Template talk:WorldCurrencies

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Template talk:Currencies of Asia)
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Finance (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject icon This template is within the scope of WikiProject Finance, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance 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.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
WikiProject Numismatics (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject icon This template 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.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
Note: this is a common talk page for all Currencies templates. (Because all format and inclusion changes need to be standard over all five templates - and perhaps even the PreEuroCurrencies template)

{{Currencies of Africa}} - {{Currencies of the Americas}} - {{Currencies of Asia}} - {{Currencies of Europe}} - {{Currencies of Oceania}}

(untitled first section)[edit]

This is really a {{EuropeanCurriencies}} comment only – Guernesey, Jersey, the Isle of Man, and Gibraltar are not part of the UK – they are Crown dependencies. This is really a fundamental point: Think of it this way. Brian of Nazareth owns a gourd. You can say the gourd is dependent on Brian; but it is just not correct to say that it is Brian of Nazareth, or is part of him. In the same way, the Isle of Man is dependent on the UK Crown, but the Isle of Man isn't the UK. QuartierLatin1968 15:59, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Switzerland/Western Europe issue[edit]

The reference you gave (Western Europe) mainly shows a definition based on the Cold War, with Europe being divided into Western Europe and Eastern Europe. However, we are including Central Europe in the template, and noone would want to argue that the Alpine countries and the Visegrad group are in Central Europe; if you want to put Switzerland in Western Europe, fine - but then we also have to include all of the Balkans, the Baltic states and Central Europe under the category Eastern Europe, and I don't think this makes sense. If you absolutely can't agree with me on this, I'd prefer to settle this in a vote rather than in continuing reverts. In hopes of a speedy resolution of the issue, Nightstallion 14:37, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

As Western Europe is the wikipedia definition and the initial choice made in the template (prior to April 1), I prefer it that way. BTW there might be a confusion with Mitteleuropa. Anyways, maybe there is a different arrangement we can find for the template, afterall it's about currencies. -- User:Docu

Dependencies, pegged currencies and single currencies[edit]

I think we need to decide finally how to treat depenency currencies (Those at fixed 1:1 rate to another) and pegged currencies. The different regional currency templates treat the issue differently. AsianCurrencies has the Hong kong Dollar (which is pegged at HK$7.80:USD) in brackets. But the Bosnian Marka, CFA and CFP francs are not in brackets, even though they are pegged to the Euro. This is a big issue as many important currencies are pegged to one of the big currencies. The Chinese Renminbi is Pegged to the Dollar for example.

Another issue is the listing, in the template, of countries using a common currency. I think this is unneccessary. But what ever we do we should be consistant. The US Dollar and CFA francs in some templates have listed countries, however the Euro does not. It is my opinion that this is a currency template, and only currencies should be listed. Explainations can be found in the currency articles. Seabhcán 15:20, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

I have done my best to standardize these issues just before you posted, putting dependencies in italics and listing regions/countries for the currencies (with the exception of the US Dollar in the America template, I just couldn't agree on how to include Puerto Rico, Panama, and so on). In my humble opinion, the template should also contain this information, since the situation isn't that simple, but if there's a consensus against it, so be it. I'm strongly for listing the information in smaller font size and brackets, though, since it adds to usability (else, someone looking for the currency of Mali might ask himself where to find it...). Nightstallion 15:30, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
These are fair points. And I like the italics better than the brackets. What about Pegged currencies? I can't see the difference between a dependency currency pegged at 1:1, something like the Bosnian Marka which is pegged at ~2:1 to the euro (it used to be 1:1 to the DMark) and the CFA or CFP francs. I think they should be all treated the same. Seabhcán 15:58, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
The problem with that point is that it's really horribly difficult to find out which currency is pegged to which other currency right now - even in Wikipedia articles on currencies, not all currencies that are pegged to the dollar are given as pegged. And what exactly do we do with currencies that are pegged to currency baskets, or pegged to a currency but with a large band, or pegged to a currency but not quite definitely so? I'm not against it in principle, it's just horribly difficult... And note that I didn't italicize the dependencies because their currencies are pegged, but simply because they are dependencies and not countries. Not that we can't change the definition, of course. Nightstallion 21:30, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
I've put up a list yesterday in which I tried to be as comprehensive as possible (for my own personal use). Just tell me how comprehensive you (and whoever else is reading this talk page) want these templates to be, and I'll adapt them. Nightstallion 08:34, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
That list you made is excellent. You should move it to a proper article page title and then perhaps put a link to it from each currency template. Good work. Your list also shows we're missing articles on the West African Monitary Zone and the East African Currency. Seabhcán 14:51, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
Thanks. I gave it my best. ;) What would you say would be the most accurate article title? And if I had more time, I'd write a few sentences about the WAMZ and the EAC currency union, but with final exams and Maths olympiad coming up, I'm afraid I won't be having too much free time in the near future... Nightstallion 09:48, 21 May 2005 (UTC)
I think you should replace List of circulating currencies with your list. I have a quiet weekend - I'll try do a bit of research on the WAMZ and the EAC. Seabhcán 10:07, 21 May 2005 (UTC)
Should the Australian Dollar in the Pacific section get after it "Kiribati, Nauru, Norfolk Island and Tuvalu"? (Based on the US in Pacific, I think that's the right way of doing it—countries other than Australia that use the dollar in italics, and Australian dependencies in the Pacific (i.e. Norfolk Island) upright?) Felix the Cassowary 12:40, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I just updated the link in the comment above to List of circulating currencies which I just renamed from "List of currencies". Ingrid 05:39, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Somaliland's currency should be listed.[edit]

The currency of Somaliland, the Somaliland Shilling should be added to the list. - (Aidan Work 02:41, 20 November 2005 (UTC))

Done. Deleted it accidentally while cleaning up. Flag of Austria.svg ナイトスタリオン 11:29, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Asia and the Pacific[edit]

Does anyone else think having a single grouping that includes countries as distant and unrelated as Israel and Vanuatu isn't such a smart grouping? --Ptcamn 02:29, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Propose a better definition, then, and I'll be happy to implement it. Just split it into Asia and Australia & Oceania? Then you've got POV troubles with Timor-Leste and Papua New Guinea... —Nightstallion (?) 07:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
How about dividing it into six templates, per the current subdivisions of Template:Currencies of Asia ? Those possibly meriting double-listing could be double-listed. -- Visviva 07:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
I'd second that. The Template:~Currencies of Asia topic is just badly named, particularly when the title is Template:Currencies of Asia and the Pacific. (Extra3 18:17, 3 February 2007 (UTC))

I really don't mind. But I'd like to point out that there is no good method to partition the world that satisfies both of these criteria:

  1. Not offend anyone
  2. Each partition is about the same size

--ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 04:39, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


It seems to me that Reunion and Hawaii should not be listed (perhaps there are others also, but I'm not a geography expert). It seems inconsistent to me, since other states/departments are not listed individually. Ingrid 03:14, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Ehm, all territories which are not part of the mainland and not on the same continent are listed separately. That's the reason. They should stay. —Nightstallion (?) 08:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Some changes?[edit]

I just found Transcontinental nation, and these templates don't quite match. I don't know enough about geography to know if there are good reasons for that. Here are the ways these don't match:

  • Armenia and Cyprus are both listed as geographically Asian, even though they are sometimes considered European for cultural reasons. Armenia is in the Asian template, and Cyprus is in the European one. I'd vote for both being Asian.
  • Kazakhstan is only in the Asian template, but has European territory as well.

On another note, should the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus be explicitly mentioned as a user of the Turkish new lira? Ingrid 02:39, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be rather asinine to have the Cypriot lira in the Asian template only when it'll be replaced by the euro in two years' time? —Nightstallion (?) 11:59, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
I seem to be phrasing things poorly, and offending people left and right. I'm sorry. I was not aware that Cyprus was going to start using the euro soon. So, since Armenia is considering joining the European Union (and thus apparently qualifies as European), should they be moved to the European template? Or should they be listed in both? Ingrid 18:33, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Nah, you didn't offend me, I just didn't understand your reasoning. =] I'd say we should simply include all trans-continental nations in both continents they are in, ne? —Nightstallion (?) 08:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

The Euro is one of the currencies in the Nordic countries[edit]

because of Finland. Either the list or the heading of the list is wrong. Suggestions: a) the heading be changed to Scandinavia. b) the Euro be included in the list of Nordic currencies. Clarifer 12:42, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

No, you simply don't understand the formatting, I'm afraid: Countries belonging to the eurozone are covered with the first line. It makes no sense to repeat "euro" in almost every other line, and that's why the Nordic line only includes currencies used exclusively there. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 17:50, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Um, you don't seem to understand the meaning of Nordic? It refers explicitly to Swe,Den,Fin,Nor and Ice. The term northern can be used in the formatting but 'Nordic' would automatically include Finland. (Compare a similar entry on the BeNeLux countries for example or on the British Isles).
No, you don't understand. The first line explicitly lists all countries in the eurozone. Once Slovenia joins the euro on 1 January 2007, we definitely won't include "euro" in the Balkans section of the template because of that. By your reasoning, we'd have to include "euro" in every line of the template. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 09:10, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
As there is no coined in term such as the "Balkan countries" in English the comparison is invalid. The 'Nordic countries' is a defined group of states in a similar way as e.g. the Belenux are. Therefore, the term Nordic countries automatically includes Finland (In a similar fashion as the Benelux automatically includes Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg) whereas the term Balkan does not include any defined set of states. Here, the term northern makes more sense than Nordic. If of the Benelux e.g. only Belgium had the Euro, one would not list the Dutch Gulden and the Luxembourgish Franc under Benelux but perhaps under western. Why is Switzerland under western and not central Europe by the way? The divisions in the table are geographic and not geopolitical, right? Clarifer 14:44, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
While I do not agree that Nordic countries is equivalent to Benelux (the latter is an organization, the former is not), let's just leave it at what it currently is, since we can agree on that at least. I've tried to get Switzerland into the Central Europe line, but to no avail. Let's try again. ;) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 17:16, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
See what I mean? I tried. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 21:47, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
For more information on the Nordic passport union and the Nordic Council and the Nordic Council of Ministers and the economic, cultural, environmental etc. cooperation programmes thereof, please see the relevant article and google it. The Nordic countries are indeed a cluster of states more or less comparable to the Benelux and this makes it a mild geopolitical unit rather than a geographical characterization. Clarifer 14:28, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
I don't really agree with that view, but fine. As I've said, we can agree with the current version, though I'd be inclined to change "Eurozone" to "European Union" once a few of the new member states have joined the euro; currently, it would be very much cluttered up. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 19:42, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
But that wouldn't remove the Nordic section: FO, IS and NO are not part of the EU. And maybe people will be talking about a special currency for GL after they've got their planned special banknotes. And SM, MC, VA and others use EUR but aren't part of EU. ( 10:49, 12 July 2006 (UTC))

Euro is one of the western currencies[edit]

I agree with Clarifier. What he says about Finland is also true of Ireland, Benelux, France, Spain and Portugal. I suggest that "Eurozone" is deleted as inappropriate in a geographic table and that Euro is added first to each geographic area. --Red King 16:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

It might be better to move the euro to several categories:
Western Europe: Euro (France, Spain, Ireland, Belgium etc.)
Northern Europe: Euro (Finland)
Southeastern Europe: Euro (Slovenia)
Etc. Europe: Euro (...)
This is how other currencies such as XAF and XOF are listed. People seeing these tables might not know what Eurozone consists of, just as the might not know what the West African / Central African monetary unions consist of. ( 07:34, 11 January 2007 (UTC))

British pound or Pound sterling ?[edit]

In the template PreEuroCurrencies :

  • Other EU British pound

In the template Currencies of Europe

  • Western Guernsey... Pound sterling

As for me, British Pound is beter, because the name of the country is in teh name of the currency. Marc. --Flafla89 14:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Switzerland's location[edit]

Check Switzerland, it's obviously in Central Europe and the article even says so. It is in "Western Europe" if you use the distinction between Western and Eastern employed in the Cold War, but then Turkey is also in Western Europe. —Nightstallion (?) 11:10, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


It's absurd to include Azores on this listing. Azores are of course european islands, and North America is the second most closed continent, Africa is only 3rd.

Unrecognised countries[edit]

Transnistrian rouble is listed as being used in "unrecognised countries" in Europe. Somaliland shilling is listed as being used in the "east" of Africa. This seems inconsistent. I propose that Transnistrian rouble either is moved to "Eastern Europe", or that Somaliland shilling is moved to "unrecognised countries".

If currencies are sorted as "unrecognised countries," there's also the problem with TWD. And RUB is used in two unrecognised countries in GE.

Sorting by geographical areas can never be wrong: even if the countries are unrecognised, the currencies are still in use at the geographical areas where the unrecognised countries are located. (Stefan2 02:09, 7 October 2006 (UTC))

agree. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 17:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Geographic categorization[edit]

Hi there.. I came across the European currencies template just now, and after reading through some of the earlier discussion, I have a question: Why is it necessary to break these templates down into smaller geographical area? It seems as if disagreements and conflict about which "region" particular nations belong in could be averted by simply listing all the European currencies, for example, alphabetically by the name of the nation. I know that when I came across this template, for example, I was interested in finding the Slovenian tolar, and it took me a minute to find it, as my first guesses as to where Slovenia would be categorized were "Southeastern" and "Mediterranean." I realize that Wikipedia has articles for these regions of Europe, and that perhaps it has been settled somewhere that Slovenia is indeed a "Central" nation, but wouldn't it be simpler and more user-friendly (especially towards those of us who are not familiar with the debates about this kind of categorization) to list all the European currencies together, alphabetically? Just my $0.02. Or £0.02, or €0,02, if you prefer. :)  :: Salvo (talk) 23:50, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Well its because comparing the European template with other regional templates might cause people to assume a Eurocentric bias among them. --23prootie 08:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)


Why are these countries/currencies included? Europe stops at the Caucuses, so anything that is trans them is in Asia, not Europe. --Red King 16:29, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Different people have different definitions of "Europe" and "Asia" (and "Africa"). See transcontinental country for further information. Besides, Georgia and Azerbaijan are partially located north of the Caucas Mountains, thus being partially European according to your definition. This leaves Armenia, which is usually categorised together with the other two countries in country listings. ( 08:06, 11 January 2007 (UTC))

CFA franc[edit]

Should the CFA franc realy be on this template? It isn't a currently circulating currency. – Zntrip 06:43, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

European "special treatment"[edit]

I've noticed that all except the European template follows the UN subregion categorisation, so I don't get why Europe should be different? 23prootie 09:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I believe that following the UN subregion categorisation strictly may be too inflexible. We must ask ourselves, what works best for each of the continent. I understand that you have an interest in categorising the currencies by geography. I looked at your edit. I get the feeling that there are too many "groups". I'm curious if the term "Indochina" is offensive to the people in the region. Would that provoke sentiment toward colonization?
USD is listed under Malay archipelago. Obviously, that refers to East Timor. But not everyone knows about it, and it is counterintuitive, despite the fact. I also remember you tried to enumerate similar instances like Russian ruble - Abkhazia, but then somehow all these instances got reverted. I'd like to take this opportunity to discuss and establish a sensible rule, which determines when to add (<small>blah, blah</small>). I have found these different use cases:
  • USD - East Timor, main user of the currency is not in the same continent. Another example is euro in Africa
  • Singapore dollar - Brunei, main user of the currency is in the same continent, same subgroup
  • USD - Ecuador, main user of the currency is in the same continent, but not the same subgroup
  • Formal monetary union - 4 in the world. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chochopk (talkcontribs) 10:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC).
I should've read old talk before creating my own section below. I agree that all of these cases should have small text explaining location. Ingrid 14:11, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Mexico and Europa stuff[edit]

Why Mexico have a single line for a single currency? Shouldn´t be with the currency in Northern America, since Mexico is geopolitically part of it? And I would suggest to add in the template with the European currencies a line of currencies replaced by the euro, like the german mark or the french franc --ometzit<col> 04:18, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

For pre-euro stuff, see {{Euro topics}}. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 04:39, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

euro in Africa[edit]

I just noticed that Euro is listed (with a capital) many times in the Africa template. Is this vandalism, or places like Reunion (which I think uses the euro)? If the latter, can we put the place in parentheses (isn't this how it used to be done)? Ingrid 22:51, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Structure of the templates[edit]

This kind of follows from my last comment. I think it's really confusing to not list locations anymore for the non-obvious ones. I also think that now that the lines are split by geographic area, it's confusing to use non-geographic headings as well. I think that euro should be listed under each geographic area, with the countries in that area listed in parentheses. The CFA francs and CFP franc may fit into just one geographic subsection, but still with the countries listed. That's just my preference though, and I wouldn't object if others disagree. Ingrid 23:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

The grouping had remained stable until User:23prootie made dramatic changes to all 4 of the continental nav boxes in late February 2007. He/she gave his/her reasoning in an earlier talk section. During this process, he/she has something like Russian ruble (Abkhazia · South Ossetia). Somebody removed it, probably because of the possible confusion that "the Russian ruble is not the currency of Russia". I don't know why exactly. But its current state is not perfect either. When I applied my personal motto and asked the generalized questions 3 sections earlier, nobody answered, again. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 05:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
I don't see the justification above. I think the templates were much better before the changes, and am tempted to roll-back the changes (not just a straight revert, since other changes have been made since then). If anyone has any objection, please explain it here (and I've posted to 23prootie's talk to invite his opinion). Ingrid 04:53, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
I have to agree, I like the templates before the changes. They were much easier to read, more intuitive, and use less space. And the way with the euros, US dollar, pound, etc... should be to list countries using it in parentheses. Joe I 05:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I would like to refrain expressing opinion on how to partition a continent. But I do support adding parenthesis on non obvious one like USD (East Timor). --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 02:39, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I started making the changes. Didn't get to Template:Currencies of Oceania. I also didn't down-case Euro (which I think should be done). I wasn't sure when to use small/italics, so may not have been consistent. I put all unrecognized currencies into their geographic area with (unrecognized), except I didn't know where to put the Asian ones. I think the Eurozone should be split into geographic sections, with countries listed. I also wonder why the Europe template has so many more divisions than the others. Perhaps that's what 23prootie was trying to correct? I've gotta run now. Will get to Oceania as soon as I can. Ingrid 22:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
I like the current structure, but there are a few things I'd like to change...
Eurozone: Euro
I'd prefer something like
Western: Euro (Ireland, ...)
Northern: Euro (Finland)
This is comparable to how the euro is handled on other continents. For example, it appears in all of 'north America', 'Caribbean America' and 'South America'.
However, I'm not sure how to classify the different countries.
FI would clearly be northern together with SE, NO, DK, FO and IS.
IE would clearly be northern together with GB.
FR, ES, PT and IT have a Mediterranean coast, so they could be classified as Mediterranean; however, they could also be classified as south or west, at least ES, PT and IT.
AD, MC, SM and VA have no coast, so they probably shouldn't be classified as Mediterranean, so maybe west or south instead. But it would look strange to classify VA and SM differently to IT, MC differently to FR and AD differently to both FR and ES.
DE, NL, BE and LU could be either west or central.
AT would probably have to be central given that CZ currently is listed as central.
SI would either be Mediterranean or southeastern.
Next thing:
Russian ruble (Russia and Abkhazia and South Ossetia (unrecognized)) · Transnistrian ruble (unrecognized)
This suggests that only South Ossetia is unrecognised, while Abkhazia isn't. And it states that in the case of Transnistria, it is the currency which is unrecognised (while the country could be perfectly recognised), while in the other cases it's the use of the currencies that is unrecognised. ( 10:33, 21 April 2007 (UTC))
Thank you for bringing this up again. It was one of the things I wanted to address originally, but forgot about. What about using this map: Image:Location-Europe-UNsubregions.png to change the subregions, and make it more similar to the other continents? I agree that the unrecognized issue is ambiguous. Perhaps putting (unrecognized) next to Abkhazia also would help? As far as the difference between the currency and country being unrecognized, I think it's a limitation of the template size, and it's not too hard to live with. But if you have a suggestion for distinguishing, I'd probably support a change. Ingrid 15:43, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm not good with images, so I didn't transclude it -- actually, I tried but it ended up huge. Feel free to fix it. Ingrid 15:46, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
If no one objects, I will make the change. Ingrid 16:04, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

interwiki links[edit]

I removed the interwiki links from template:currencies of europe because they interfered with the interwiki links on articles. This lead to thinks like the interwiki link at Swiss franc linking to :de:Vorlage Europäische Währungen instead of :de:Schweizer Franken. Yaan (talk) 07:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


Bermuda is listed in many places as being in the Caribbean and I can find nothing stating that it is not. Wikipedia:WikiProject Bermuda is listed as a subproject of Wikipedia:WikiProject Caribbean, Template:Countries and territories of the Caribbean and Template:Caribbean Community (CARICOM). Joe I 05:19, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Northern America. Caribbean. Bermuda. US State Department. Can you find any actual source saying that it is in the Caribbean? Bermuda's inclusion in WikiProject Caribbean was justified — Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Caribbean/Archive_1#Bermuda — in it not being included anywhere else back in 2006. It's inclusion in Template:Caribbean Community (CARICOM) is not an argument to its geographic location. It has only been included in Template:Countries and territories of the Caribbean since June 2008, having long ago been removed. (talk) 15:49, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Message at the top[edit]

Note: this is a common talk page for all Currencies templates. (Because all format and inclusion changes need to be standard over all four templates - and perhaps even the PreEuroCurrencies template)

- - - -


's talk page does not redirect here, unlike the other talk pages. Is that an error?

Presence of "cite" tags in templates[edit]

Article footer templates are really not the place for cite tags (or for controversial or heavily-disputed information, for that matter). Any controversy should be quickly resolved without the use of tagging for missing citations -- since references are not in fact added to templates, therefore no citation can be "missing", and the tagging is not useful. AnonMoos (talk) 17:51, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Template should really not redirect to Russian-language Wikipedia[edit]

As the "Karabakh dram" link currently does... AnonMoos (talk) 16:02, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

So where should the link go instead, then? In my opinion, it is useful to list all European currencies in the template, but there is no article about the Karabakh dram on English Wikipedia, so it is not possible to link to an English-language article. Linking to the Russian Wikipedia at least ensures that those who speak Russian can read about the currency. And those who don't can go to the Russian Wikipedia and from there follow the links to the Spanish or Turkish Wikipedias, which they might be able to read instead. ( (talk) 23:33, 22 January 2010 (UTC))

Valueless links to large geographic areas[edit]

The leftmost column defines large geographic areas such as North America or Western Europe. These are familiar terms and anyway just general groupings for a list of countries and their currencies in that area, and I see no benefit in linking them. These templates are there to provide links to currencies, not to teach basic geography. In fact they're misleading as, in this context, anyone who clicks on those links might reasonably expect to get some sort of overview on currencies in that area, but instead they'll just get an article that tells them what the template already shows, the list of countries in that area. Therefore, I've unlinked the leftmost column. One editor, through various IP addresses, keeps relinking them, and we need to discuss it here. Colonies Chris (talk) 10:37, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Please do not remove the wikilinks, I use them to navigate to learn and teach the geographical regions where those currencies are used, so please do not remove them, also, you need to ensure that you are not breaking things, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Currencies_of_Asia&oldid=398418745 also, from your talk page, you say that you are removing links from stub, these templates do not qualify as a stub, please see your talk page, there are several notes you may need to pay attention. (talk) 16:51, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
I apologise for inadvertently disconnecting the West Asia section from the rest of the template - I see that has now been fixed.
Although these links may sometimes be useful to a very small number of readers, they are superfluous, as the list of countries in each of these regions is already present in the template itself, and they are confusing for most readers, as they don't lead where you might expect from a link in a currency template. This template's purpose is to provide links to currency articles, not to teach geography. There are plenty of other sources for that information. Colonies Chris (talk) 10:04, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Have you ran a survey to know how many readers find the regional links useful or not? Have you ran a survey to know how many readers find the regional links confusing? For me, I find them useful and they do not cause confusion. One use I see of having the link is: if a new currency shows up, the editor can click in the region link and find out quickly where the new entry should be added. (talk) 21:27, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
I agree with Colonies Chris that these links are not needed. They have little relevence and should go. There are other ways of navigating WP by region. JIMp talk·cont

Why by region?[edit]

Why are these templates organised by region (e.g. North Africa, West Africa, etc) within each continent? Wouldn't it be more convenient for the reader looking for a particular country's currency to just have the countries listed alphabetically within each continent? Colonies Chris (talk) 18:57, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Continents are large masses of land, putting all the countries currencies in one large list, would make it difficult for a user to find a specific entry, so, from my point of view, I found them to be more convenient. besides, Chris, I believe your concern is not how are the currencies grouped, more likely about the delinking project that you are currently running. (talk) 23:53, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Leaving aside your failure to WP:AGF, you've merely made an unsupported assertion "putting all the countries currencies in one large list, would make it difficult for a user to find a specific entry" without justification or explanation. Grouping by region is only helpful if the user already knows which region the country lies within, but creates an extra difficulty for the reader who doesn't know that. The question that needs to be answered is how a typical reader uses these templates.
These templates are mostly transcluded into articles about specific country currencies. So the templates are only of value if they provide an easy method for a person reading about the currency of one country to link to the currency of another country they might then be interested in. Do we know what the readers of these articles want? Tourists, numismatists and businesspeople would all have different reasons for reading these articles, and very different ideas about what constitutes a currency of related interest; this might be the currency of a neighbouring country, or the currency of a former colonial occupier or predecessor state, or the currency of a major trading partner, for example. In fact the only justification for even dividing the list by continent is to keep the size of the template manageable - it might be better to simply list all countries in one template, regardless of continent, or to break up the list into several templates by alphabetic ranges rather than by continent, or to have several different subdivisions by different criteria, to suit different readers' purposes. Or even to drop the templates entirely, as they add nothing to what's already in Category:Currencies by region. Colonies Chris (talk) 12:34, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Unrecognised countries (2)[edit]

In my opinion, micronations and countries that lack widespread recognition should not be included in these templates. What do others think? --John (talk) 06:10, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

@John:, I don't see any reason why micronations and unrecognized countries shouldn't be in the templates, and currency articles. Also, it seems unecessary to bring this up again, as there have already been a agreed consesus to have currencies of unrecognized countries in the template and some articles (ex. Turkish Lira), seeing as the currencies of those countries have stayed for a long time. Seqqis (talk) 06:34, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping. Where was this agreed previously? --John (talk) 08:13, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
@John: After I looked at the older complaints about the issue on this talk page, it seemed that unrecognized countries can stay in the templates. Seqqis (talk) 17:42, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
So where was this agreed previously? --John (talk) 22:32, 8 June 2015 (UTC)