Talk:ISO 4217

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Economics (Rated List-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics 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.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Numismatics (Rated List-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Numismatics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Numismatism-related 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.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

There is also a list at http://www.xe.net/iso4217.htm

XAU Gold[edit]

"XAU Gold". Gold what? Pink Elephants? Fixing. --Admbws 00:01, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

ISO 4217:1981 says just "Gold". I see that someone has added to the article that the unit is troy ounces, but does anyone have a reliable reference for that? It could, for instance, be kilograms or grams---or unspecified by ISO 4217. --Ljosa 09:38, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Before or after?[edit]

In the course of a discussion somewhere else, I got to wondering whether the standard defines how these "names" should be used: before the value (like a symbol: "£10" becomes "GBP 10") or after it (like a word: "10 pounds" becomes "10 GBP"). I've seen both in use, but I wondered if one or the other was officially "correct". Anybody know? - IMSoP 17:42, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

It all depends on language, not so much on currency. Take these representations of EUR 12.34 in the languages of various Euroland countries:

  • Ireland: €12.34
  • France and Spain: 12,34€ (also 12€34 in France)
  • Germany and Italy: €12,34

However, if the currency is a word (euro), rather than a symbol (€) or ISO code (EUR), then the currency follows rather than precedes the amount. Nfh 11:33, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

It is my personal opinion that ISO 4217 codes should come after the amount, and be separated by a (non-breaking) space. The reason for my opinion is that I see the codes as unit symbols, and other unit symbols always come after the amount. I shudder whenever somebody puts a currency code before the amount, because, to me, it's like stating that something is "m 3" in length (instead of "3 m"). Of course, every other English-speaking person disagrees with me :) --64.229.112.76 04:31, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I guess the number should be written in the format of whoever is looking at the information. I like the code after because it is easier to align the numbers but I gues you can also do it before. Maybe it is a language rule.

  • 1,230.45 USD / 1.230,45 USD
  • USD 1,230.45 / USD 1.230,45


Standards[edit]

There is a Wikipedia:Requested move to move the Dong (currency) to Vietnamese dong. I notice that most, but not all pages follow the pattern of "country currency". I think all that can, should be moved into this format. There are a number where this will not be approprite EG the Euro. There are also some where "common (English) usage" may dictate another page name eg "Pound Sterling". But I think for the majority of currencies they should be in the format "country currency name" in line with ISO 4217. Also I think that the currency should start with an upper case letter eg "United States Dollar" instead of "United States dollar". What do others think? PBS 09:58, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I agree Zntrip 02:19, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

I agree with the Dong issue, but disagree with the currency capitalization. Flag of Austria.svg ナイトスタリオン ㇳ–ㇰ 09:45, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

The currency list on this page is actually quite a mess as there are lots of mistakes on the currency names, although the currency codes do appear to be correct.

Where a currency name is not unique (e.g. Dollar, Pound, Franc, Rupee, Peso etc), ISO4217 uses the relevant country name or adjective, or another uniquely identifying word, as part of the currency name. Unique currency names do not include a country name or adjective in the official ISO currency names. However, many currency code lists, such as London FX, do include country names or adjectives for all currencies, even though this causes many of the currency names to differ from ISO4217. For the non-unique currency names, ISO tends to favour the name, rather than the adjective, of a country, so perhaps we should following this same tendency here for adding countries to the unique currency names.

I have identified the following non-unique currency names on the page here as differing from the official exact ISO4217 currency names. We should correct these mistakes. As a start, I am correcting GBP (Pound Sterling) immediately.

  • AED = UAE Dirham, not United Arab Emirates dirham
  • ANG = Netherlands Antillian Guilder, not Netherlands Antilles Gulden
  • AZM = Azerbaijanian Manat, not Azerbaijani manat
  • BAM = Bosnia and Herzegovina Convertible Marks, not Bosnia-Herzegovina convertible mark
  • BBD = Barbados Dollar, not Barbadian dollar
  • BMD = Bermudian Dollar, not Bermuda dollar
  • BYR = Belarussian Ruble, not Belarusian ruble
  • CDF = Franc Congolais, not Congolese franc
  • CVE = Cape Verde Escudo, not Cape Verdean escudo
  • EUR = euro, not European Union euro
  • FJD = Fiji Dollar, not Fijian dollar
  • GBP = Pound Sterling, not Great British Pound
  • GYD = Guyana Dollar, not Guyanese dollar
  • ISK = Iceland Krona, not Icelandic króna
  • KMF = Comoro Franc, not Comorian franc
  • KRW = Korean Won, not South Korean won
  • LKR = Sri Lanka Rupee, not Sri Lankan rupee
  • LVL = Latvian Lats, not Latvian lat
  • NAD = Namibia Dollar, not Namibian dollar
  • OMR = Rial Omani, not Omani rial
  • PKR = Pakistan Rupee, not Pakistani rupee
  • RWF = Rwanda Franc, not Rwandan franc
  • SAR = Saudi Riyal, not Saudi Arabian riyal
  • SHP = St Helena Pound, not Saint Helenian pound
  • SRD = Surinam Dollar, not Suriname dollar
  • TMM = Turkmenistan Manat, not Turkmen manat
  • TRY = Turkish Lira, not New Turkish lira
  • UGX = Uganda Shilling, not Ugandan shilling
  • USD = US Dollar, not United States dollar
  • UYU = Peso Uruguayo, not Uruguayan peso
  • UZS = (Uzbekistan) Sum, not (Uzbekistani) som
  • XDR = SDR (Special Drawing Rights), not Special Drawing Rights (IMF)
  • ZWD = Zimbabwe Dollar, not Zimbabwean dollar

Furthermore, ISO4217 capitalises the first letter of each currency name (except for the euro). We should do likewise here for all currency names in order to comform as closely as possible to ISO4217.

In summary, I suggest that we use the exact ISO4217 currency name. If the currency name is unique, we should insert the relevant country name or adjective, with a preference for the country name. For example, we should use the exact ISO name "Pound Sterling" because "pound" is not unique, but we should use enriched name "Latvian Lats" (inserting "Latvian") because "Lats" is unique.

The only place you can get the full ISO4217 official currency list is to buy it from ISO. You can also find it for free in the SWIFT book, but everything is capitalised.

Nfh 19:52, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I can certainly live with Guatemalan quetzal instead of Quetzal (currency); and for the sake of consistency I can accept moving Ariary to Malagasy ariary. But even as a fan of ISO 4217, I have to point out that it does follow some very strange decisions: Why peso uruguayo? (Are the other pesos' countries translated?) Why "Latvian" (adjective) but "Namibia" (noun)? Why "Surinam" if the country's own preferred spelling is "Suriname"? And the capitalization issue -- while probably quite valid in the context of presenting a standardized list of names -- seems to fly in the face of "use common names" and the guidelines of most style manuals: Chicago, Associated Press, World Bank. Times, ITU, etc. all used lower-case dollars, etc. –Hajor 20:23, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
I proposed more sensible moves at Requested moves and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numismatics. Flag of Austria.svg ナイトスタリオン 21:06, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
I think that some of the choice of names comes down to the country's own preference. This is definitely true of ISO country names. For example, the following are all official ISO English language "short names" of countries: Russian Federation, Libyan Arab Jamahiria, Iran (Islamic Republic of). These are the choices of the countries themselves, and no doubt currency names are affected by the same decisions. The ISO4217 name of currency LVL, being a unique name is simply "Lats". I added "Latvian" to be consistent with the existing list, as it was the name of the currency that was wrong, not the country. On the subject of Suriname, ISO4217 has the country name as "Suriname", but the currency name as "Surinam Guilder" - I agree that is odd. Nfh 21:35, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
Note, however, that Wikipedia policy is not to use the official name, but rather the most common name. (Which I'm not always happy about - East-Timor should be Timor-Leste - but in this case, I agree.) Please go through my list of suggested moves and tell me which ones you can't agree with, and then we can discuss those. Deal? Flag of Austria.svg ナイトスタリオン 22:41, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
And regarding capitalization: I'm pretty sure there's a consensus that dollar, euro, pound and the likes should not be capitalized. Flag of Austria.svg ナイトスタリオン 22:43, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
This article is supposed to be specifically about ISO4217, not simply about currency codes in general. We should therefore use the ISO names (including ISO's capitalisation), not the most common names. Nfh 20:09, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
... good point, actually. Alright, I support changing the listed names in this article to the ISO-4217 ones, but I would still advocate using the ones listed by me at Requested moves for the article names. Agreed? Flag of Austria.svg ナイトスタリオン 09:05, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
Yes, agreed. I would only add that we should use the capitalisation used by ISO4217 for the currency names. Nfh 20:28, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
I don't think you'll find consensus on that... And I don't think it should be that way. Going through Google News searching for "canadian dollar", I find many more "Canadian dollar"s on the first ten pages than "Canadian Dollar"s. If you really insist, though, I'm not opposed to voting on it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numismatics. Flag of Austria.svg ナイトスタリオン 21:52, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
Oh, and just go ahead with updating the list in this article to the official ISO names, you've got my support on that. Flag of Austria.svg ナイトスタリオン 21:53, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Why GBP and not UKP?[edit]

I understand that GBP and not UKP is the correct abbreviation for pounds sterling... but why is that the case, given that there's no independent country called "Great Britain"? I tried Googling to see if I could get an answer to this, but all I got were a heap of results pointing me to ISO 4217. In other words, they stated the position, but didn't explain it. The only explanations I saw that seemed to make sense were:

a) that it was to avoid confusion with Ukrainian currency - but as that turns out to be UAH, there goes that idea; b) because Northern Ireland banks issue their own notes - but so do those in Scotland.

So... can anyone tell me why UKP was passed over in favour of GBP back in the 1970s? Loganberry (Talk) 02:34, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

ISO 4217 codes are, as you can read in the article, based on ISO 3166 codes. ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code for the United Kingdom is GB. · Naive cynic · 09:05, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
And if you're still wondering now, the reason why the ISO code for the UKoGBaNI is "GBR" and "GB" and not "UKD"/"UKG" and "UK" is that the "United Kingdom" part is considered to be just like the "Federal Republic" part in "Federal Republic of Austria". And yes, I'm aware of the fact that by all rights, the USoA codes should be "AMR" and "AM", then, and not "USA" and "US", since "United States" is basically equal to "United Kingdom"... Anyway, hope I could help. Flag of Austria.svg ナイトスタリオン 10:32, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

My two cents... Things happen; no-one can really be bothered to fix it, huge amount of effort to change, no really cares etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.30.138.157 (talk) 02:13, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

GB is the correct 3166 code. The error is that .uk was used for the TLD instead of .gb, but you can be sure no one will fix tat.  Randall Bart   Talk  20:47, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
We were not anal about saying "UK" back in the '70's. "UK" was rarely heard. You said "Britain" when referring to the entire UK. Hence, GBP. Institutionally, it's still Britain: British Army, not Ukish Army.
99.237.143.219 (talk) 17:58, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

links to Wikipedia articles[edit]

There are a lot of currency articles around now that are not linked here. Ingrid 05:29, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

update to match ISO 4217[edit]

Since this page is about the ISO, the currency names (not just the codes) should match the ISO list. I've started the update (and gotten up to Euro). I think this change makes sense regardless, since the whole point of the page is to show ISO 4217 (and I think the currency names count as part of the standard). However, this is also an important change because the numismatics project has decided to use ISO names for currency pages (see vote). Ingrid 00:54, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Missing[edit]

So far I notice three currencies are missing:

They are not on the ISO official list either. Why? --Kvasir 03:35, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Because they're not currencies in their own right. Just like Scotland and Northern Ireland, they have their own notes and coins, but they're still Sterling. I'm not sure why the Gibraltar Pound is listed by ISO as a currency in its own right, because it has a similar status to the above. The only place I've seen these, Scottish and Northern Irish listed as currencies in their own right is in the wholesale banknote markets, where non-BoE notes are worth less than BoE notes. NFH 09:49, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
In that case, neither are the SHP and the FKK but they are on the ISO list. They are 1:1 with the GBP just like the GIP. --Kvasir 10:09, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
That's a good question. There are two ways I can think of that GI, FK & SH differ from GG, JE, IM, Scotland and Northern Ireland: 1. The latter territories are not listed in ISO4217 (despite many other dependent territories being with the currency of their parent country); 2. The latter territories are in the British Isles, and therefore geographically close to the UK (if that has any relevance). NFH 12:24, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I was able to find "IMP", "GGP", and "JEP" under List of circulating currencies as "ISO codes". But they are probably not official though. Interestingly, the article on the Faroese króna explicitly say it isn't an independent currency and use the code DKK instead. This corresponds to the table in List of circulating currencies. --Kvasir 12:32, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
"Circulating" implies notes and coins, not necessarily a currency issued by a recognised central bank (e.g. Scottish banknotes, Somaliland etc). If you check http://www.iso.org/iso/en/prods-services/popstds/currencycodeslist.html, you will see what I mean about GG, JE and IM. NFH 12:39, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
What I don't get is that the ISO table lists dependent territories who have no independent currency as well. See there is Faroe Islands with its own entry even though it list it as using the Danish krone when there is a Faroese krona as well. GG, IM and JE should at least have entries in there because they are by no means part of the UK. A little inconsistent with the ISO table IMO. --Kvasir 23:53, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, it's very consistent. The Channel Islands and Man don't have ISO country codes, so they are not listed; the Faroe Islands do, so they are. —Nightstallion (?) 07:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
That's kind of the point I was trying to make. However, it doesn't explain why GG, JE and IM don't have their own ISO country codes in the first place, whereas other dependent territories do, which I think it the point that Kvasir is making. NFH 08:06, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
That IS a good explanation, Nightstallion, thankyou. It doesn't really have much to do with currency dependency, afterall. But yeah, NFH, it doesn't explain why there is no country code for GG, IM and JE. --Kvasir 08:12, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
I had been wondering about that for quite some time, too. They do have inofficial ISO codes, though; GGY, JEY and IMN. (Those are reserved codes, on behalf of the International Postal Union, IIRC.) One of you two could send an e-mail to the ISO folks and ask them about this, though... If you do, please let me know of the reply. —Nightstallion (?) 10:38, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

For those who care -- there's been an update to ISO 3166; they've got codes now. Yay! ;) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 06:43, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

What are funds?[edit]

What are fund codes like the "Bolivian Mvdol"? – Zntrip 01:36, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Locations using this currency[edit]

I suggest to show in field "Locations using this currency" show all entities where currency recognized as official incl. unrecognized countries:

Serbia and Montenegro[edit]

Both Serbia and Montenegro have received their own ISO 3166-1 codes. ISO website still has CSD as Serbian dinar ISO 4217 code, but that should change soon, maybe changed to RSD.--Jusjih 15:24, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Not maybe, certainly. It's only a matter of when the code will be changed from CSD to RSD. —Nightstallion (?) 19:58, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

XXX 999[edit]

Where is the XXX 999 (no currency) code used? --Samnikal 11:35, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

In data tables and such. —Nightstallion (?) 01:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
What sort of data tables? Where they have a blank entry they put XXX 999 ?--Samnikal 02:00, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
When they include non-currency information where currency information would be expected. —Nightstallion (?) 00:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

XXX is used for pieces for e.g. when you buy 1000 shares then you buy 1000 with the nominal currency XXX. When you buy bonds the nominal currency is e.g. EUR. To say XXX is used where a currency is expected that is not true. So for me XXX is a currency - it's used as nominal currency. -- Robert Graf 09:41, 06 February 2007 (UTC)

See. Thanks.--Samnikal 04:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

E = 0, 2, 3[edit]

What is the significance of the column 'E' in the table? Typical values seem to be 0, 2, and 3.

Is it perhaps related to the subunits (e.g. E = 2 means that there are 100 subunits to the unit, E = 3 means 1000 subunits to the unit, and E = 0 means no subunits)? -- pne (talk) 19:53, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

It appears to stand for exponent - the number of digits after the decimal point as you suggested. -- (Shocktm | Talk | contribs.) 00:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
I must point out, some currencies have multi level subunit such as renminbi or Jordanian dinar. Therefore, a single exponent number provides an incomplete picture. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 09:23, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

In addition, some countries with nominal subdivisions no longer used due to inflation are listed here as 0, and others are listed as 2. What determines whether it's listed as 0 or 2? Nik42 18:05, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

In addition, some currencies have subdivisions that aren't divisible by 10. So what to list in the "E" column for MGA and MRO? 0.69897? Looks cryptical to me. (Stefan2 10:25, 21 October 2007 (UTC))

Clean up[edit]

Nik42, thank you for cleaning up this article. I believe this article needs more cleaning up. Many currency unit in the table are capitalized. They should be lower case per Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Style. And for currencies that have gone through so many redenominations, but with the same unit name, such as the Yugoslav dinar, a disambiguating phrase should be included, like "(1994)". (I'm sorry for being the one who talks big and takes no action... But I am so busy lately...)--ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 05:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Bulgarian lev codes[edit]

There are codes indicated for Bulgarian currencies which were obsolate before ISO 4217 was introduced (BGJ and BGK). Are they authentic or just created later - it seems to be soo since the 3rd letters (J and K) alphabetically preceed L (coming from lev) of the code when the ISO standard was introduced. Timur lenk 06:04, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Code breaks table during print[edit]

It seems that this line of code is causing the table of active codes to break and terminate at the end of a page when printed:

|+align="bottom"| http://www.jhall.demon.co.uk/currency/

72.177.42.254 13:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

USD=2? USD=3![edit]

Just because the USD doesn't have mills in active circulation doesn't mean they are nonexistant. The Coinage Act (1792) states..."That the money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars or units, dismes or tenths, cents or hundredths, and milles or thousandths". It is used in taxes and gas prices. If anyone is going to base an argument on the lowest available coinage, keep in mind countries such as Slovakia, which have levels of currency far below the lowest coin (50h is the lowest coin, but Slovakia is listed as 2 decimal places in this chart). samwaltz 00:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

The information comes from the ISO standard, and is thus correct in this article even though everyone does it differently. See also: JPY. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.87.143.161 (talk) 22:03, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Airline ticket not actually showing price[edit]

The airline ticket in the picture claims that the "price" is shown in EUR. Unfortunately, the price itself is "IT" (individual tariff) and not shown on the ticket, just the surcharges (for example, fuel surcharge YQ) are. 217.11.197.10 (talk) 09:43, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Places using the Euro[edit]

There are a good handful of places out with the Eurozone which use the Euro unilaterally including Kosovo and Montenegro. Yet these are not listed. 86.111.162.127 (talk) 03:10, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

E = 0.7[edit]

In the list of currencies (section 2) is the column E[1]. The relevant footnote only says "Number of digits after the decimal point."

At least two currencies have '0.7' in this column, which is nonsensical in terms of the wording of the footnote (you can't have 0.7 digits). I'm not entirely certain what is going on here, I just know that what I'm reading makes no sense. Can someone knowledgable examine and rectify this please? Manning (talk) 01:37, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Their minor units are base-5, i.e. 5 minor units to one major unit. The values in that column are the base-10 log of the number of minors units per major (i.e 10^2 = 100 for those with 100 minor per major). 10^0.7 is approximately equal to 5. 16:37, 15 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.9.140.54 (talk)
And even the printer, and the coins themselves say "1/5" Yea, there's only 5 subunits, but it's still valued at 0.2, 0.4 etc; or vulgar as 1/5, 2/5, 3/5. It's just that values of 1.5 OU are non-sensical, as it only exists electronically, and not physically. This logic is just like saying number of decimal points for the 1/2 cent should be realised as 0.3 because 10^3 == 2 because there are only two subdivisions.
This should reflect -actual- use, and when even a single cigarette is 70 AR (350 FRM) or a bunch of bananas for 200 UM; you'll never actually see a decimal point in reality. 204.15.241.108 (talk) 18:10, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

0.7 digits after the decimal point??[edit]

Several currencies have 0.7 digits after the decimal point in their currency. How does that work, unless it's like it converted from base 10 to base 7 with the decimal point. 75.170.42.250 (talk) 23:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

The exponent is the number n, such that 10n is the number of subunits that the currency is divided into. Therefore if the currency is divided into 100 subunits (each worth 0.01) then, as 102 is 100, the exponent is 2. Similarly for currencies divided into 1000, 103 = 1000 so the exponent is 3. For decimal currencies, this equates to "number of digits after the decimal point.
For non-decimal currencies, the mathematics become a little less simple and requires logarithms
we have the formula:
10n = a
we can use logarithms to get the formula:
n = log10 a
and if a is 5 (as in the case of those odd currencies) then:
n = log10 5
n = 0.69897000433601880478626110527551...
which for convenience is rounded to 0.7. While not mathematically precise, plugging that 0.7 into the initial formula produces 5.0118723362727228500155418688495..., which (seeing as a currency can only be divided into an integer number of sub-units) must mean that the number of sub-units is 5
For the Curious, I calculate that the exponent for Galleons to Knuts would be 2.693 and for Ningi to triangic Pu would be 0.9 MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 21:03, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Zimbabwean Dollar[edit]

Shouldn't we add something about the possibly unique case of the Zimbabwean Dollar where the old currency code was used for the revaluated currency? [1] Nil Einne (talk) 06:25, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Position?[edit]

The article doesn't describe how the code is positioned in relation to currency amounts. I understand that the code serves as an abbreviation of the currencies themselves, and so would come after the number like most units of measurement, but will wait for someone who knows better to add it to the article. --Paul_012 (talk) 10:47, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Unrecognized currencies[edit]

The article lists are variety of currencies, however many of them do not exist, neither officially nor in any for of coinage. I will therefore remove those marked below. If anyone can provide references that the removed currencies actually exist, feel free to add them again.

The following do exit

  1. Alderney pound (1:1 pegged to the pound sterling)
  2. Cook Islands dollar (1:1 pegged to the New Zealand dollar)
  3. Cuban convertible peso (1:1.08 pegged to the US dollar)
  4. Faroese króna (1:1 pegged to the Danish krone)
  5. Guernsey pound (1:1 pegged to the pound sterling)
  6. Isle of Man pound (1:1 pegged to the pound sterling)
  7. Jersey pound (1:1 pegged to the pound sterling)
  8. Kiribati dollar (1:1 pegged to the Australian dollar)
  9. Maltese scudo (1:0.24 pegged to Euro [2])
  10. Somaliland shilling
  11. Transnistrian ruble


The following do not. A great deal of these were apparently added as some of these territories issue commermorative coins denominated in other currencies. However this does not mean that they have their own currency ! E.g. All Euro countries issue distinct commeorative coins, but yet they all have only 1 currency, the Euro. There is no such thing as a "French Euro" in terms of a currency.

  1. Ascension pound (1:1 pegged to the pound sterling)
  2. British Virgin Islands dollar (1:1 pegged to the US dollar)
  3. Cocos (Keeling) Islands dollar (1:1 pegged to the Australian dollar)
  4. Micronesian dollar (1:1 pegged to the US dollar)
  5. Nagorno-Karabakh dram (1:1 pegged to the Armenian dram)
  6. Nauruan dollar (1:1 pegged to the Australian dollar)
  7. Niuean dollar (1:1 pegged to the New Zealand dollar)
  8. Northern Mariana Islands dollar (1:1 pegged to the US dollar)
  9. Palauan dollar (1:1 pegged to the US dollar)
  10. South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands pound (1:1 pegged to the pound sterling)
  11. Tristan da Cunha pound (1:1 pegged to the pound sterling)

The last one, the Tuvaluan dollar is questionable, as I cannot find an official source denoting that this currency is the the currency of Tuvalu. [3] says that the Australian dollar is the official currency.

Passportguy (talk) 12:24, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Zimbabwean dollar code[edit]

Is there any code for the dollar from Feb 2009? It is called 'ZWD' or we just put it "without currency code"? Jimm36 (talk) 13:00, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

In the table "Historical currency codes" the Zimbabwean currency code ZWR is noted as replaced by ZWL, but the code ZWL is not listed as either as an active code or a historical code. —Coroboy (talk) 08:12, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Bitcoin[edit]

       criterion of currency (issued by a recognized state)

Not sure how this is a relevant criterion for inclusion, considering the official list includes troy ounces of gold and silver, neither of which are state currencies. Can anyone provide list of gold ounces and silver ounces, issued as state currencies? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.183.218.215 (talk) 03:49, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

None of the X-prefix codes are "issued by a recognized state". Many are issued by transnational bodies and a few are not even financial ones (International Union of Railways). There is also a test code. Since the monetary base of Bitcoin of $2.2bn (as at Oct 2013) is larger than that of several dozen countries, the "recognized state" criterion of currency is fatally flawed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.201.154.202 (talk) 06:24, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Worthy of note: Bloomberg started tracking Bitcoin prices recently (2014-Apr-30) on their ticker, and they're using "XBT" as the ticker symbol. One more datum in favor of including it in the table? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.220.40.147 (talk) 18:04, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

The article is about the ISO 4217 standard. Is Bitcoin in that standard? No. Should it be? Irrelevant. It isn’t. Failing coherent objection soon, I’ll amend. JDAWiseman (talk) 19:32, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

USX[edit]

In Reuters commodity market listings, I noticed USX used for some listings, while USD on others. What is the distinction? LorenzoB (talk) 07:31, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

USX is used to denote cents, i,e. for financial instruments denominated in US cents. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.201.154.202 (talk) 08:41, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Machine readable list[edit]

As I think one common usage of the ISO codes is to import whem into software which has to do something with currencies, wouldn't it be a great idea to make the list machine readable? For example make it exportable as XML? I also noticed some differences between this list an translations to other languages. Might it be possible to use one base as source for the different language sites? Only thing that should differ is the name in each language. Any of you Wikipedia gurus know if this is possible and a good idea? End result could be a complete XML file with all currencies, their names in different languages, historic changes etc. I think that list may be widely used. --Nadaron (talk) 12:55, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

UYI[edit]

"UYI 940 Uruguay Peso en Unidades Indexadas" is on the ISO list, but not on this wiki page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.206.208.214 (talk) 07:41, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Added. --Bequw (talk) 18:36, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Bangladeshi Taka?[edit]

The Bangladeshi Taka (BDT) is listed under "Obsolete currency codes" rather than "Active Codes", but it is also listed as "Still in use". On the actual Bangladesh and Bangladeshi Taka pages I see no indication that it has been or is going to be retired in favour of some other currency - anyone know what's going on here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.222.232.8 (talk) 07:26, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Unofficial codes[edit]

It appears that the section Currency code#Unofficial codes includes a single currency code for Bitcoin which is referenced entirely to bitcoin.org. The article Bitcoin has only recently been put back into the mainspace after just meeting wikipedia notability standards and it looks like an issue of self-referencing and WP:Undue weight/ SPAM. Polargeo (talk) 14:14, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I am removing this section per my comment above. Please feel free to discuss its inclusion based on independent reliable sources. Polargeo (talk) 16:58, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Which of the following reliable sources listed here would you like too see as a reference for this? Please let me know and I will fix it. PanderMusubi (talk) 15:23, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Incorrect numeric code for EEK[edit]

The ISO 4217 page says that the numeric code for EEK is 223. However, according to http://www.currency-iso.org/dl_iso_tables_a3.xls it should 233. (The article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estonian_kroon has the correct 233.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.127.94.7 (talk) 16:51, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

KRI or KID for Kiribati dollar[edit]

In the ISO 4217 page the code for Kiribati dollar is called KRI, while in the Kiribati dollar page the code is called KID, which is the correct one? --Arnoudmulder 17:06, 19 Jul 2011 (UTC)

"GGK"!? "GPM"!?!? "GRM"!?!?!? =[edit]

Could someone please have a look at the following two rows in the table in the Historic currency codes section?

Code Num E[1] Currency From Until Replaced by
... ... ... ... ... ... ...
GGK 300 0 German gold mark 1873 1922 GPM
GPM 300 0 German Papiermark 1922 1923 GRM
... ... ... ... ... ... ...

As fair as I know, codes "GGK", "GPM", "GRM" have never been part of ISO 4217. They look line pseudo-codes invented on-the-fly by some "clever" one who took the "historic" part a bit too literally... Someone who apparently didn't even consider that ISO was founded in the 1947, so does not generally issue standards about thing which ceased to exist half a century before. Also, notice that the numeric code for these pseudo-entries is 300, which is the code of the Greek drachma, i.e. the currency coming immediately before these two rows in the table! Unfortunately, this fake information seems to have widely circulated on the Internet, and is now included in hundreds of mirrors of this articles, and even sotware works based on it. 93.62.144.26 (talk) 13:47, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

removed, as well as the Austro-Hungarian krone --androl (talk) 18:06, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

I am so sick of Wikipedia.[edit]

Get Estonia out of the Euro row. Yes, it uses the Euro. But the other sixteen countries aren't listed; they're included in the entry with the little EU flag labelled '17 European countries'. The problem with Wikipedia is that edits are by idiots, almost invariably. Somebody thought it was important to add Estonia and now more than a year later nobody cares to edit the original stupidity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.252.93.97 (talk) 03:02, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

External Link to "Official" free standard now a For-Pay Standard[edit]

The link to http://www.iso.org/iso/support/faqs/faqs_widely_used_standards/widely_used_standards_other/currency_codes/currency_codes_list-1.htm now gets an HTTP 404. When searching iso.org's web site, I can no longer find a free list of the standard, but instead a for-pay download of the publication: http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=46121. What are the rules regarding broken/changed links? Should it be removed from the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.95.120.7 (talk) 16:59, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Unexplained removals of Bitcoin from the non-recognized ISO code list.[edit]

It is cited material. Please do not remove. 209.34.230.129 (talk) 01:38, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Ψ concur — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.183.218.215 (talk) 03:54, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

I have added it back. It is properly cited with reliable sources and its removal has been unexplained. --ColdWind (talk) 16:27, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
Reverting, WP:PREFER, "pages that are protected because of content disputes should not be edited except to make changes which are uncontroversial or for which there is clear consensus". Also, something being "properly cited" does not mean that it should be indiscriminately included, WP:INDISCRIMINATE and WP:GEVAL. Petomaatti (talk) 06:48, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Someone is removing content without any explanation. I think this content is perfectly valid here and complies with Wikipedia guidelines (the ones I know, at least). If nobody explains why they think it should be removed, I cannot make a point to support inclusion. And I cannot change my mind and support its removal either. --ColdWind (talk) 18:35, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Actually, after reviewing other currencies in that table, I think they belong to List of circulating currencies. They are already listed there, with a much more comprehensive table. Some of them lack sources supporting the use of their non-ISO code, even in their main article. I would remove the table and the listing altogether and reference List of circulating currencies. Sounds good? --ColdWind (talk) 20:17, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
If the goalposts start moving and the criteria for inclusion is bent with "(d) not issued by a recognized state" (just so that Bitcoin can be listed), where does it stop? "(e) a local currency", "(f) a private currency", ..? Does every interested/activist party get to expand the criteria indiscriminately to get their thing on the list? What about the next coin fork and other virtual currencies? To quote WP:SALAT, "The potential for creating lists is infinite. The number of possible lists is limited only by our collective imagination. To keep the system of lists useful, we must limit the size and topic of lists.".
How to go about implementing that policy? First of all, WP:INDISCRIMINATE says that "..merely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.". WP:UNDUE mentions that "Giving due weight and avoiding giving undue weight means that articles should not give minority views as much of, or as detailed, a description as more widely held views. Generally, the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all, except perhaps in a "see also" to an article about those specific views.". WP:GEVAL adds "While it is important to account for all significant viewpoints on any topic, Wikipedia policy does not state or imply that every minority view or extraordinary claim needs to be presented along with commonly accepted mainstream scholarship."
Even though X may be called a currency, it doesn't mean that X has to be listed indiscriminately on currency-related articles or that X has to be represented alongside other currencies or that X has to have the same level of coverage.
1) Why not include Bitcoin on that list? Even if you'd bend the criteria with "(d) not issued by a recognized state", Bitcoin is fringe when compared to the status (utility, treaties, law, etc) of the listed currencies. Bending the criteria would actually make it harder to WP:AGF, instead of assuming POV pushing for getting the name out there in name of Bitcoin advocacy.
2) Why not remove the whole list then? List of circulating currencies should mention these currencies considering these are in circulation but the topic of that article is not ISO 4217 and its code distribution policy. These currencies have treaties, law, etc behind them, and you will deal with these currencies in their respective locations. Why this one has been given a code and this hasn't - even though they're seemingly equal in legitimacy and utility in their respective geographical areas - is an issue relevant to this topic.
Petomaatti (talk) 04:37, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Bitcoin being "fringe" (which is arguably POV) is irrelevant here. 9/11 conspiracy theories are also fringe, but they are common and notable and so per WP:NOTABILITY they are given their article and a position on List of conspiracy theories. WP:UNDUE is not violated as I am certain more people are aware of Bitcoin than those aware of the Tuvaluan dollar. The remaining issue here is whether Bitcoin meets the definition of currency, as if it does, it is certainly a notable currency without an ISO code and would meet the criteria for the section. This is obviously an issue of contention. The current definition of currency on the page would suggest it is not a currency, indeed, as without the d) clause Bitcoin would not meet any of the disjuntive criteria. However, that definition seems to violate WP:OR, albeit in an indirect manner. No source is given for the three criteria that define a currency without a currency code for that section. The criteria was historically accurate and not a subject of contention, but now that it is a source would seem necessary. The definition certainly seems arbitrary, given that Wiktionary defines currency as: "Money or other items used to facilitate transactions", which does not seem to exclude Bitcoin.
I would even say that whether the section itself should be on this page is in dispute. A page about ISO 4217 does not need to detail what is not part of ISO 4217, and the entire section should be removed as off-topic and replaced with a mention that "some currencies in niche or localized usage are not parts of ISO 4217", similar to the International System of Units.―Dree12 (talk) 22:18, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Actually, the criteria is inconsistent with the article itself. ISO 4217 does not have reservations towards whether currencies are issued by a government; for example, gold and silver have ISO codes. The criteria would in fact exclude most of the X?? currencies, given that they are not issued by a government. The list of "currencies without ISO codes" should therefore not introduce a restriction not put in place by ISO 4217 itself. The criteria should be removed altogether, or made much less strict to be relevant to the article. Is there an argument for the criteria to remain? ―Dree12 (talk) 20:46, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Took my time to reply, but hey. I think the point of contention is the word 'fringe' - bitcoin being fringe in Wikipedia does not invalidate it nor does it carry any negative connotations or implications. It just means that bitcoin is just a significant departure from mainstream views in its particular field. I would think that is something we can agree on; I haven't seen anyone argue the opposite before, quite the contrary actually. As such, WP:UNDUE also applies. Like I said above, even though X may be called a currency, it doesn't mean that X has to be listed indiscriminately on currency-related articles or that X has to be represented alongside other currencies or that X has to have the same level of coverage. The issue is not actually whether bitcoin is a currency or not.
Devising criteria for limiting the scope of a list would be an editorial judgment, and both 'when to limit' and 'how to limit' are (should be!) sourced in policy. There's no WP:OR when there is no research, only policy. Whether the criteria is good or not (or whether the list should be removed or not) is a whole another thing to discuss, and I argued both in my preceding comment. I'll restore the criteria for now, considering it was removed due to what I assume to be a misunderstanding. Petomaatti (talk) 15:55, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Bitcoin needs its "BTC" to be on the unofficial list. The monetary base of this new currency is equivalent to US$350 million, a large amount, and the code appears on all electronic wallets which hold this electronic currency.

Check the context; the list lists codes for the aforementioned currencies, it's not a catch-all for all unofficial codes. Petomaatti (talk) 19:55, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
The purpose of ISO 4217 is outlined below:

The purpose of ISO 4217:2008 is to establish internationally recognised codes for the representation of currencies. Currencies can be represented in the code in two ways: a three-letter alphabetic code and a three-digit numeric code.[2]

Nowhere here does it state that the ISO is incomplete, and there are currencies which meet the "criteria" given that are not included. If the ISO is complete, there should not be any currencies that are listed "without currency code", because they would not meet the requirements for ISO 4217 anyways. This information belongs on List of currencies, not ISO 4217, just as shrimp belong in List of crustaceans, not Lobster. I propose moving this section to the aforementioned article accordingly. Dree12 (talk) 03:51, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
I don't agree with the proposal (and I think that's a false analogy), and I refer to my earlier replies in which I explained the criteria and also why information should stay here. Petomaatti (talk) 15:28, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
Regarding the edit you made, I thought about adding something like "In addition to the conventional currencies listed above, alternative currencies such as local and digital currencies have not been assigned ISO codes." to the end of the "Without currency code" section to resolve the issue. Does that sound all right to you? Petomaatti (talk) 15:47, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
That's not necessarily true, however, as there does not seem to be anything preventing their assignment. This is a bit different from unrecognized states, which have other countries opposing the currencies assignment. Maybe the following: "In addition to the conventional currencies listed above, certain alternative currencies lack ISO codes.". I don't think the "local and digital" elaboration is necessary. Dree12 (talk) 01:11, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Currencies abolished prior to 1973[edit]

According to the text, ISO 4217 began in 1973. It is based on ISO 3166 which was first published in 1974. A standard can be published months before a standard it references, but ISO 4217 could not have been issued prior to 1973. I can imagine that a currency recently abolished still has transactions to settle for a year or two. I do not understand how currencies abolished in the 1940s could have ISO 4217 codes. What is the source of these codes?  Randall Bart   Talk  21:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Historical currency codes table not ordered[edit]

The table of historical currency codes does not appear to be ordered by anything. I suggest that it should be ordered by the currency code, like the table of active codes. —Coroboy (talk) 09:28, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Equatorial Guinean peseta - code GQP?[edit]

The page Equatorial Guinean peseta claims without reference that there was an ISO 4217 code GQP for this currency. Can anyone confirm / negate this claim? —Coroboy (talk) 09:35, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

CAD[edit]

Use of "CAD" with the Currency template outputs "CAD", rather than "CAD$".
Is that how it is supposed to be? 99.237.143.219 (talk) 18:02, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

CSK discrepancy[edit]

CSK is present on both the active list and the historical list. I believe it's presence on the historical list is a mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.202.184 (talk) 19:40, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Include type[edit]

I think it would be helpful to include a "Type" column in the table -- so that one could quickly separate the currency codes from funds codes and precious metals. Anyone else agree? YBG (talk) 13:54, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Zimbabwe replacement is Zambian Kwacha?[edit]

The revision as of 14:07, 6 July 2013, put the replacement for the ZWL as ZMW, but the Zimbabwe article says there is no replacement and they are using international currencies. 192.197.253.19 (talk) 14:38, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference ReferenceA was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ http://www.iso.org/iso/home/standards/currency_codes.htm