Talk:Ghanaian cedi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Ghana cedi)
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Numismatics (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Numismatics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Numismatics articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Ghana (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ghana, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ghana on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Merge of Ghanaian Pound article into Ghana Cedi article[edit]

Since the Ghanaian Pound simply was the very first currency of independent Ghana, the proto Cedi on might say wouldn't it be a good idea simply to have all four historical currencies of the Republic of Ghana in the same article? Jack Bornholm (talk) 14:36, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

I agree. There's no real reason for the separate pound page. VirusKA (talk) 18:46, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Sounds logical. --Varavour (talk) 21:19, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Agree. →Enock4seth (talk) 13:41, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
It makes sense, I agree.—Sadat (Masssly)TalkCEmail 18:07, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Oppose, two different currency names. Might as well put Australian pound with Australian Dollar. It would be too confusing. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 21:35, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Agreed. Once the Ghanaian pound (1958-65) banknotes are already on display on Ghana Cedi, it seems plausible to merge and locate the Ghanaian pound stub (composed of just 4 lines) in that section. I understand Enlil Ninlil's concern, but it sounds to me unjustifiable. Krenakarore TK 22:22, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
The Australian pound was introduced to show that Australia as a British Dominion was developing its independence and it continued after the full Independence was achieved in 1942. Australia was a British settlement area and developed its relationship with Great Britain over long time. It is still has a British Monarch. The area today called Ghana was an independent area that trade with danish, dutch and english traders for century (Yes you guessed it, the slavetrade). The main part of the country did not formally become a english colony before 1901 (after the final defeat of the Ashanti Empire). Some Ghanaian Kingdoms and Federations consider the British colony time as a short-lived military occupation. I Have a friend whose Great-Great (something) father as the King of Krobo Ilyt use to throw British colonial officals off a cliff until 1898 when the english finaly got enough artillery upriver. Of course the tribes living at the coast have a different view in this matter. in 1960 88% of the population voted to depose the British Queen as Queen of Ghana.
It is important to understand this talking about the Ghanaian Pound. In contrast to the CFA Franc, witch originally was the french colony currency and then developed into what it is today, the Ghanaian Pound was made up to separate the new Ghana republic from the English colony currency, the British West African pound (not to be confused with the Ghanaian pound). The Ghanaian pound was very shortlived, excisted for only 7 years and it was directly followed by the Cedi.
Of course there is some value to Masslys point of view. I would have no problem following it, but then we should also make new articles for the Cedi and the New cedi as they just as different currencies as the Ghanaian pound in relation to the currency that names this article, namely the Ghana cedi. Comming to this article you might be confused that it does not only handle the Ghana cedi, but also the Cedi and the New cedi. In other words the article right now is already about 3 different currencies. It will take little effort to move the list of Ghanaian pounds on display here to the other article. But it will take more to make 3 good articles instead of 3 stubs about the now defunct currencies: Ghanaian pound, Cedi and New Cedi. Who will do the work researching and writting 3 full articles on this High Importance Project Ghana subject? Jack Bornholm (talk) 23:20, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Now you sound confusing to me. Will or would ? You wanna merge the Ghanaian pound into this one. Krenakarore TK 23:32, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
I WOULD love four wellwritten GA articles on all four currencies, but I am realistic. I WILL merge the Ghanaian pound article into this article and make this article really good. To be honest I dont think there is enough references for four article or editor manpower. This is africa :) Actually many of the websites you will go to at a google search sounds word for word like this article before I started removing the worst mistakes. Most of such potential references forgets the 10 and 20 revolution notes. (just an example). So realistic: Lets make one good article about the Currencies of Independent Ghana and lets call it Ghana cedi because that is where most will start looking. So lets merge. And I am also a little annoyed that because they are all called something with cedi that people actually consider them to be the same currency :) Jack Bornholm (talk) 23:41, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
It is just a historical thing, from one currency to the other. To make one good article instead of four stubs is common sense to me. I tend to read the history section before touching anything, so that means I've noticed you've been working on this article for some time, and I've gotta say you've been doing good. Merge that article into this one, once the information is here, not there. Thank you, Krenakarore TK 23:51, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Just wait until we get to the history section. I am finding some references, but it take time. There is quit a few mistakes right now and even more half truths. I dont know if i can succeed, but I hope the history section will one day tell the real story about how it is not simply from one currency to another. But I have to write from internet sources and not simply what I am told when I sit down with my Togbe. How not that many years ago washing powder was better than paper money. Or how the dreams of the grandfathers, or the cazy and dangerous fantasies some might say, never came to be. Or how close we actually was to crashing the whole country this july. But I cant write from what I know, I have to write from sources, so we shall see. Unfortunately I do have a live creeping up on me :). But believe me, the story about the money of Ghana is the story about Ghana. And like anywhere else in Westafrica you really have to be here to feel it. And I am just a white man in a black mans world. Always remember there is a logical explanation for everything, it just not your kind of logic. Jack Bornholm (talk) 00:22, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
As I usually say, my preferences here are totally irrelevant. I believe you will succeed in telling the story of this currency though. Actually, I am sure. I'm gonna ask you a mathematical question now, although I myself am a lousy mathematician: You're working for the New York Times. Your boss is now appointing you the one in charge of the first page. How will you arrange the information on that page ? I showed you other ways to re-arrange the information on the article (the second picture was moved to the left for one reason: The first picture, in the infobox, is already on the right - WP:MOSIM). I will not touch the article, once you're now working on it. Krenakarore TK 00:41, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Please feel free to do so, we can always get a friendly editing war going :). No seriousely, I don't own any article. I like the way of making the lists, making them the same size. I didn't like the big black parts it made around the pictures, but I think I solved that problem. Maybe you are right, on but on large screens a left picture in a small section will often make the next sections title look out of place. That is what happening on my screen. I really don't like the way the pictures in the coin section looks to. On my screen they are making a sandwich out of the text. I think I would prefer an old fashion paper layout that will not change with the size of the screen the viewer is having. Of course, the solution is simple. Just expand the historical version with the info on the historical inflation of the traditional cedi economics. Then a left picture will be good for all sizes screens. But I get your point, specially when you collapse the table of contents. Jack Bornholm (talk) 00:53, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

I would love to help you out (:) but right now I'm a little bit late with something I've been doing offline for about a year. It is perfectly normal when a picture interferes with a heading, which appears mid-way to the center of the article. That helps to break the usual symmetry between left and right positions of the pictures in the article. In the beginning I didn't like that either, but as time progressed I was showed the advantage of this happening. The black margin around the banknotes was something that should be fixed. You did very well ! Sometimes textual parts in the article tend to be partly sandwiched, but as you said, the solution lies in the expansion of the text itself. Here, nothing remains the same, and if I don't touch the article, somebody else will. Believe me, what you see on your monitor, is what I see on mine. I'll be back when you expand things a bit and make them in a way the readers out there will easily understand. Best of luck, your friend Krenakarore TK 01:18, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

I Agree Wsduho (talk) 17:36, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Oppose. The established convention on Wikipedia is that if the currency unit name is different, it should be a different article, as evident as Malawian kwacha:Malawian pound, Rhodesian pound:Rhodesian dollar, Zambian pound:Zambian kwacha, Israeli lira:Israeli new shekel, the list can go very long. Length is not an issue. There are short-lived republics that are predecessor to the current ones and they have an article. The coin and banknote tables of the pound at Ghana cedi should be moved to Ghanaian pound and that actually solves the correctness problem and the worthiness of Ghanaian pound. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 04:46, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Do you want this article to be split into four articles? Because there is not two different names but four: Ghanaian Pound, Cedi, New Cedi and Ghana Cedi. And if so would it be a good idea to copy the background (the historical Cedi and Pesewas from the 14th to 19 century) into all four articles or should that be a fifth article? Jack Bornholm (talk) 14:30, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

I Agree The article Ghanaian pound is quite brief and its merger with Ghana cedi will enrich that article with the historical background. If someone manages to expand information on the Ghanaian pound substantially, it can be recreated as a separate article.--Natsubee (talk) 13:35, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Wrong move[edit]

I mistakenly moved the page to Ghanaian (P)ound. It should be Ghanaian (p)ound, like all the other examples such as Malawian kwacha, Malawian pound, Rhodesian pound, Rhodesian dollar, Zambian pound, Zambian kwacha, etc... That needs to be undone and moved to Ghanaian (c)edi, which was someday the title of the article. Sorry for this burden, but accidents happen. Krenakarore TK 21:40, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

There's a Move to Ghana cedi here which probably explain why Ghana cedi, although I disagree with what was said 7 years ago. Krenakarore TK 21:48, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

There is no such thing as a Ghanaian Cedi. There is the Ghana Cedi, the current currency of Ghana. There is a Ghanaian Pound, a Cedi and a New Cedi, old currencies of Ghana. But A Ghanaian Cedi has never existed. Why this move without discussion? This move should be changed back to Ghana Cedi witch is the right name. It might be wrong in British or American English gramma. But these kind of english is not the only english in the world. If another title than Ghana Cedi is wanted for this article then lets discused it. A new name could be Ghanaian Currencies. But Ghanaian cedi is simply wrong. Jack Bornholm (talk) 02:20, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 28 January 2015[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. Cúchullain t/c 21:10, 4 March 2015 (UTC)



Ghanaian CediGhana Cedi – Ghana Cedi was the former name of this article as it is the official name of the current currency of Ghana. There has never excisted such at thing as a Ghanaian Cedi, but there has been several with one of these words in Ghana. The Ghanaian pound, The Cedi and The New Cedi. Jack Bornholm (talk) 02:30, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

What the national bank of ghana say is the name their own currency: [1] and a little history from the same official website: [2] Jack Bornholm (talk) 02:55, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Comply ! Krenakarore TK 14:03, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Comment: I think there's a confusion here. Jack Bornholm is obviously an expert on Ghanaian matter and I appreciate him/her for pointing out that "Ghana cedi", and not "Ghanaian cedi", refers to the 3rd cedi started in 2007. But I still have question about that claim. In this article, the first sentence says "the old Ghana cedi [second cedi] notes and coins to cease to be legal tender". I can't help but to wonder, if the central bank using "Ghana cedi" for the 3rd cedi is just a fluke? Typically, Wikipedia article would group a number of differently-valued currencies of the same name from the same country as one article, like the Yugoslav dinar, Turkish lira, and the Brazilian cruzeiro, even though one of those generations may be known as "new blah" to differentiate with the old. If the term "Ghana cedi" being a proper name for the cedi proved to be true, maybe we can clarify that in the first paragraph? --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 10:12, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the nice comment, but I am not a expert. I simply live in Ghana and uses the cedi every day. I wonder how many of the hardworking editors here is actually from Ghana? At the market where I buy my food no one calls it the Ghana cedi. Instead they refer to the New Cedi as the old cedi and the Ghana cedi as the new cedi. Even though it is years ago many will still use the old value (adding four zeros to he price) while shopping. I have no idea why the Central Bank keeps calling the current Cedi for Ghana Cedi. When the Cedi was replaced with the New Cedi they stopped mentioning the word new in all documents some years after the introduction of the New ced. But now 7 years after the change in currency the central bank continues to use the term Ghana cedi, so that is the name of the currency. Fluke or not.
That is why the title Ghanaian cedi is wrong. If there only had been one currency with that name of if the current currency was not named Ghana Cedi then it would not be a big problem. But right now the title is disinformation. An alternativ solution if the title Ghana cedi is not acceptable would be to name it Ghanaian cedis. in plural the article would be about the money that have been used in the area today known as Ghana since the 17th century. Then the redirect from Ghana cedi could lead not to the top of the article but to the part of the article talking about the 21th century currency. Jack Bornholm (talk) 19:25, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Comment: ChoChoPK, I think this is already well explained. It was my mistake to have taken a comment on the Numis-WP talk-page as an obvious reference to the article's name. Nonetheless, if the Bank of Ghana states that the new currency is Ghana (C)edi, then who I am to say the opposite? If I had checked the article's talk page first, this mistake would never have happened at all. I believe you are right in the sense that including the Ghanaian Pound in the article would create a multiple issue, but I also believe that nothing might prevent Bornholm to create an article on the history of the Ghanaian currency and include the Ghanaian Pound the way that he intends to do. This is all quite confusing to me once I know nothing of the matter, so I abstain and leave the decision to others who know more about this issue. I should have never come here in the very first place. Best to you all, and please forgive me. Krenakarore TK 01:01, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

  • Oppose. The article title is chosen for consistency and recognizability, it is not supposed to represent an "official" name. "Ghanaian" is a descriptor only, in the same way as "Algerian" is added to budju and "Angolan" is added to kwanza. (While budju and kwanza are primary topics, as is cedi, the descriptor is added for clarity and consistency across articles.) The page should however be at Ghanaian cedi. DrKiernan (talk) 12:16, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Move to Ghanaian cedi per DrKiernan. I see "Ghanaian" more as a descriptive adjective than an integral part of the name. The cedi should not be capitalised though, currencies usually are not.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:01, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 30 March 2015[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved per request Mike Cline (talk) 15:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)



Ghanaian CediGhanaian cedi – Consistency with Category:Currencies of Africa. DrKiernan (talk) 16:27, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

  • Support GregKaye 07:52, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Support per nomination. There seems no compelling reason to capitalise.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:56, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.