do list.
 * 7) I suggested merging Slovak koruna and Slovak koruna (WWII). Please add your input.
 * 8) I have some style stuff I want to add to the style guide, and would like feedback, but have to go play with my daughter right now... Stay tuned. Check in now if you'd like to participate in discussions of "banknote vs. paper money", denomination pluralization, naming an article about a specific coin/note, etc.


 * As far as the table/infobox for multiple coins/notes on one page, I just realized that is an example of using an infobox where you can get multiple rows. See Yugoslav dinar for an example. This would be a great thing. I don't have time right now to look at the currency infobox, but wanted to post this so I don't forget. Ingrid 19:28, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Copyright tag on Commons
I made a tag on Commons like Money-US, at commons:Template:Money-US, so that images can be uploaded to Commons and use that tag. There are a bunch of images in commons:Category:United_States_coins using the generic US public domain tag which could be converted to the money tag. &mdash;Kenyon (t&middot;c) 08:37, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Assuming that the claims made in the tag are correct ("the design is ineligible for copyright, and is therefore in the public domain"), I like this idea. Markkawika 20:05, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I agree that re-publishing U.S. dollar images do not violate copyright laws, as they are works of the government. However, you might want to check the laws regarding currency image reproduction. --Chochopk 14:25, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Proposed moves
From WikiProject Numismatics/to do:

Articles to rename potentially controversial
 * Renminbi &rarr; Chinese yuan
 * Pound sterling &rarr; British pound
 * Euro &rarr; Eurozone euro

probably not controversial


 * Antoninianus &rarr; Roman antoninianus
 * As (coin) &rarr; Roman as
 * Denarius &rarr; Roman denarius
 * Barbados dollar &rarr; Barbadian dollar
 * Bermuda dollar &rarr; Bermudan dollar
 * Brunei dollar &rarr; Bruneian dollar
 * Cayman Islands dollar &rarr; Caymanian dollar
 * Suriname dollar &rarr; Surinamese dollar
 * New Taiwan dollar &rarr; Taiwanese dollar
 * Vietnamese dong &rarr; Vietnamese đồng

Discussion
I'm in favour of moving the Roman coins.

Barbados dollar wins the google contest by 64 to 1; I think in this case, "Barbados" is used as a demonym similar to the way it's used in "United States dollar". I propose we leave Barbados dollar where it is; if we move this, we also have to move Trinidad and Tobago dollar, and I don't even want to imagine how ugly that page's title will be. ;)

Bermuda dollar can be moved IMO, as can be Brunei dollar.

Regarding the Cayman Islands dollar... We've also got the Falkland Islands pound, which somehow sounds wrong as "Falkland pound", but I may be wrong. If we move the Cayman Islands dollar, we'll also have to move the Falkland Islands pound.

Suriname dollar can be moved IMO, as can be Vietnamese dong.

Regarding the New Taiwan dollar: I'm for moving it to Taiwanese new dollar, to mirror other currencies with "new" as part of their proper name (Turkish new lira, Israeli new sheqel, ...).

To summarize my thoughts on the non-controversial moves:


 * Antoninianus &rarr; Roman antoninianus
 * As (coin) &rarr; Roman as
 * Denarius &rarr; Roman denarius
 * Barbados dollar – leave it where it is
 * Bermuda dollar &rarr; Bermudan dollar
 * Brunei dollar &rarr; Bruneian dollar
 * Cayman Islands dollar – unsure
 * Suriname dollar &rarr; Surinamese dollar
 * New Taiwan dollar &rarr; Taiwanese new dollar
 * Vietnamese dong &rarr; Vietnamese đồng

What do you think? I'd say we should discuss the controversial ones only after these. ナイトスタリオン ✉ 13:44, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Merriam Webster dictionary (http://www.m-w.com) says that things from Barbados are Barbadian. Similarly for Caymanian. I think United States is an example where there is no "United Statesian" so we make do. I'm not sure about Trinidad and Tobago or Falkland Islands, but will look them up when I get a chance. I agree with "Taiwanese new dollar" if we keep the new (I've been meaning to propose that for the style guide), however the page itself says that the new is optional, so I thought it would be neater without. For the controversial ones, I was planning to post to their talk pages with a link here, inviting discussion. I wanted to phrase the recommendation carefully though so as to not antagonize anyone, and haven't gotten to it yet. Ingrid 19:33, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I'd like to propose that we consider the CIA World Factbook as a reasonably accurate source of terms like "Caymanian". It's in the public domain so it's fully citable.  I'll grant that it's not necessarily neutral, but as a resource for finding the adjective form of a given country name, it's reasonably trustworthy.  IMHO.  Thus I propose the following names:
 * Antoninianus &rarr; Roman antoninianus
 * As (coin) &rarr; Roman as
 * Denarius &rarr; Roman denarius
 * Barbados dollar &rarr; Barbadian dollar
 * Bermuda dollar &rarr; Bermudian dollar
 * Brunei dollar &rarr; Bruneian dollar
 * Cayman Islands dollar &rarr; Caymanian dollar
 * Suriname dollar &rarr; Surinamese dollar
 * New Taiwan dollar &rarr; Taiwan new dollar
 * Vietnamese dong &rarr; Vietnamese đồng


 * Note: "Barbadian", "Bermudian", "Caymanian" and "Taiwan," not the words you might expect to find.  I would submit that using Google as an official reference for the adjective form of a country's name is not necessarily correct.  I'm not actually sure I agree with all of these terms, but this is what the CIA Fact Book has as the official adjective form.  For what it's worth, the adjective form of "United States" is "American".  So if we are going to be pedantic, it should be "American dollar" not "United States dollar".
 * And also, the offical forms for Falkland Islands and Trinidad and Tobago are "Falkland Islands" and "Trinidadian / Tobagonian". So the official name for their currency should be Falkland Islands pound and Trinidadian and Tobagonian dollar.
 * -- Markkawika 22:42, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm fine with whatever source everyone likes, but I'm a bit more in favor of a neutral (non-political) source like a dictionary. I'm going to update the to do list with the ones we've agreed on (if anyone else has a problem with any of them, feel free to bring it up). Merriam-Webster says Bermuda can be Bermudian or Bermudan, so I'm happy with either. That leaves (my votes in bold, sometimes two votes if I don't care):
 * New Taiwan dollar -> Taiwan new dollar, Taiwan dollar, Taiwanese new dollar or Taiwanese dollar
 * Falkland Islands pound -> leave or Falkland pound
 * Barbados dollar -> leave or Barbadian dollar
 * Cayman Islands dollar -> leave or Caymanian dollar
 * Bermuda dollar -> leave or Bermudan dollar or Bermudian dollar
 * United States dollar (or were you kidding? -- I think it's unfortunate that American means United Statesian and would rather not use it, but I'm flexible)
 * Trinidad and Tobago dollar -> leave or Trinidadian and Tobagan dollar
 * Then there are some others I've found:
 * Belize dollar -> Belizean dollar
 * Singapore dollar -> Singaporean dollar
 * Continental Currency -> ?North American continental currency?
 * Conventionsthaler -> Holy Roman conventionsthaler
 * Greek drachma -> split to Ancient Greek drachma and Greek drachma, put a disambiguation page at Drachma
 * Dupondius -> Roman dupondius
 * Burundi franc -> Burundian franc
 * Polish mark -> Polish marka
 * Gibraltar pound -> Gibraltarian pound
 * Isle of Man pound -> Manx pound
 * Saint Helena pound -> Saint Helena and Ascension pound
 * Reichsthaler -> Holy Roman reichsthaler
 * Russian ruble -> split to Russian ruble and Soviet ruble? There's a redirect now, but it's always been a pet peeve of mine that people call the USSR Russia. Maybe it doesn't matter.
 * Latvian ruble -> Latvian rubłi
 * Sestertius -> Roman sestertius
 * Trade dollar -> United States trade dollar
 * Vereinsthaler -> ?German and Austro-Hungarian vereinsthaler?
 * Ingrid 02:20, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I am not an expert on the English language. But I am from Taiwan, and I can tell you what is really happening there. Since New Taiwan dollar replaced Old Taiwan dollar more than 50 years ago, people omit the word "new" in everyday life. On the Taiwanese Yahoo shopping, eBay and restaurants, prices are marked with NT$ or simply $ (but never T$), if not "元". Government official documents always have the word "new" when referring to the currency. --Chochopk 03:05, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * "New Taiwan Dollar" is the translation by the Central Bank of China. See here. --Chochopk 03:08, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * This is something should have a poll on. I've set one up at the bottom of the page. Markkawika 21:38, 18 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Of course, you would be leaving the redirect, right? Tito xd (?!? - did you read this?) 02:44, 18 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Definitely leave the redirect. I also think we should add more redirects. For example, I think Angolan kwanza should have redirects from Angola kwanza, kwanza, and kwanza (currency). Ingrid 04:48, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Note that as this has rather far-reaching consequences, I've created a new template Numismaticrename and added it to the talk pages all of the currencies that we're discussing renaming. The template points readers to the Style Page and to here. Hope that's okay. Markkawika 09:06, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you! The template and the poll were both great ideas! I updated the template to point to the specific conversation and poll. If we want to use it in after this discussion, we can just edit that, but I thought it would be more friendly to people who don't want to read through all of our mess of irrelevant discussions. Ingrid 21:57, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * The article on the U.S. Trade Dollar should probably be called either Trade Dollar (United States) or, ideally, just Trade Dollar. It isn't a distinct currency, simply a silver coin with slightly different specifications. Paul 03:09, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Denominations should always start with a capital letter.
See Rhodesian Dollar. - (Aidan Work 02:49, 18 December 2005 (UTC))


 * Actually, denominations should always start with a lower case letter. See WikiProject Numismatics/Style. Funny you should pick Rhodesian Dollar as an example. I'm the one who asked Titoxd to move it from Rhodesian Dollar to Rhodesian dollar to match the numismatics style guide. Before we started moving articles, there was no consistent style used. We're trying to find all of the articles and make them consistent. See for upcoming moves. If you disagree with the existing style guidelines, please share your reasons here. Ingrid 04:45, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

I have always preferred to list denominations themselves starting with capital letters. See my article Coins of Cyprus as another example of why I always have currency denominations starting with capital letters. I am a numismatist in my own right. - (Aidan Work 00:54, 20 December 2005 (UTC))

New category?
I was just browsing around (when I really should've been doing something else, but what else is new?) and I found Otis Kaye. He makes currency based art (not counterfeit since it's not intended to be used as money). Seems like he should be in our project, but I'm not sure which category. Maybe a new Category:Currency related art under Category:Currency? The name doesn't exactly flow, but it's the best I can come up with. Any suggestions? Ingrid 14:52, 18 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Why not Category:Currency art or Category:Art based on currency. Just a few ideas.

Johann Wolfgang 18:51, 18 December 2005 (UTC)


 * It would have to be Category:Currency-related art if we were going to use that term. But I think I prefer Category:Art based on currency myself. Markkawika 00:42, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Currency Rename POLL

 * Poll ends 12:00pm -5:00 GMT December 25th 2005
 * (All users are allowed to vote here)

Shall we rename these currencies or keep them as they are? (Please refer to the Style Guide for our current policies and discussion)

New Taiwan dollar &rarr;
 * ~leave
 * Strong support (and strong oppose for the other proposals): The proposals are ridiculous. There is no such thing as an "Old Taiwan dollar". There was a Taiwan Yen and the Taiwan Nationalist Yuan, but not "old Taiwan dollar". And "New Taiwan dollar" is the name and form used everywhere. No one uses "Taiwan new dollar" or "Taiwanese new dollar". What happened to the use common names rule? If there isn't a good reason not to use the common name, then don't break the rule.--Jiang 08:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong support and complete agreement with what Jiang says. The common name is paramount; at best, the -ese form can be preferred as a tiebreaker. Jpatokal 17:54, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Instantnood 21:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC) - Per Jiang. Either leave, or rename New Taiwan Dollar.


 * ~Split into New Taiwan dollar and Old Taiwan dollar
 * Vote: Actually I have a problem with one of the style guide: "Use the standard name of Somewhereian generic currency". Yes, we say Canadian dollar, Thai baht, Swiss franc all the time, but there are exceptions too. See above where I explain New Taiwan dollar is the official translation. And also, what's the adjective form of Hong Kong? The name written on Hong Kong banknotes is Hong Kong dollar. (Maybe the adjective form of Hong Kong is Hong Kong, and I'm not aware of it) --Chochopk 06:54, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * (Note: The CIA World Book has "Hong Kong" as the adjective form of the name.  So it would be Hong Kong dollar.) Markkawika 07:57, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * ~Split into Taiwan new dollar and Taiwan old dollar
 * Weak Vote: This is the CIAWB version of the adjective, and "new dollar" is what the government calls it. But apparently everyone else calls it the "dollar", so I'm torn. Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The government does not call it the "new dollar". It calls it the "new Taiwan dollar" like what is stated on the Central Bank of China website. In ordinary colloquial speech it is the kuai or yuan (usually denoted 元, unsimplified to 圓 on the bills, and sometimes denoted as NT$). No one calls it the "new dollar". Whenever it is referred to officially, it is noted as the "New Taiwan dollar" since, until 5 years ago, the official currency was the silver yuan even though the silver yuan hadnt been in circulation for decades.--Jiang 13:43, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * ~Split into Taiwan dollar and Taiwan old dollar
 * Vote. I think this will do best, though I dislike all options... [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * ~Split into Taiwanese new dollar and Taiwanese old dollar


 * ~Split into Taiwanese dollar and Taiwanese old dollar
 * vote. I don't think it's relevant what the government calls it (whether the official language is English or not). We're trying to have a consistent naming style. Personally, I don't really care what that is, but I do hope we can choose a consistent style and implement it. Right now, our style is to use the adjectival form of the country name (in English) followed by the local denomination. That would be this one. Situations where people might expect a different name (like this one, where many people who are familiar with the local name of the currency but not the Wikipedia naming style will look at New Taiwan dollar) are what redirects are for. Except I'm not sure about "Taiwanese old dollar", per Jiang's comments above, it sounds like there was no "dollar" before this. Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It not just about what the government calls it, but what everyone else calls it. This means businessmen, economists, journalists, historians, traders, merchants.... We have a policy, "use common names", that is not to be broken without good cause. I don't see a good cause here. Why should wikipedia be inventing names that don't exist? Sometimes consistency is good, but in this case it is inappropriate. Currency names are in ways like proper names. What this amounts to is moving "Alan Dershowitz" to "Allen Dershowitz" under the notion that we should keep a consistent name for "Allen/Alan". In the real world, people don't always refer to things using the same figure of speech. It's not wikipedia's job to engineer a consistency that just doesn't exist.--Jiang 01:22, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support I to dislike all options, but this sounds best.  And if there was no "old" dollar, no "old" dollar article should exist.   Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * The discussion on this currency is out of control!! (Actually a "controlled discussion" is not a real discussion). I see this problem as 3 issues
 * Use adjective Taiwanese or not I have no more comment to add on this subject. The facts are already provided: our style guideline conflicts with the official translation.
 * Word ordering, i.e. Taiwan(ese) new v.s. New Taiwan(ese) Do we have a style guideline for non-national adjective such as new, old, convertible, etc?
 * The currency before the current one (The one that live between 1945 and 1949) It is inevitable that an encyclopedia must introduce a thing, if possible. So the real question is, do we split, or not? What do we call it? So far I only found one source of official translation, Old Taiwan dollar (folder of a commemorative banknote). Actually I have doubts about the name Jiang uses (Taiwan Nationalist Yuan). I don't remember seeing any source that use the term. And it is highly unusual to name a currency with a sub-national political entity (Nationalist). It sounds like a currency issued by a rebellious faction, which it was not.
 * A note on the word "Yuan". Yuan = 元 = 圓 = Yen = Won = dollar. Just like pound = lira = livre = libre, or drachma = dram. Chinese banknotes issued after the Xinhai Revolution in 1911 all have the word 圓 on it, of course, but 1/2 of them say "dollar" on the back as the English translation, 1/2 of them say "Yuan". The Old Taiwan dollar notes do not have English translation on themselves, only the Chinese 圓. But early New Taiwan dollar notes in the 1950's have the English word "Yuan". English translation was discontinued since 1960. --Chochopk 01:28, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Falkland Islands pound &rarr;


 * ~leave
 * Vote: CIAWB version. Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Falkland Islands Pound is better. - (Aidan Work 01:13, 19 December 2005 (UTC))
 * Vote. I think this should stay where it is. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support: use common names.--Jiang 19:29, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Instantnood 21:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * ~Falkland pound

Barbados dollar &rarr;


 * ~leave
 * Support: use common names.--Jiang 19:29, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * ~Barbadian dollar
 * Vote: CIAWB version. Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Cayman Islands dollar &rarr;


 * ~leave
 * Vote. Would be awkward when compared to Falkland Islands pound. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support: use common names.--Jiang 19:29, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support per Falkland Islands pound  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Instantnood 21:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * ~Caymanian dollar
 * Vote: CIAWB version. Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Cayman Islands Dollar is better. - (Aidan Work 01:13, 19 December 2005 (UTC))
 * vote Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Bermuda dollar &rarr;


 * ~leave


 * ~Bermudan dollar


 * ~Bermudian dollar
 * Vote: CIAWB version. Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Bermudian Dollar is better. - (Aidan Work 01:13, 19 December 2005 (UTC))
 * Agree. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

United States dollar &rarr;


 * ~leave
 * American dollar would be POV. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support: use common names.--Jiang 19:29, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support I think that "American" would be more of the common name than US, but I know I don't say either, so...but...  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with Nightstallion on this issue that "American" would be POV. Keep in mind that there are two continents with the title of America in their name.  Also, some residents of South America, for example, consider themselves "American" (though obviously not United States "American").  Also, this would be confusing/conflicting with the "Currencies of the Americas" info box.  To sum things up, I'm strongly opposed to this name change.  Kurt 01:45, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * ~American dollar
 * Weak Vote: CIAWB version. The only reason why we should do this is if we want to fully conform to our Style guide. It is more technically correct, and I'm for being technically correct.  But my feelings are weak. Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Trinidad and Tobago dollar &rarr;


 * ~leave


 * ~Trinidadian and Tobagan dollar


 * ~Trinidadian and Tobagonian dollar
 * Vote: CIAWB version. Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Trinidad & Tobago Dollar is better. - (Aidan Work 01:13, 19 December 2005 (UTC))
 * Agree, somehow. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak Support Trinidad and Tobago dollar is a lot less clumsy tho  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Belize dollar &rarr;


 * ~leave
 * Support: use common names.--Jiang 19:29, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * ~Belizean dollar
 * Vote: CIAWB version. Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Belizean Dollar is better. - (Aidan Work 01:13, 19 December 2005 (UTC))
 * Agree. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Singapore dollar &rarr;


 * ~leave
 * Vote: CIAWB version. Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong vote: In Singapore &mdash; an English-speaking country, I might add &mdash; it's always called the "Singapore dollar", never the conjugated version. Google also agrees by a whopping margin of about 30:1. Jpatokal 17:52, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support: use common names.--Jiang 19:29, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Instantnood 21:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC) - Very often "Singapore" is also used as an adjective.


 * ~Singaporean dollar
 * Singaporean Dollar is better. - (Aidan Work 01:13, 19 December 2005 (UTC))
 * Weak vote. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote (see my comments under "Taiwanese dollar" above) Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support

Conventionsthaler &rarr;


 * ~leave
 * Leave it. I think our system fails from a certain point in history backwards. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote. You make a good point, Nightstallion. Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * ~Holy Roman conventionsthaler
 * Vote: Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It is better to leave it at Conventionsthaler, because quite a few German-speaking states issued Conventionsthalers. Put a link at Thaler as well.

Greek drachma &rarr;


 * ~leave


 * ~split to Ancient Greek drachma and Greek drachma, put a disambiguation page at Drachma
 * Vote: Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Dupondius &rarr;


 * ~leave


 * ~Roman dupondius
 * Vote: Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support was there anyother type of dupondius?  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Burundi franc &rarr;


 * ~leave


 * ~Burundian franc
 * Vote: CIAWB version. Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Polish mark &rarr;


 * ~leave


 * ~Polish marka
 * Vote: CIAWB version. Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Gibraltar pound &rarr;


 * ~leave
 * Vote: CIAWB version. Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Instantnood 21:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * ~Gibraltarian pound
 * Gibratarian Pound is better. - (Aidan Work 01:13, 19 December 2005 (UTC))
 * vote Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support consistancy sucks   Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Isle of Man pound &rarr;


 * ~leave


 * ~Manx pound
 * Vote: There is no CIA World Book entry for Isle of Man. I like "Manx" better though, because it does seem to be the command adjective form of the country from what I've seen. Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Manx Pound is better, as the Isle of Man's native people are known as Manx & their language as Manx-Gaelic.
 * Weak agree. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Saint Helena pound &rarr;


 * ~leave


 * ~Saint Helena and Ascension pound
 * St Helena & Ascension Pound is better. - (Aidan Work 01:13, 19 December 2005 (UTC))
 * vote The coins say "Saint Helena and Ascension", so I think the title should include both. I'd like it to be Saint Helenian and Ascensionian (or whatever), but I don't think Ascension has an adjectival form. Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * ~Saint Helenian pound
 * Vote: CIAWB version. Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support consistancy sucks   Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Reichsthaler &rarr;


 * ~leave
 * As per vereinsthaler. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * ~Holy Roman reichsthaler
 * Vote: Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Put a link in at Thaler, because quite a few of the German-speaking states issued Reichsthalers. - (Aidan Work 01:13, 19 December 2005 (UTC))

Russian ruble &rarr;


 * ~leave


 * ~split to Russian ruble and Soviet ruble
 * It is more correct to say Russian Rouble & U.S.S.R. Rouble. -(Aidan Work 01:13, 19 December 2005 (UTC))
 * What about the style guide: "Use the local name for the denomination even if there's an English translation (e.g., Czech koruna, not Czech crown)". Singular ruble in Russian is рубль, which would be transliterated as rubl'. Plural nominative would be рубли = rubli (As in "What are those? Rubles."). But if you're talking about specific plural quantity, you need to use plural genetive case. 2~4 rubles would be рубля = rublya. 5 or more would be рублей = rubley. See also Romanization of Russian. There are also a Belarusian ruble (where the transliteration is actually rubel') and Transnistrian ruble --Chochopk 06:54, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with you. The Style guide says we should use Russian рубль.  That's what it should be in my opinion.  Redirection, of course, for things like Russian rubl' or Russian ruble.  I'll add those as voting options.. Markkawika 08:01, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree. Using Cyrillic is out of the question, though, this will never live through anyone not working on this project having a look at it. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote this is a tough one. I'd like to have them at the Cyrillic, but agree with Nightstallion that that's not practical. So, this gets my vote. Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * ~split to Russian рубль and Soviet рубль, with English-language redirects.
 * Vote: Markkawika 08:01, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Latvian ruble &rarr;
 * ~leave


 * ~Latvian rubłi
 * Vote: CIAWB version. Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Instantnood 21:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Sestertius &rarr;


 * ~leave


 * ~Roman sestertius
 * Vote: Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support

Trade dollar &rarr;


 * ~leave


 * ~United States trade dollar


 * ~split into United States trade dollar (or American trade dollar, depending on the outcome of United States dollar above) and Japanese trade dollar, with disambiguation page
 * Vote: Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't forget, that there was a British Trade Dollar, which was issued between 1895 & 1935. - (Aidan Work 01:13, 19 December 2005 (UTC))
 * Agree. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Brunei dollar &rarr;


 * ~leave
 * Instantnood 21:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * ~Bruneian dollar
 * Vote: CIAWB version. Markkawika 00:25, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Bruneian Dollar sounds better. - (Aidan Work 01:13, 19 December 2005 (UTC))
 * Agree. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 10:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * vote Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

(Note: I have left out Continental Currency because I wasn't sure if there was any consensus on what to call it. We can have another poll about that later.

Markkawika 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Some other ones (since the poll is not too old, I'm going to list them here): Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC) Rhodesian Dollar &rarr;


 * ~leave
 * Instantnood 21:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * ~Rhodesian dollar
 * vote This clearly conforms to our style guide. It was moved (to little d) once, and got moved back (to big D), so I'm listing it to verify that there is consensus. Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support  Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support, of course. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 23:37, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Bosnia and Herzegovina convertible mark &rarr;


 * ~leave


 * ~Bosnia and Herzegovina convertible marka
 * Support Shouldn't everything except the denomination, marka, be in english?   Joe I  23:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Mh, no: Compare German reichsmark, which would be German imperial mark by your notion. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 23:37, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * ~Bosnia and Herzegovina konvertibilna marka
 * vote this is the denomination on the bills (see http://www.cbbh.gov.ba/en/bnc.html). Ingrid 21:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Agreed. 23:37, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Are the polls above getting anywhere? &mdash; Instantnood 18:05, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Image filename
I hate to see people put whatever they want for their images. I wish we can standardize the filename. You can look at the images I uploaded. The format is (Country name, P (for Pick number, a de facto bible for banknote is written by someone named Pick), pick number-denomination-year, _a for front or _b for back). e.g.



By the way, is there a way to rename an image?


 * I'm all for standardization. Would it be better to discuss this on the Style page?


 * As for renaming of an image, you can't. See the third paragraph of this section: Image use policy


 * --Markkawika 09:03, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * So what I'm proposing is basically a derivation of the Banknote World style. With an important difference that front side (obverse) ends with "_a" instead of "_f" so that on your file system, the front is sorted before the back. And for country name, I personally prefer something like ChinaPR, CongoDR, GermanyFR so that there is no ambiguity, but also not too long. And of course, as usual, issued year if different from printed year are put in parenthesis.


 * Please say yay, nay, or comment on my proposed file name style. --Chochopk 13:15, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Is it ok to submit banknote/coin images to the Wikimedia Commons as free license? The images are either scanned by myself, or from Banknote World where the webmaster explicitly permits re-publishing the images if --Chochopk 04:13, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The images will be used for your own viewing pleasure. Or,
 * You will use the images to promote World Paper Money collecting. Or,
 * You will use the images in some form of educational capacity. Or,
 * You will use the images in your personal homepage.


 * Since I'm fairly sure I'll hardly ever upload banknote images, my word shouldn't really have too much weight in this discussion, but to me, the style proposed looks good enough. Not too long, while being absolutely clear and unambiguous. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] Nightstallion ✉ 15:07, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Using Catalogue References.
There are 2 types of Pick catalogues - ones for officially issued banknotes, & ones for private & trading banknotes. The catalogue number prefixes as used by dealers & collectors is as follows;

P number for officially issued banknotes. 'P' is derived from the Pick catalogues listing notes up to 1960, & one listing notes issued since 1961. PS number for private & trading bank notes. 'PS' is derived from the Pick Specialised catalogue. - (Aidan Work 00:51, 20 December 2005 (UTC))


 * Shall I add, PR for regional issues. --Chochopk 13:15, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Here's another one; PCS for collector's series notes, such as those same-serial numbered specimen banknotes that came out in the late 1970's. - (Aidan Work 01:36, 22 December 2005 (UTC))

No more moves please
I'd like to request that no one move any currency articles until after the poll is concluded. I know that I have moved articles in the past without consulting anyone in trying to implement the existing style guide. Now that we're getting consensus from outside of the Numismatics project, I think it's important to wait and see what's decided before we try to implement anything. Thank you. Ingrid 02:32, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I went ahead and moved a page since I found two that were about the same currency with different names, both of which seemed wrong to me. They were East Timor escudo and Timor Escudo. I merged, and put at Portuguese Timor escudo. Wherever it ends up is fine with me, I just thought it shouldn't be left as two separate pages during the discussion. Ingrid 04:18, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Post-poll discussion topics
I don't want to confuse the existing poll by adding more entries at this point. Here are some that will either be decided by an updated style guide, or need to be discussed in the future (feel free to add to the list):
 * French Franc -> French franc
 * Cypriot Pound -> Cypriot pound
 * Luxembourgish Franc -> Luxembourg (or Luxembourgian) franc
 * New Hebrides Franc -> New Hebrides franc
 * Irish pound -> Irish pound (pre 1979) and Irish punt (1979-2002)
 * louis (coin) -> ?French louis? ?French gold louis?
 * écu (coin) -> ?French écu? ?French silver écu?

Also, I've brought this up at the Style page, but it seems that we're discussing naming conventions here right now. We had some sort of consensus to use "French coins" instead of "Coins of France" as an article or category title. As I learn more about Wikipedia, I think "x of y" is more standard than "y-ish x". Ingrid 02:32, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Still,that doesn't change the fact that denominations should always start with a capital letter. - (Aidan Work 03:11, 20 December 2005 (UTC))


 * Let's let the survey/poll below see if there is any consensus on that. :) Markkawika 10:37, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * For those of you who care, the adjective forms of those in Ingrid's list (according to the CIA World Book are: "French", "Cypriot", and "Luxembourg". I don't know what the New Hebrides adjective form is, but the Vanuatu adjective form is "Ni-Vanuatu".  No joke. Someone should create Ni-Vanuatu vatu.


 * Oh, and I vote for Coins of France over French coins. Markkawika 10:37, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Markkawika, when the main currency unit is applicable to only one country the nationality label should be omitted. For example, the Vatu, which is used only in Vanuatu, the article should be changed from Vanuatu vatu to Vatu. - (Aidan Work 01:29, 22 December 2005 (UTC))

succession box title
As many of you know, I've been adding succession boxes to currency pages. It just occurred to me that rather than sticking it at the end of the article (often under "External links" which makes no sense), there should be a header. I stuck it under "Succession box" on French franc, but am not really happy with that. Any ideas of a better title? Ingrid 04:31, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I replaced "Succession box" with a vertical line. I think this is more fitting Kurt 09:13, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Did you mean a horizontal line? I like your design, Kurt.  I definitely think it should go at the bottom of the page, not at the top. Markkawika 10:25, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Great, I support standardizing common attributes like this. But how is it that nobody comments on my Template:Infobox_Currency (See examples here). I believe it would be a great idea to incorporate succession information into that infobox. --Chochopk 13:15, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Actually, it occurred to me that succession boxes probably belong in the "See also" section. As far as the currency box, I really intend to look at it. I've been occupied with the renaming discussion, but will get to it soon. Ingrid 15:16, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Poll on capitalisation of denominations.
Here's a poll about whether coin & banknote denominations should start with capital letters.Please post your name in the appropriate column & the reason(s) for your choice.You are limited to ONE vote per member. - (Aidan Work 06:30, 20 December 2005 (UTC))

In favour of starting denominations with capital letters.

 * 1) User:Aidan Work. - I have always labelled denominations starting with capital letters, which is traditional among serious numismatists. - (Aidan Work 06:30, 20 December 2005 (UTC))
 * 2) Tito xd (?!? - help us) - I think that these are proper nouns, and our naming conventions say that proper nouns should be capitalized. Tito xd (?!? - help us) 22:01, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Johann Wolfgang This is the way most guides do it, so this should be the way we will do it. Johann Wolfgang 18:26, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Opposed to starting denominations with capital letters.

 * 1) Non-capitalized is clearly to be preferred. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 09:10, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) I agree with Nightstallion. When speaking about "The Dollar" I would capitalize it (for example, "The Dollar is rising against the Yen"), but not when speaking about "United States dollars" as opposed to (say) "French francs". Markkawika 10:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Agree with both. Unless it's a proper name, it shouldn't be capitalized. I don't thnk that the example Markkawika gave is a proper name though. The only case I can think of is, possibly, Belly Button Dollar or others where a specific variety has a name, but even then, is it a name or a description? Ingrid 15:10, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Support no caps  Joe I  21:53, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) In general, I think denominations are usually lower-case. Individual designs, though, should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and should remain consistent throughout articles. --TantalumT e lluride 22:11, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Follow local and common practices

 * 1) Instantnood 21:21, 23 December 2005 (UTC) - It is not for us to decide how the denominations of a currency are written. There is a common practice for each currency.

Macau or Macao?
Currently Macao redirects to Macau. And it says
 * The form "Macao" was the original Portuguese spelling, and has been retained in most European languages. In modern Portuguese, the correct spelling is "Macau". During the 20th century, the official spelling "Macau" became more and more common in English-language sources, including most print media.


 * Since the handover of sovereignty, the government of Macau considers "Macao" the official English spelling of the name, whereas "Macau" remains the official spelling in Portuguese. This is the practice followed in official documents such as passports and immigration forms.

So what should we use for the infoboxes, or image filename? --Chochopk 13:36, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Trying Google News, I get twice as many Macau as Macao, which seems to indicate that Macau is the more commonly used form in current English. In addition, all other shtuff (e.g. Image:Flag of Macau.svg) is standardized to Macau. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 13:49, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Macao is the more well-known spelling, as 'Macau' is the Portuguese spelling. It must be remembered that Macao is an English pronouciation of the Portuguese name. - (Aidan Work 01:32, 21 December 2005 (UTC))


 * I don't know about the rest of the English-speaking world, but in the UK the standard spelling (used in atlases, encyclopedias etc.) is in my experience "Macao". Matt 13:55, 22 December 2005 (UTC).

money-stub
I just noticed that the money-stub template says "This currency- or coinage-related article..." Since currency includes coinage, we should change it, probably to "This currency-related article...". It's going to appear on so many pages I didn't want to make the change without checking. Ingrid 05:38, 21 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Agreed. --Chochopk 05:42, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 06:46, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support -Johann Wolfgang 18:26, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Changed. Tito xd (?!? - help us) 02:14, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Currency templates
The templates used for listing coins, banknotes, etc. should settle on a standardized style; right now, they're not consistent with respect to formatting, official coin/note name, coins/notes not currently in production, uniformity in currency topics, etc. The three examples that currently exist are:

 Category:British coinage

I think an "ideal" template would be similar to the current US and Canadian templates, but I don't want to go through and change/create templates before collecting a little feedback. –Swid 20:30, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

There's also (at least -- I haven't gone on a search, but these are what I've found and listed on the project page):

category:Currencies of Hong Kong

I agree that there ought to be consistency. First, changing "coins and currency" to "currency" or "coins and banknotes". Other than that, I don't much care. I'm not sure if these will even be necessary once the currency infobox is implemented (see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numismatics). Ingrid 22:49, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The standard template looks like the US currency and coinage template, so I would change all of those to match that style. Tito xd (?!? - help us) 02:16, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I am subst:ing the above templates so that they are displayed in their current form and (mostly) so that this talk page doesn't show up in any categories. Melchoir 02:30, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Succession boxes.
How do I add these in. For example, I have added in some information about the Governors of the South African Reserve Bank. What I want to know is, how do I add in the succession boxes? - (Aidan Work 01:32, 22 December 2005 (UTC))


 * What I always do is find a page that has one (Yugoslav dinar has a complex one, Malawian kwacha has a simple one). I click "edit this page", then select the succession box text, and copy and paste it into the new article. Then, I edit it. To me, that's easier than remembering all the details. If you have any specific questions about how they work, feel free to post to my talk page. Ingrid 02:06, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Attention people who care about Ireland!
If you're not already aware of the situation, please drop by these AfDs: I personally don't care whether these articles get deleted, merged into the Republic series, or merged from the Republic series, but something has to be done. Melchoir 02:26, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Articles for deletion/Banknotes of Ireland.
 * Articles for deletion/Coins of Ireland.

Naming conventions
Until Jiang brought it up, above, I was not aware that we were violating Naming conventions. Now, I think we are (specifically, that you're supposed to use common names. So, unless we plan to create our own Naming conventions page (which I could see the benefit of, but I'm not sure I want to volunteer to write it or see it through the acceptance process), I think we need to google-search to find waht's commonly used, and go with that. Presumably, we could still refer to currencies however we want within articles (if we end up with a lot of pages that are named differently from how we want to refer to the currency, that would be a reason to propose a new naming convention). Much as I don't like it, I think that's the way we have to go. Ingrid 19:50, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm all for having our own naming convention. [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] Nightstallion ✉ 22:36, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * We should follow the official ISO 4217 currency names. ISO spends a lot of time and money establishing appropriate currency names in English and French. These always coincide with the names by which currencies are most commonly known internationally, but ISO also consults central banks for their opinions. ISO uses country adjectives where the adjective is particularly well known, the country name if the country adjective is not well known or does not exist, or no country if the currency name is unique. There is no point in deviating from these internationally recognised currency names, given that somebody else has already done this research for us very well. However, the ISO 4217 article is not currently accurate. An updated case-sensitive copy of ISO 4217 costs GBP 70.00 if bought from ISO or a capitalised version can be found free in the current SWIFT book. Nfh 22:19, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Googletest is quite reliable, but not *always* reliable. I think ISO 4217 is a good standard to use here. It follows the common name and accuracy rules. Is the book on books.google.com?


 * I don't think the SWIFT book is widely retailed. I occasionally get a copy from the back office of one of the investment banks I work for. The book primarily contains SWIFT codes of banks in order to send payments to them, but it also happens to contain a reliable (capitalised) copy of ISO 4217. Nfh 09:28, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

There has been no justification given here for not using common names. There is nothing inherently inaccurate, biased, or offensive in the common names. There's no point in creating a consistency that does not exist in the real world.--Jiang 09:10, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Exactly, I couldn't agree more. For example, changing Pound Sterling to "British Pound" for consistency is absurd, because the currency is not commonly known as "British Pound". ISO 4217 ensures that we use the commonly used names, using country adjectives only if those adjectives are common in international usage. Nfh 09:28, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I heartily agree with the idea of moving to the ISO 4217 name for the currency. I don't think our current Project naming conventions are reasonable, especially when you have things like the Russian ruble that by the strictest interpretation of the rule would require the page to be named "Russian рубль". That's clearly not a good idea in an english encyclopedia. The naming rules need to be revised. Markkawika 13:35, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * So what's the verdict? This topic has been discussed to death! Once we get a consensus, people can actually start implementing what we decide. I could really use some help on the infobox... --Chochopk 14:05, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * shrugs What I'd like to see used isn't likely to survive this, but I'd say we should have a simple vote on it – ISO 4217/common name or standardized usage. Either way, we would have some way of ((COUNTRY)) ((CURRENCY)) implemented, as far as I see, with a few exceptions like euro, pound sterling and yuan renminbi, right? &mdash; Nightstallion (?) 14:21, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm fine with using ISO 4217, but what about currencies that were around before ISO 4217? I think consistency is important, but it doesn't have to be arbitrary consistency. That is, ISO 4217 does not have any consistent rule (at least as I understand it), yet we would be consistent if we always followed 4217. Similarly, "common use" as determined by google is consistent, even when it doesn't yield a consistent style from one currency to the next. It allows people who are creating new pages to know what to name them, and people who are looking for pages to know where to look. That's what I think is important -- I personally will be happy with whatever rule is adopted. Ingrid 19:56, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I have a 1997 copy of ISO 4217 which we can use for some of the obsolete currencies (particularly the pre-euro legacy currencies). For anything older than that, perhaps we could ask ISO. They may be kind enough to provide a very old copy of ISO 4217 free of charge, or they may be able to help with specific historic questions. My understanding is that the British Standards Institute maintains ISO 4217 on behalf of ISO, so it may be best to go directly to them. See their web site. Nfh 20:13, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * As I understand it (and I'm certainly no expert), ISO 4217 is only intended to label currencies back to 1900. I didn't see a list of the codes from the BSI. Here's a link to the |ISO list on the ISO website, but it appears to be only current currencies. I notice that both Malawian kwacha and Zambian kwacha are listed as "kwacha", so that wouldn't work for page names. Ingrid 23:51, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Another related issue is what to name articles about a specific coin (or banknote). As far as I can tell, there's no existing consistency. See Category:Coins and its subcategories for plenty of examples. Ingrid 19:56, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Vote
Let's get this over with. We deal with the principal now, and minor details/exceptions later -- Chochopk 12:20, 31 December 2005 (UTC) - I changed it Chochopk, hope this is what you meant. Rev if not :)  Joe I  16:54, 31 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Use of ISO 4217 as naming convention?
 * 1) Support --Chochopk 12:20, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Support for mordern/listed currencies. There is an issue, I havent seen the ISO, someone said some dont have country distinguishers, every currency should have a country.  Ancient curriencies...another issue.   Joe I  16:54, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * concerns. I'm not voting either way, but I have some concerns with this option. As Joe I said, not all currencies include a country name (see my comment above regarding kwacha). Also, not all historical currencies are listed (even modern historical currencies, as I understand it -- again, see above). The fact that some currencies are not in English is confusing, e.g., Franc Congolais. Finally, do we have access to a complete list, and rights to use it? Ingrid 23:51, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Support - use wherever possible. For kwacha, we will obviously have to add a country name, and if we differ slightly from ISO 4217 in at least some cases such as this, then we may avoid copyright issues. I believe there may be some deliberate errors in the list at  in order to detect copying. For example, Metical (Mozambique) is listed as "Merical". We should also investigate why the English listings for certain currencies in ISO 4217 resemble another language, e.g. Franc Congolais, Peso Uruguayo, Rial Omani. There may be a good reason for these, which we should find out before dismissing them. NFH 10:27, 2 January 2006 (UTC) I'm also very against inserting country names where ISO4217 doesn't include them (except for kwacha). If the currency name is unique, it doesn't need a country. We can make reference to the country in the article itself. However, in any list of currencies, I do think it's a good idea to make some reference to the country, perhaps in another column (like ISO and SWIFT do). NFH 19:01, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Support &mdash; The rule should be "use ISO 4217 except...", where the exceptions are spelled out. If 4217 doesn't include a country name, we include it.  Once we find out from ISO why some of the odd foreign names (Franc Conglais et al) are used, we can decide whether to use that or Congolese franc.  Another exception would be "pre-1900 currencies" or "currencies not listed by 4217".  For those we can follow our current convention if it applies ("Somewhereian dollar") or for ancient currencies we'll just have to discuss each of them and decide on a final name.  Basically, the standard should provide room for oddities.
 * 3) Support. deviations should be permitted with good cause and consensus (per reasons give by NFH). if ISO 4217 doesnt list te country, then we shouldnt include it. titles should only be as long as they are necessary. if the long form is neither common nor informative, then there is no point in using the long form. for older currencies, we simply need other means to find the common name (google, etc). --Jiang 09:19, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Support with derogations given below. &mdash; Nightstallion (?) 09:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Use of Google "most used name" naming convention?


 * Define and use original naming conventions?


 * Comment: Is capitalising (Dollar or dollar) part of the ISO 4217 standard? &mdash; Instantnood 18:05, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * That's my concern, too. If it is – then I'm all for modifying it to set up our own naming convention, based on ISO; that might also serve to avoid copyright issues. &mdash; Nightstallion (?) 19:46, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure now whether ISO4217 stipulates case. Shortly before the euro was introduced on 1 January 1999, I remember speaking to the British Standards Institute about ISO4217, who told me that the euro would have a lower case 'e' in ISO4217, but I see it now has a capital 'E'. As we all know, the E on euro is definitely lower case in English (upper case only in German). Now I'm not sure what to think. NFH 19:01, 3 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm generally not against using ISO 4217 as the basis of our naming scheme. However, I propose the following modifications:
 * a) If ISO 4217 inexplicably uses names like "Franc Congolais", we will use "Congolese franc".
 * b) We won't capitalize the currency names.
 * c) If ISO uses only the currency name without a demonym, we'll add the demonym (Latvian lat, not just lat).
 * What do you say to these proposals? &mdash; Nightstallion (?) 09:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Seems like there's strong support for ISO 4217. But we don't have a very complete list in wikipedia. Does someone have access to one? It's not free (and thus I still have concerns about copyright). Along with the questions above, we still need to decide on what to call currencies that were around before ISO 4217. My answers to Nightstallion's questions are:
 * a) I don't like "Franc Congolais" and would prefer "Congolese franc"
 * b) Since denominations are not proper nouns (according to all dictionaries I've checked), they should not be capitalized, but the vote on this issue was close
 * c) It seems like this would mean not really using ISO, except to determine the adjectival form of the name. I'd be fine with that, but that doesn't seem to be what everyone voted for. For example, would we use "pound sterling"? But if we don't add the country name, what happens if someone else decides to use a "lat"? Does ISO make any assurances of backwards compatibility? (That is, when they add new currencies, do they promise not to change existing ones -- I'm sure they wouldn't change the three letter codes, but what about the labels)

So, if someone has access to the full ISO 4217, can you tell me what I should name the following (I've already created the Rhodesian ones):
 * Southern Rhodesian pound
 * Rhodesia and Nyasaland pound
 * Rhodesian pound
 * Austro-Hungarian gulden/Austrian florin (these are the same currency -- which should the merged article be called?)
 * Yugoslav dinar is about 4 currencies and I'd like to split it. What should they be called? They are the dinar from Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, Kingdom of Yugoslavia, Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (aka Serbia and Montenegro).
 * CFA franc is about several currencies (I'm not sure exactly how many -- I know it's at least the CFA franc BCEAO and CFA franc BEAC but there were other acronyms before sometime in the 90's. Plus there's a Malagasy CFA franc, and a Malagasy-Comoros CFA franc among others. I'd like to update this whole area, but don't know what to call the pages I'll need to create. Ingrid 01:17, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Since no one has replied, I went ahead and updated our style guide, taking into account the vote results (use ISO 4217, and don't capitalize denominations). I've made stuff up in other areas because we are creating new pages now and need something, and no one has addressed historical currencies effectively. If you care, please read WikiProject Numismatics/Style and comment there. Ingrid 22:36, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Tagging articles for recategorization
I have started tagging articles for recategorization, using NumismaticCategories. Anyone want to volunteer to help? I've been going through List of currencies and have made it through the b's. Of course, there are many, many other articles that may need to be recategorized, I just thought I'd start with the currencies which I think are in the worst shape. Ingrid 20:52, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Brazilian cruzeiro
I just noticed that someone requested that Brazilian cruzeiro be moved to cruzeiro (currency). I've voted against, and included links to various supporting arguments here. Please add your vote (regardless of where you think the page should be, I think we've agreed that we should decide before moving any more articles). Thanks Ingrid 19:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Actually, noticing the dates, the discussion is really old, referring to moving it from cruzeiro to cruzeiro (currency). Should I remove the requested move notice, or is that for an admin to do? Ingrid 19:09, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Me again
Hey everyone, sorry I haven't been around much lately (and how ever did you get along without me??!?) but I just wanted to say that a) this wikiproject is pretty remarkable and I'm proud to be a part of it and b) currency article titles shouldn't, in my opinion, include the country/issuing authority name unless it needs disambiguation (i.e. dollar or franc). That aside, you people are doing great things. Paul 08:36, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm glad you like our little project. I don't think currency titles should have the country or issuing authority name either, however if there is any confusion between articles we will have to use the country and issuing authority name. Maybe we should have a poll in this. Just an idea. Johann Wolfgang 17:20, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Standardized table for banknotes
How's this?

I didn't use Template because of the optional attribute that some currencies might require to use. The source code is probably more understandable using Wikipedia's table syntax anyway (which is what I demonstrated above).

--Chochopk 14:30, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Looks really good. &mdash; Nightstallion (?) 15:26, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * it looks nice and would work, if you can get it atleast allinged like the coin box(vertical,front,info,back,info)(vertical,front,back,info) wouldnt it give the pages alittle more consistancy, professional look? I'm not thinkin exactly like it tho.   Joe I  17:16, 31 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what you meant by "the coin box". Do you mean the coin box in our very own sandbox? If so, I'm thinking it would take too much space. What I meant to devise is something compact enought to fit multiple denominations, yet still informative enough. The "designer" information would hard to find for many less-known currencies (someone mentioned this before?). Therefore it would be an optional attribute. Without it, would it fit the width of a screen? What do you think? --Chochopk 23:31, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

--Chochopk 23:31, 1 January 2006 (UTC)




 * No, he's referring to the Infobox Coin which I started and is in the process of being redesigned (see the top of this talk section). I would propose re-doing your table as an infobox.  It might look something like this.


 * Note that this infobox takes up far less screen real estate than your table, and ctonatins the same information. It's becoming standard practice on Wikipedia to use infoboxes for information about a group of like items in a standard format. Also note that we have the color "goldenrod" reserved for all "currency" infoboxes. Markkawika 08:26, 3 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The box on the right is indeed more professional looking. But my question is, it would take so much space if one wants to present the information on all banknotes/coins. Euro, Russian ruble, and Moroccan dirham are already using something like the horizontal table. Either format gives the same amount of information. I believe vertical (the one on the right) is more suitable in an article about that single coin/banknote with additional texts, such as Cent (U.S. coin). But my horizontal is more suitable in an article about all banknotes/coins of a particular currency. --Chochopk 11:23, 3 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I think this is a great idea, and a template (or series of templates) would be more user friendly, plus it would lead to a more consistent look. Here's the above banknote example with templates (which I just created). Right now, they don't have any optional attributes. It's basically the same as the table above. I used "note" instead of "optional attribute", and have a little more border/text formatting. If you can point me to some examples of tables that exist now, or tell me how you think they might be used, I can update it (or someone else could feel free to edit the templates, of course). My only thought is that maybe we should use "color" instead of "colour". I try not to be US-centric, but I'd guess more editors use US-English than British, and using "colour" will lead to mistakes. Of course, maybe I could have a variable for "color" and one for "colour" that both fill in the same cell. I'll do that when I make some things optional. Do y'all want me to create templates for the coin table above? What about catalog number, and perhaps including a range of years that this design was used for? I know it's already a wide table, just some thoughts. Ingrid 00:54, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I still believe that using a plain wiki table is a better choice. There could be any combination of optional attributes. Sometimes similar notes are only distinguished by watermark, title of the signer, printer, etc. And for older notes, not all the information are available. Sometimes there is no image, or dimension, or neither. The only advantage I see from using a template is to maintain the ordering of these columns. IMHO, I believe it is an overkill to do that. --Chochopk 05:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


 * that's fine with me, but I believe it will be hard to achieve any sort of consistency unless a template is used. Ingrid 22:51, 18 January 2006 (UTC)



Who is an admin?
Who is an admin here? I need some help: I have some images that I moved to Commons. So the copies on en need to be deleted. I really hate having duplicate copies for the same purpose. And do other languages have a similar template like Template:NCT to give the admins a list of images that are moved to Commons? --Chochopk 11:56, 3 January 2006 (UTC)


 * the images you have uploaded on commons claims that you drew them. Is this true? It seems to be a copy of the current images on en which are labelled fairuse. If you did not draw them, and they are improperly tagged on commons, then they do not belong on commons and will be eventually deleted. --Jiang 08:18, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I own and scaned these notes myself. In the case of ChinaPRP901-100Yuan-1999 a.jpg, the copy on en is not my scan, but the copy on Commons is my scan. --Chochopk 18:27, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I dont think a scan counts as a creation. you are reproducing the image, not creating it. you do not gain copyrights by using someone else's copyright. those images should not be on commons. --Jiang 19:17, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Are you suggesting that I should "fair use" it everywhere (Wikipedias of other languages)? --Chochopk 22:47, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * fairuse or public domain, depending on country/currency. use of the tag will do.--Jiang 23:00, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

New stuff
I created a few new things - Mexican Mint, Royal Spanish Mint, and Category:Mints of Australia. All could use some expansion/improvement, so as always feel free to take a look and contribute. Now that I think about it - should the titles of the Mexican and Spanish mint articles be in Spanish, or should they be the translated names as provided by the mints themselves? If they should be in Spanish then someone could take the initiative of moving them. Paul 20:32, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

currency succession
As some of you know, I've been working on putting in succession boxes on currencies. I've been getting a bit frustrated with the existing for various more complex currencies. Some of the more challenging ones are Swaziland lilangeni which circulates concurrently with South African rand, or Euro which is used in so many different places, most of them started at the same time, but that will not be true as more countries adopt it. Another problem is when the currency is replaced by one with the same name but a different value (sometimes/always? called "new", but then often the "new" is dropped without fanfare). Rhodesian pound is also a little complicated. Another problem illustrated by Euro is that the time when a currency is added and the time when the previous currency is removed can be complicated (there's a date when they're pegged, a date when the physical coins/notes are introduced, and a date when the old currency is removed).

I know that the currency infobox has much of this information, but I'm wondering if that's asking too much of it. Also, although I am seriously impressed with the examples shown at the sandbox, I wonder if it's going to be possible to find all that information for every current and historical currency. I know there are a couple of examples where I've had trouble understanding just the succession (although I admittedly do not have access to the best sources). For example, CFA franc and Malagasy ariary.

So, finally, my question. Am I wasting my time working on succession boxes when they will be replaced by the currency infobox? If not, I think I'd like to make a succession box that is specific to coins and can handle some of the more complicated situations I've run into. Any thoughts? Ingrid 00:08, 4 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I think the succession relationship in currency is absolutely important. In fact, it is you who inspired me to put this information into the currency infobox. What I have done is no different from what you have done. We just placed them in different places with different formats. When I was trying to draft another infobox for a currency (I forget which one, Russian ruble maybe?), I realize "succeeded by" and "preceded by" are not enough for currencies. In many instances, a currency "branches off" to a child currency, and the parent currency continues to exist. This is the case for Rhodesian pound, and for Russian ruble as well. I cannot think of a better, more professional term than "branches off". While the naming convention topic is discussed with no conclusion, we can start listing these "problematic" currencies (in the sandbox?), analyze them, draft whatever box, and let everyone review them.


 * I am a collector of banknotes myself and I have data files and some standard catalog to help me collect these information. Yet, there are still many unknowns I left out in the sandbox.


 * Also, I would like to ask if succession and redenomination are the same thing? Currently the French franc article was preceded by gold louis and silver écu, but a redenomination took place in 1960 with 1 new = 100 old. So.. do we want to differentiate succession and redenomination? If so, by what criteria?


 * --Chochopk 02:40, 4 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Excellent source here (but always be cautious and cross-check with other sources) --Chochopk 05:11, 4 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I hope I didn't sound like I had my feelings hurt by the work that's been done on the currency infobox. I think it's a great thing, and just wasn't sure if there was a need for a succession box anymore. Considering I can't even figure out how to put everything I want to into a succession box though, I guess it's still valuable. I'm going to play around a bit in the sandbox and see if I can come up with something better than the basic Succession box. I have some ideas, but I'm also kind of stuck about how to handle multiple currencies on the same page. I think it counts as a new currency whenever there's a redenomination (basically, whenever ISO 4217 would give it a new id), but I don't think that it would make sense to create a new page for it (in most cases -- Turkish lira and Turkish new lira both seem to be substantial pages). But it makes infoboxes & succession boxes harder. Also, Rhodesian pound is a great example of a page for 3 currencies (the pound of Southern Rhodesia, the pound of Rhodesia & Nyasaland, and the pound of Rhodesia). Should these all be called Rhodesian pound? Maybe not. Should they be in the same page, again, maybe not. Mostly, I think labelling all of these situations would be easier if we could use ISO 4217 (which I don't think we can, since it's not widely available on the internet, and ISO wants you to pay for it, I doubt they want us to be publishing it for free). Anyway, I'll post whenever I get some examples up for y'all to look at. Ingrid 19:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I made up some examples at New boxes. I really like how the East African shilling one came out (much clearer than the original, I think). I'm still not completely happy with the formatting -- I don't think so much should be bold. I also think I can simplify what editor will have to type by making my own templates rather than using the standard succession ones. But I was hoping to get some feedback first. Do you think that this is too cumbersome? I like the table format, and don't mind that it can get large, but I just noticed that someone took the succession box out of euro with the comment: "rm awkward and repetitious "info" box - has no obvious purpose". Also, I'm still not sure how to handle a redenomination, or if I should include the exchange rate. It's a statistic that I don't care much about, but I think others are interested and so I should include it, but I'm not sure how to do it succinctly (without something like ISO 4217 codes that is). Ingrid 01:00, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I've gotten a lot of time on the computer tonight, so I added WikiProject Numsimatics/Sandbox. It's a bit tricky for the reasons mentioned above, plus as I got into it more, I realized that Namibia makes it really confusing. So, I used "Note:" in the box to explain the situation. If someone has a better idea, please share it. Ingrid 02:46, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Nice! I don't know the answers to all of your questions. But I think if we brain storm on classifying the "type" of succession, we will get the answer eventually. I have a list of problems
 * succession vs redenomination (hopefully to be solved by classifying the "type" of succession)
 * currency branch-off (hopefully to be solved by classifying the "type" of succession)
 * "South African pound preceded by South African pound" sounds wierd (hopefully to be solved by classifying the "type" of succession)
 * If splitting is a must, I think we can put something like "Yugoslav dinar (1992-1993)" as the article title to differentiate between different generations of Yugoslav dinar. This is the style of disambiguation.
 * Exchange rate change is different from redenomination. The exchange rate between dollar and euro changes every day, but my 1 dollar bill is still 1 dollar tomorrow.
 * I will start putting types of succession in the sandbox.
 * --Chochopk 03:56, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I guess I didn't mean exchange rate. What's the term for the rate used to convert during a redenomination? I'm thinking I should put a line in the succession box. Could I use "Conversion: 1000 francs = 1 new franc"? It would be nice to have something that could be used for all types of currency transfers (after independence, joining euro zone, etc). Is there a better word?
 * I'm not sure which situation you're referring to above, "South African pound preceded by South African pound". The box is for South African rand. Or are you referring to the case of Namibia? Or is it something else?
 * I think the succession box shows the splits and joins of currencies really well, without having to label them. I like having the Reason tag in there though. Is there a case that you think is unclear? I'll be impressed if you manage to get similar information into the currency infobox (at this point, I can't imagine it).
 * I think the redenomination has to be handled as the creation of a new currency as far as the succession box is concerned, but I'm happy to hear other ideas. Hopefully, after you think about it some more, you'll come up with something great. I never realized how complicated currency could be. Ingrid 20:28, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Now I realize the succession box is a better presentation of the relationship than the infobox. Here's why I think so. The same information in the infobox is just list of succession, which makes it 1-dimensional. The succession box is actually 2-dimensional. Horizontal axis is time, and vertical axis is location. When and where are both important.
 * I misread rand with pound. My mistake.
 * How do you want to handle USD? Many Pacific islanders gained their independence and started using USD. Similarly with GBP, where many former British colonies used it at some point in time.
 * I'm really busy as I'm also involved with my several personal projects. I'll see if I can squeeze some time during the weekend. --Chochopk 11:17, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

The examples are ready for comment. They use new templates, so once they're implemented, it will be easy to change the style uniformly. Now that I added the ratio (should it be called something else?), the boxes get pretty big -- should I change it somehow? Of course, I intentionally picked some complicated examples. I'd like to include all the information for places that use USD or GBP, but am not sure how practical it will be. I'll have to try it out and see. Anyway, comments and suggestions are always welcome. Ingrid 22:37, 6 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Those are absolutely gorgeous! Especially with the Gulf Rupee. I believe it is best that any succession box to be reviewed and verified by at least 1 person who has not edited it. (Not that I don't trust you. It is our duty to deliver 100% facts. I wish someone review my box too). One small suggestion if you don't mind. When you write the conversion rate, can you write the new unit first like 1 new unit = x old units. It probably doesn't matter to most people, but computer programmers have the habit of writing things that way. I'll work on some Asian currencies if you don't mind, since I am an Asian. Thanks! --Chochopk 04:37, 7 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I think it would be great if you (or anyone else) did some succession boxes (although I enjoy learning about the currencies while I'm doing it -- but I don't mind sharing the fun).
 * I'm not thrilled with the way the ratio is working. I don't like saying 1 pound = 1 pound, but am not sure what would be better -- 1 Southern Rhodesian pound = 1 Rhodesia & Nyasaland pound is just too cumbersome. I do think that it should be before = after though. If you were to put it in a sentence, "the pound was replaced by the dollar, at a rate of 2 to 1", it would be assumed that 2 was for the pound, and 1 was for the dollar. Aside from programmers (not our primary audience), I think it would make more sense to most people this way, but am open to other opinions. The ratio issue is the reason I haven't taken my templates live yet -- I want to figure out how to handle ratios first (not so much the order, more the name and format).
 * I always appreciate it when someone reviews my work. Often though, if I can't get feedback beforehand, I'll make the change anyway, and usually get plenty of feedback afterwards (not ideal, but sometimes the best I can get). Although I'd like to provide 100% facts, I feel like if I improve what's already there, I've done something worthwhile, even if I can only find one source or am not 100% sure.
 * I haven't really finished the Gulf rupee (I've been working on it tonight). I'm having some trouble with the table. I posted about it [|here]. If you (or anyone else) can figure out the table issue, I can put it into the template. I'd like to have one currency of row for "Trucial States" and one for "Qatar" with one after box for "Qatar" and "Abu Dhabi" and another for "Trucial States except for Abu Dhabi". I can't do it with the existing templates and it's driving me crazy. Ingrid 05:57, 7 January 2006 (UTC)


 * What about "at par" instead of 1 pound = 1 pound?
 * I added Malaysian stuff. One thing I realize in this process is that sometimes a currency is used in many political entities. And later, they decided to form one integrated entity. I believe this is not uncommon, as we see in Malaysia and Rhodesia. But the current set up has to make 2 boxes to signifies this fact, which I find, somewhat cumbersome.
 * Well, I could say "the dollar replaced the pound" too... --Chochopk 14:35, 7 January 2006 (UTC)


 * at par solves it for the ones that are at par, and we can probably use old/new in most other cases, as you have with dong (great work by the way!). I'm not sure I'm understanding the problem of making two boxes. I think you're referring to the one box for say the Southern Rhodesian pound (with formation of federation as after reason) and one box for Rhodesia & Nyasaland pound (with formation of federation as before reason)? If so, I think this will make more sense over time. I imagine that eventually, these will be on different pages. I still wonder if there's a more elegant way to handle monetary reform, since I imagine that most of those will be on the same page (but maybe this won't be true as the pages get bigger). Oh well, I think what we've come up with is much better than what was there before, and if someone can improve it more, they will. I think we're ready to start putting these on real pages, what do you think? By the way, there's already a page for French Indo-China piastre -- I've updated your chart. Also, I think it looks better to leave reason out than to put ???, but maybe that's just me. Ingrid 02:11, 8 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Back to the order for "ratio", I know you can change the words around. I didn't make my point well. If you were to say "the currency was exchanged at a rate of 2 to 1" (which would be a bad idea because someone might misunderstand, but that's a separate issue), I think most people would assume that if you turn in 2 of the old currency, you'll get 1 of the new. If this is not the case, I'm fine switching it. Ingrid 02:11, 8 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I just looked at your tables some more, and realized you may have been referring to Malayan dollar. I think it would also be reasonable to handle it with just one box (since before, after, and dates are all the same). I'll put up my example now. Speaking of Malayan dollar, I'd also like to know why the before/current/after locations are not the same. Like I did in East African shilling, specifying that Aden became part of Yemen, or in Rhodesian pound, specifying that Malawi was Nyasaland, etc. Ingrid 02:22, 8 January 2006 (UTC)


 * And looking some more, I see that the Malayan and British North Borneo dollar is in two separate boxes. I don't like it, but I'm not sure how to handle it. I'm not very familiar with the area, but it seems like the problem is that Malaysia was created in 1963, but the currency did not change until 1967, is that right? I've been handling that (admittedly, in an inexact way) by saying currency of "malaya" until 1967, even if malaya ceased to exist in 1963. Then under reason, I'd put "creation of Malaysia in 1963". I'm not really happy with either way. Perhaps a better solution would be to make the succession box 4 columns wide in this case. Let me play with it a bit and show you what I mean (only I have to go right now... I'll post again after I do it). Ingrid 03:35, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Too many indents -- I'll just start again. I updated the Malayan and British North Borneo dollar tables. I think it came out pretty good. Let me know what you think. I also think that this is the way to handle Namibia, but I haven't updated the table yet (I may get to it soon). I haven't looked closely at the Vietnam boxes, but will try to do that soon.

I think trying to include all areas where the previous currency was used in the location field of the before cell is not practical. I see that field for situations where there's a split or join, to specify which locations go where. Or for when there's a change of name, if the same region has a different name before and after, for example. Ingrid 06:38, 8 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Again, another brilliant job done, Ingrid!! Now it's a complete pleasure to look at the two tables for Malay(si)a. Not cumbersome, yet delivering all the necessary info. There is a syntax error with South African rand. I'm not sure what you intend to do there, so I didn't fix it. Perhaps we can apply the idea of 4-column thing to Rhodesia? Jobs for me now:


 * 1) Revamp currency infobox (again!) to take advantage of the "optional attribute" that you introduced me to.
 * 2) verifying facts on the other tables
 * 3) Korea, Japan, Laos, Cambodia
 * The night is still young, I hope I can get something substantial done tonight. --Chochopk 03:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Glad you like it. I didn't get a chance to finish SA rand last night when I had to quit. I fixed it up a bit tonight, but still haven't included Lesotho & Swaziland. I made succession boxes for the loti & lilangeni, and ran into some contradictory info which I'd like to research a bit more (there's a note on the sandbox page). Gotta go tonight though.


 * I don't think the 4 column box will work on Rhodesia. There are actually 3 currencies which we're calling Rhodesian pound. I think that needs to be corrected, by calling them Rhodesian pound, Rhodesian & Nyasaland pound, and Southern Rhodesian pound, even if they're all on the same page. Ingrid 04:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Should we include "currencies" issued by Japanese, German, Italian forces in the regions they occupied during WW2? Some people might consider those "governments" illegitimate, therefore the currencies too. --Chochopk 02:25, 13 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I would like to include whatever was actually used (legitimate or not), as much as we can determine what that is. Ingrid 02:32, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Coin
Template:Coin has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Templates for deletion. Thank you. It is redundant with Template:Infobox Coin. Please lend your input to the discussion and vote to delete it. Markkawika 00:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

2 euro commemorative coins - Input required
I'm currently writing an article about the €2 commemorative coins, and I'm not quite sure on two decisions: Thanks for your input! &mdash; Nightstallion (?) 12:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) What should the title be? €2 commemorative coins? 2 euro commemorative coins? Commemorative €2 coins? Commemorative 2 euro coins? Something else?
 * 2) Dependent on the first question: Under what name should I upload the coin pictures?


 * Hello. this is my first intervention in that Project Numismatics. My english is not fluent enough to follow all the quick discussions but I ve just read these 45 pages and I ve to say this is a good job !
 * Living in europe, euro is now my usual currency and having some interest in collecting coins, I can give you some help about this subject. first you have to know that there is an official journal of the european Union which give informations about coins. Just have a look to the "2003/C 247/03 - Communication from the Commission on the recommendation of 29 September 2003 concerning a common practice for changes to the design of national obverse sides of euro circulation coins ". the internet link is :
 * http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2003/c_247/c_24720031015en00050006.pdf.
 * thus, you can find
 * euro circulation coins (both normal and commemorative)
 * commemorative euro circulation coins (the 2 euro in fact)
 * euro collector coins
 * In my opinion, you should choose 2 (or two(?)) euro commemorative coins.
 * Do not hesitate to contact me if you need more info. Regards. Marc - --Flafla89 22:31, 4 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Please see List of world commemorative coins. I have links made up for each country individually, which I'm guessing isnt what you want, but other than that, I don't know. :)   Joe I  01:03, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Standard Catalog of World Coins is also a great reference book. There are many editions. Just search that on Amazon. I don't have a copy with me because I am not a hardcore coin collector. It has 48000 images! (black and white though). Most of them, I believe, are commemorative. I suggest we start a List of world commemorative banknotes if there is no similar article. This one is easier to complete, and I could contribute. --Chochopk 03:38, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

To answer Nightstallion's question, I would go with "Two euro commemorative coins," but I haven't really been keeping up with our numismatic naming conventions. Do we even have naming conventions? All the cool WikiProjects have naming conventions! --TantalumT e lluride 03:49, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Or should that be hyphenated (i.e. "Two-euro commemorative coins")? --TantalumT e lluride 04:00, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm currently inclined to use €2 commemorative coins, since that's what's used by the ECB, the Commission and the Council. What do you think? &mdash; Nightstallion (?) 06:36, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * That's fine with me. --TantalumT e lluride 18:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay. Feel free to give me your input at User talk:Nightstallion/sandbox. &mdash; Nightstallion (?) 19:28, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It seems to be the best if already used by the ECB --Flafla89 19:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)