Talk:Ora (currency)

Symbol (£, $, R?)

What exactly is the symbol of the Ora? An O? or do they just write "ora"? Bezuidenhout (talk)

Please discuss issues on the talk page

@Chipmunkdavis: What are your issues with the changes I made specifically? I made quite a few with detailed edit summaries. The information removed was not supported by sources/was highly misleading/was a primary source stated in WP:WIKIVOICE. In addition, the information I added was supported by citations and I made sure to include detailed citations with quotes so that there was no confusion or assumption of ill intent. Desertambition (talk) 10:22, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Please could you justify the changes that you made. They are disputed. The issues were raised in the recent deletion discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ora (currency).-- Toddy1 (talk) 11:00, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

I am not seeing these supposed reasons in the deletion discussion. Closest thing that is there is "Also oppose the ongoing removals/rewriting that seem at attempt to make the article match the deletion rationale. (Also, of course it's pegged to the rand, it's a local currency in South Africa. It would be unusual for a local currency to not be pegged to the national currency.)" which is not an actual specific argument or complaint.

It is incredibly disheartening to have hours of research removed and for users to not even read the detailed edit summaries. I made sure to check every single source I removed, make sure the article was neutral, provide reliable well-cited sources, and make myself available for discussion on the article talk page.

I am 110% willing to justify the changes I made, but I feel that WP:AGF should have editors at least justify their disagreement a little bit before removing everything. Please, if you have specific issues with what I changed, I am ready to hear them. Desertambition (talk) 11:07, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Please Toddy1, provide the diffs that you disagree with and I will explain them to the best of my ability. If my edit summary was insufficient, fine. But asking me to write the equivalent of a lengthy essay to justify every minute change is just not reasonable. Desertambition (talk) 11:12, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Both versions of the article have The ... is not sanctioned by the South African Reserve Bank. (One says scrip and the other currency.) The citation for this is a BBC article, which says A spokesperson for South Africa's Reserve Bank said the voucher or currency must not resemble any of the South African bank notes. It does not say anything about whether the currency/scrip/coupons are sanctioned by the South African Reserve Bank. I imagine that they are not sanctioned, but the source does not say it.-- Toddy1 (talk) 11:14, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

All you are being asked to do is to justify each of your deletions. Is that too much to ask?-- Toddy1 (talk) 11:14, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

It is a little unreasonable given the large amount of changes and accompanying detailed edit summaries but I am still willing to do so. However, it is late here and I would like to sleep soon. Surely it is clear that it would take a long time to create a detailed explanation of every move that isn't just copy and pasting edit summaries. I hope you notice that I have engaged in these lengthy discussions in the past. I provided reasons for every edit I made. It is reasonable to want fellow editors to at least be specific about what edits they have a problem with and cite diffs. I also did not touch that sentence you are talking about but I do not see the inaccuracy in it. Perhaps a better citation tag would be good and I can almost certainly find one soon but removing it seems unnecessary. That's not the point though. If you want me to justify every edit I made in depth, I am willing to do so but please give me a few days as that requires me to go through the sources, re-read them, give you quotations, etc.

I will reiterate that this seems extremely unnecessary and that I would prefer if you cited specific diffs while cross referencing sources and explaining why you disagree with my specific edits. Saying "I'm removing everything you added until you write me a detailed explanation explaining why" while not checking the sources yourself is frustrating. Desertambition (talk) 11:27, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

I've partially reverted to the status quo while discussion is ongoing - and I'll note that the edit summaries do not explain the removals. For example, you removed the statement Other than in Orania itself, the currency is also accepted in some surrounding towns with the edit summary Claim of outside use not supported by source. The source is a graduate paper, and we shouldn't be using it and I've kept it out on that basis (and the basis that I found a source stating that the Ora was not used outside of Orania), but the statement is supported by the source.

I'll also note that the electronic version is not a cryptocurrency; that claim isn't supported by the current sources, and this source says it isn't one. I also don't see the point of removing the symbol; we show the symbol for Sealand's currency, there is no reason not to show it here.

I haven't reviewed the rest of the edits yet, but from what I have seen they should all be discussed before being implemented. BilledMammal (talk) 12:11, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

I will avoid removing content for now. I will add some sourced content. If you disagree feel free to revert and explain why. Will not be reverting any more. Will make sure to be specific in my edit summaries. Again, not trying to edit war. Please revert any change you think is wrong. Desertambition (talk) 15:53, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

List of issues with the article

Ora is not actually pegged to the South African Rand and should not be classified as a currency

Despite official claims from Orania that the Ora is pegged to the South African Rand, that is a misnomer and inaccurate way to describe how the Ora functions. There is no central banking institution to control a fixed exchange rate. The Ora also has an expiration date, which real currencies do not have. Perhaps there should be a sentence that says "although often erroneously described as a currency, the Ora is much more aptly described as a coupon or voucher."

What do you all think? Desertambition (talk) 16:05, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Claims about Ora preventing theft do not seem to be supported by sources provided

The claim "The use of the Ora as a payment method also has the effect of discouraging theft, as it can only be used within Orania." does not seem to be supported by the source from Neue Zürcher Zeitung: https://www.nzz.ch/wo_afrikaaner_unter_sich_bleiben_koennen-ld.541450?reduced=true Desertambition (talk) 16:18, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Claims about banking system and discount do not seem to be supported by sources provided

The claim "To encourage its use, some stores in Orania offer a 5% discount for items purchased in Ora. The local banking institution, the Orania Spaar- en Kredietkoöperatief, is in charge of the initiative." does not appear to be supported by any source present in the article and is currently tagged with "citation needed". I believe this information should be removed or significantly clarified as it makes it sound like the "bank" operation is similar to that of the official banks in South Africa ie. South African Reserve Bank. Desertambition (talk) 16:18, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Claims about etymology are not supported by sources cited

Claims that "The name, recalling that of the town where it circulates, derives from Latin aurum, meaning "gold"." does not seem to be supported by the source provided from News24. Etymology is presented in WP:WIKIVOICE when the source only quotes a spokeperson: "Lombard said: "To my delight, the 'ora' won overwhelmingly. It comes from the first three letters of 'Orania' and it also sounds like the Latin word 'aurum' which means gold."

It is inaccurate to say that the name derives from the Latin aurum because the Spokesperson is only saying they sound similar unless there is another reliable source saying otherwise.

Unclear why we need to list ISO code

As the Ora is not sanctioned by any government or used outside of Orania, it is unclear why listing a non-existent ISO code is necessary.

History section appears to be a spokesperson's words written in WP:WIKIVOICE

The article currently says: "The idea of the Ora originated in 2002, when Professor Johan van Zyl argued that a community that intended to empower itself should have access to as many instruments as possible, including its own currency." However, the source cited says: "According to Lombard the idea for the currency was first mooted by Professor Johan van Zyl during a conference by the Orania Movement in 2002. Van Zyl apparently emphasised that a community which wanted to empower itself needed to do so with as many instruments as possible to further enhance its self determination, and having its own currency unit was good example of this." I believe this information should be removed as the only source is the spokesperson's words.

Unclear why "white ethnostate known as a Volkstaat" was reverted to "independent Afrikaner state known as a Volkstaat

There appears to be fairly convincing evidence that a Volkstaat is more accurately described as a white ethnostate than an "independent Afrikaner state". I believe the wording should be changed back to "white ethnostate known as a Volkstaat" as a Volkstaat is the continuation of the white separatist idea of apartheid.

Unclear why SABC source and quote were removed

This SABC article: https://www.sabcnews.com/orania-to-introduce-the-e-ora/ and the accompanying quote: "The Ora is not a full currency but serves as a token of tender. It was introduced in 2004 to promote local spending, with users enjoying discounts when they use the Ora coupons." were removed and it is unclear why.

Unclear why statement from the Deputy Governor of the South African Reserve Bank and Associated Press source were removed

Chipmunkdavis removed this quote because "that the Ora is not supported by the Reserve Bank is already in the article", however the quote makes the reserve bank's position much clearer and does not force us to interpret their words in my view:

The only legal tender in South Africa is the South African rand which the Reserve Bank is authorised to issue and which has to be accepted by vendors and all parties within our economy. Secondly, the Ora is not a currency. It is a coupon. And the E-Ora is only an electronic version, it's like a mobile wallet of this coupon. So I would prefer to refer to it as an e-coupon as opposed to any form of currency. Because from an economic perspective currency has to meet certain criteria, namely it has to be a medium of exchange, a storer of value, and a unit of account. And one of the requirements of a currency is that it has to be widely accepted. Clearly the Ora is only accepted within Orania.

— Francois Groepe, Deputy Governor of the Reserve Bank

Hope this isn't too long, wanted to be thorough. Desertambition (talk) 16:39, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

The Ora is pegged to the Rand, as has already been pointed out to you multiple times, and as multiple sources attest. Your assertions about what makes a real currency are unfounded, please see Currency and Local currency. Similarly, you assertions about a "bank operation" is are misplaced (and reserve banks do not function like normal banks so the SARB is a confusing example). As again has been mentioned to you before, someone who names something is a reliable source on why something is named something. Similarly, people who come up with ideas are reliable sources for the idea they came up with. No ISO code is listed, in fact the infobox explicitly states "Not recognized", so it is unclear what you are referring to. CMD (talk) 17:40, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: The Reserve Bank of South Africa has said that the Ora is not a real currency and is more like a coupon or voucher, as does SABC News. The SABC news article says: "The Ora is not a full currency but serves as a token of tender. It was introduced in 2004 to promote local spending, with users enjoying discounts when they use the Ora coupons."

The Deputy Governor of the Reserve Bank says: "The only legal tender in South Africa is the South African rand which the Reserve Bank is authorised to issue and which has to be accepted by vendors and all parties within our economy. Secondly, the Ora is not a currency. It is a coupon. And the E-Ora is only an electronic version, it's like a mobile wallet of this coupon. So I would prefer to refer to it as an e-coupon as opposed to any form of currency. Because from an economic perspective currency has to meet certain criteria, namely it has to be a medium of exchange, a storer of value, and a unit of account. And one of the requirements of a currency is that it has to be widely accepted. Clearly the Ora is only accepted within Orania."

I believe these are reliable sources. Desertambition (talk) 17:45, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

And? How does that link to the above, and how is that different from literally any local currency? CMD (talk) 17:47, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

It is very relevant given that you just said it is a real currency and both sources I linked and quoted refute that. Coupon, voucher, and scrip are all more accurate words to describe the Ora. As stated above, "from an economic perspective, currency has to meet certain criteria, namely it has to be a medium of exchange, a storer of value, and a unit of account. And one of the requirements of a currency is that it has to be widely accepted. Clearly the Ora is only accepted within Orania."

A better example of a local currency would be the Bristol pound. Currency also does not have expiration dates like the Ora does. Desertambition (talk) 17:56, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

I didn't say that, and if you read the linked article you'll see that the Bristol pound has an expiry date, and is not listed in the article as a coupon, voucher, scrip or whatever term you are trying to find to remove the term currency. CMD (talk) 18:02, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: Why do you keep removing the quote from the Deputy Governor of the Reserve Bank? It's 100% relevant. It also goes against your false statement of "The Ora is pegged to the Rand, as has already been pointed out to you multiple times, and as multiple sources attest. Your assertions about what makes a real currency are unfounded, please see Currency and Local currency." Myself and another user have tried to add this section already.

The only legal tender in South Africa is the South African rand which the Reserve Bank is authorised to issue and which has to be accepted by vendors and all parties within our economy. Secondly, the Ora is not a currency. It is a coupon. And the E-Ora is only an electronic version, it's like a mobile wallet of this coupon. So I would prefer to refer to it as an e-coupon as opposed to any form of currency. Because from an economic perspective currency has to meet certain criteria, namely it has to be a medium of exchange, a storer of value, and a unit of account. And one of the requirements of a currency is that it has to be widely accepted. Clearly the Ora is only accepted within Orania.

— Francois Groepe, Deputy Governor of the Reserve Bank

Desertambition (talk) 09:26, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: I would also like you to please explain why you re-added the etymology section when it is not supported by the sources as I said in my edit summary and in the discussion above. Desertambition (talk) 09:28, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure where your opinion about currency pegs is from, but local currencies are pegged to national currencies. It's a big part of how they work. That is the case all over the world. The quote says nothing except that the national government does not support the Orca, which is again also the case for every local currency all over the world. It's extremely generic. As for the etymology, it matches exactly the source. CMD (talk) 11:20, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

References