Talk:20 euro note

20 euro note has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 16, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed
August 23, 2012	Good article reassessment	Kept

Current status: Good article

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Numismatics Mid‑importance

	Numismatics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Numismatics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of numismatics and currencies 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.NumismaticsWikipedia:WikiProject NumismaticsTemplate:WikiProject Numismaticsnumismatic articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

European Union Low‑importance

	European Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union 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.European UnionWikipedia:WikiProject European UnionTemplate:WikiProject European UnionEuropean Union articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:20 euro note/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Puffin (talk · contribs) 12:56, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
	1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	~~"when it replaced the banknotes and coins of the 12" I don't understand this, can you clarify what it means in the article?~~ Done ~~Avoid using the word "currently" it becomes outdated. You use it here "Currently, there are approximately 1,495,700,900 €20 banknotes in circulation around the Eurozone 17. (As of August 2011)"~~ Done Avoid using the word "various" and "several" they are too vague. You there in the article: "a depiction of EU territories overseas, the stars from the EU flag and various security features as described below." and "national central banks for periods ranging from several years to forever." Done The line "The ECB closely monitors the stock and circulation of euro banknotes and coins. It is the Eurosystem’s task to ensure a smooth and efficient supply of euro banknotes and to maintain their integrity." has been directly copied from http://www.ecb.int/stats/euro/circulation/html/index.en.html, could you possible edit it a little so it is not copied word for word? Done ~~The source you give for the sentence "The printer code is located in the 8 o'clock position star" mentions nothing about that. Are you sure you have cited the correct reference?~~ Done, couldn't find source, so removed. ~~You say that the paper type is "100% pure cotton fibre" in the infobox, can you provide a citation for this?~~ Done
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
	2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	~~Please sort out your referencing. Instead of listing the same reference over and over, give them a ref name, see WP:NAMEDREFS if you are unsure.~~ Done ~~The inline citations should come directly after the punctuation. Sometimes they are, sometimes they are not in this article.~~ Done In the lead section "Over 175 million people use currencies pegged to the euro worldwide, with over 150 million people in Africa." This is unsourced and likely to be challenged and is not mentioned later in the article. Please add an inline citation. Done, removed. ~~All web references need the author, publisher, publishing date and access date, in some of your web references, some of these factors are missing.~~ Done
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	see above
	2c. it contains no original research.	~~You say the gothic era is "(between the 13th and 14th century CE)" can you provide a citation for this? The one you listed does not say this.~~ I agree, I must have 'misplaced' the correct citation, which is now Done
	3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	~~When you provide the inline citations needed listed above, then I can verify if the article is neutral, but for now, I can't because you have made some unreferenced claims.~~ Done, every thing you listed above is referenced.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
	6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	The Obverse and Reverse pictures havo no captions. Please add one in such as "The obverse of the note" and "The reverse of the note. Please see Template:Infobox banknote. You cannot add captions. Cannot be done. Not done
	7. Overall assessment.	Instead of quick failing this article, I'm going to place it on hold for a week. If you manage to fix most of the issues within a week and only have a few more minor ones to go, I will give you some extra time, but, if most of the issues are not resolved in a week, I am going to have to be forced to fail the article. Good luck! Y pass Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 08:14, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't delete the comments I made in the table, instead, comment under them and maybe cross them out when they are done? It just makes it easier for anyone who wants to look at the review can see what needs to be done. Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 18:04, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed reference number 41 "Basic calculator work used here." That is not a reliable reference and should maybe be a note or further reading. Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 18:06, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can the way I got it be a source? – Plarem ^{(User talk contribs)} 14:51, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Remove the citation all together. Also, [reference number 8 says that it was retrieved in 2002, but the article was created in 2009. [1] Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 16:48, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But every statistic has to be cited... – Plarem ^{(User talk contribs)} 17:15, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An amazing improvement, just one more minor thing needs to be fixed. ~~Reference number 10 is a dead link, could you possible fix that? It's tagged with the dead link template.~~

Done Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 08:12, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Anything else? – Plarem ^{(User talk contribs)} 18:49, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~It's still a dead link. ^ "The monetary agreement, the road space adapted to micro-economic". Retrieved 6 September 2011.[dead link]~~

Done Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 20:23, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done, something must have undone what I did. – Plarem ^{(User talk contribs)} 21:03, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing it. – Plarem ^{(User talk contribs)} 09:43, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 23:33, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:20 euro note/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
"The changeover period during which the former currencies' notes and coins were exchanged for those of the euro lasted about two months, until 28 February 2002." should include the start date which was 1 January 2002 Done
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
Reference #9 is a dead link. Has been dead since 2012-07-01. Done
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Comment

Done – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 12:31, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalisation

Shouldn't the E be capitalised? Philafrenzy (talk) 14:59, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on 20 euro note. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:13, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]