Talk:Euro banknotes/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

copies

Isn't it illegal to make copies of banknotes or even if you did not copy them. I think its ok if you hide the currecny mark or something. - fonzy

The EU put images of the banknotes online, in the period before they went into circulation. I don't know EU laws on this--US law allows copies of money if they're sufficiently enlarged or shrunk. Vicki Rosenzweig

Well I am not shore. But shoudn;t we jsut for teh moement be on teh safe side. Do something. Then if it si ok put them back. - fonzy

There's no danger of the images being illegal because they could be used for counterfeiting, as they came directly from the ECB's own site. Scipius 09:06 Sep 21, 2002 (UTC)

the ECB site seems to have watermarked the pictures with "specimen"... (link) also, the ECB owns the copyright to it. link and point 6, and most of page 2 of this. Seems to be mostly the same as US law. -Sharth

What looks like "EKT" is actually Greek letters. Should it be encoded as such? (See European Central Bank for what they stand for.) -phma

Good idea. Implemented. -Scipius 00:03 Feb 24, 2003 (UTC)

(see also below -- sannse (talk) 21:39, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC))

Archive 1

Archive 2

True or false??

True or false: A 5 Euro banknote is worth the exact same amount as a American $5 bill. (I mean, the ratio of a Euro and an American dollar is 1:1)

False. At least false in general. The exchange rate of both currencies vary. It is true however that at the moment they are worth approximately the same. DJ Clayworth 18:44, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Well now €1 will get you about U$D1.28. Gerbon689 19:58, 05 Apr 2005 (UTC)

As of 8 May, 2008, €1 will get you US$ 1,53. George Adam Horváth (talk) 10:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Manchester code for 10 Euro note

Judging by the other examples given, the Manchester code for the €10 note should be "0101 10" without the final 1 - since two code positions are taken together to give one resulting digit, there should not be an odd number of positions in Manchester code.

However, since I'm not certain the translation "110" given here might be incorrect, rather than the "0101 101" code, I thought I'd ask here. -- pne 12:31, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)

---

i'll ask the original source (news://europa.union.euro) about that

thewikipedian

no need to ask any officials, I think in 2 years someone could have looked at a note by himself. Another question: for the results shown in the table, you have to look at the note from the back, and a bright bar is 0, a dark bar 1. Is this in any way "official", or can it be done in any way?

Looking from the front and making bright bars 1 and dark 0, it would give the codes 001,011,0000,0001,0011,0111,1111 - I think, this would look more logical. --Androl 09:21, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Checksum? Seems wrong to me.

I've tried working out the checksum for the notes there, and I get zero every time. Either the instructions are wrong, or it does not work with the notes shown.

Same here. I had a bill with number X03418732469, and according to my calculations (which I repeated 5 times) the last number should be 0. But it is 9. I have a second one, with the same problem. I have looked for the right calculations, but I can't find those yet. --Omegium 22:15, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

X03418732469: 24+3+4+1+8+7+3+2+4+6+9 = 71 7+1=8 The last digit can never be 0, a 0 is not necessary because the 9 will give the same checksum.

The mistake you all make is that you DON'T HAVE to replace the country code by it's number in the alfabeth!!! You have to ignore this character completely.

This means that: X03418732469, the X stands for Gemany (cheksum = 2) 3+4+1+8+7+3+2+4+6+9 = 47 -> 4+7 = 11 -> 1+1 = 2 = Germany!

Also the example on the current page is completely wrong. U08217383936, the U stands for France (checksum = 5), 0+8+2+1+7+3+8+3+9+3+6 = 50 -> 5 = France!!!

All very well, except that you don't explain why X = 2 = Germany and U = 5= France? --Red King 20:48, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Read the part of "Country letters" - "National identification codes" - "Checksum" of the article.

Great! Are you ammending the page, or should I? 132.165.76.2 (talk) 10:16, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

remote detection

I've heard of plans to embed RFID chips in all Euro notes. If anyone knows specifics about this, could they please update the article. I also wonder whether the metal foil decal on the notes can be detected by metal detectors while the notes are in your wallet.

I'm not sure about the RFID (I know ECB is considering it but whether of not they'll do it, I can't say) but I can tell you with certainty that the metal foil in the notes does not set off metal detectors (I'm not sure if it is metal) - Gerbon689 19:58, 05 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Dear all, the metalic stripe embedded in the paper is no longer made of metal. If you look very carefully, each note has a certain text punched into the "metal strip". However, if you look even MORE carefully, you will notice that the "metal" immediately around the text is of a lighter colour. Note issuing authorities have been using plastic strips instead of metal for over a decade now, and as far as I know they have done so with the euro as well. George Adam Horváth 08:27, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Complaint

We have received a complaint from the ECB about this page, because our images, which according to the above came from the ECB site (!) do not have "specimen' watermarked into them. Anyway, I checked and the ones on their site at this link now have 'Specimen' and we should delete the ones we have and replace them with these I think.

I think our encyclopedia mission is satisfied perfectly well with the "specimen" version, so I see no reason to fight with them about it. --Jimbo Wales 21:35, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I'll do this - I've got the files - just in the process of converting to .png now -- sannse (talk) 21:43, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Having looked at the images with specimen on them, they appear pretty badly defaced and unsuitable as reasonably accurate representations of the notes. It appears from the above discussion that the existing images are already of notes with an invalid serial number. Seems to me to be a poor idea to use the current versions from their site, though a specimen note which defaces them less might do the job. Perhaps someone has a photograph of the notes instead? Or mismatched halves so it's impossible to construct a complete note but the images aren't so badly defaced? Jamesday 21:53, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I've done the uploads - but certainly see Jamesday's point here. Perhaps we could take the earlier versions and use a fainter "specimen" bannaer. That might work. Of course, if someone can take better image - that would be best -- sannse (talk) 22:06, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I notice the current rules on the reproduction of Euro notes were published in the OJEU in March 2003, which was after the images were loaded here! The rules for electronic reproduction ("Specimen" in Ariel or Ariel-like font, diagonally across the note, at least 75% of the width and 15% of the height, in a contrasting non-opaque colour) seem a bit tricky to get round, but I suppose we could use a faint colour for it. -- Arwel 22:33, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• The ECB complains about a page in wikipedia?! How odd... I also complain: the 500 euros image shoud be removed. it's a lot of money and the article could be robbed. -Pedro 22:07, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Polymer banknote Euro?

When the notes came out first, Irish newspapers ran the story that they would be replaced with plastic (by which I suppose they mean Polymer banknote technology) within a couple of years. Has there been any developments on this front? Seabhcán 19:15, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Don't know about it but you could try contacting the ECB about it at info@ecb.int. Maybe you have already, I don't know, just thought I'd say it anyway.

I read that they kept to paper for the changeover because the EU thought converting to euros was more than enough for people to cope with. --Dlatimer 15:10, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Euro banknotes in use?

Is it just me, or are the higher-valued Euro banknotes extremely uncommon in actual use? I use €5, €10 and €20 notes pretty much routinely, but I only get my hands on a €50 note once every two or three months, and to this day, I have had a €100, €200 or €500 note exactly once in my entire life, and even that was when I emptied my entire apartment rent back-up account for transfer into a different account.

What's the point in printing banknotes no one ever gets to use? 85.76.152.179 18:20, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It depends what country you're in. When I go to Ireland I find I commonly get €50 notes out of the cash machines in Dun Laoghaire near the ferry terminal. Notes above €100 are not issued in France and Portugal (though imports are of course valid), and they were not printed for Ireland (the Central Bank got a small stock from elsewhere for people who needed them). On the other hand, the use of high-value notes has always been common in Germany and Austria because credit cards are less popular there and they had high value notes in the old currencies. -- Arwel 20:21, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

"I commonly get €50 notes out of the cash machines" - oo get him! ;) I think they're most usually save for large cash transfers and the like, just like £50 notes. violet/riga (t) 20:27, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Heh! At the moment I'd be grateful if my bank account would let me at such amounts :) They're not terribly uncommon in Dublin, at least -- I remember seeing plenty of them cross the bar at the Porter House. There was one cash machine on the corner of O'Connell Street and on of the streets to the east - not Talbot St, but one nearby - which used to dish out IE£50 notes if you asked for more than £100 - it was very surprising when I asked it for £110 and got a £50 and 3 £20s, rather than 5 £20s and a £10. IE£50 is about €63.50, and again I had no trouble spending one in the Porter House... -- Arwel 22:14, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I can verify that observation. Cash machines in Dublin are rarely loaded with anything other than €50s and €20s, and similar for cash withdrawals from banks. The €50 note plays the role of the £20 in England as the note in which larger cash transactions are most likely to take place. €10s and €5s are generally returned as change and passed around enough to become grubby very rapidly. €100, €200 and €500 are very rare and generally only available from banks on special request. Pulling any of them out among friends will attract a 'coo look at that'. Anyway, with the price of drink, to buy a round of 4 you'd need to be pulling out more than a single €20. jlang 10:29, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Similar here in Austria. 5€ and 10€ are in regular use, 20€ is nothing special either. 50€ can often be seen, as well. 100€ are already rather rare, and I can't recall ever seeing 200€ or 500€ in actual use. On the other hand, Austria had 5000S as its highest denomination prior to the Euro, which is about 363€, so maybe that's the reason for the high use of 20€ and 50€, compared to what was written above. Nightstallion 10:46, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

'Notes above €100 are not issued in France and Portugal. False for France: I had €100 and €500 notes when I withdrew a large amount of money. David.Monniaux 13:05, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

€200 and €500 notes are used in some places. In Basel (Switzerland), a majority of the bank machines dispense Euros as well as Swiss Franks. Switzerland is not in the EU, but Basel is on the border, and has enough commuters from France and Germany, as well as Swiss residents who shop in France or Germany, to make it worth while. These machines dispense €50 and €100, or €100 and €200 notes. I even know one which dispenses €500 notes. This could be in part due to Switzerland, and adjacent Germany, being more of a cash-based economy than some other countries. TiffaF 14:03, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

You just try to figure out the value of a CHF 1000 note. (83.108.30.141 (talk) 19:48, 10 July 2010 (UTC))

'Notes above €100 are not issued in France and Portugal - Actually, according to the ECBs original emission scheme Portugal was the ONLY country not to issue any notes higher than 100€. Every other member state has issued a certain amount of 200 and 500 notes, although their actual use and popularity varies. To add to previous comments, last week I was in a Brussels supermarket and a lady in front of me decided to pay for 8 euro worth of goods with a 500 euro note. I don't suppose I have to explain the havoc she caused. She eventually got her change in some fifties (well, one, actually), and the rest in twenties. You should have seen her face :D Regards, George Adam Horváth 07:07, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

€500 notes are legal throughout were Euros are legal. It would be a cliché to say that Belgium is not ready for the Euro.(83.108.30.141 (talk) 19:48, 10 July 2010 (UTC))

I never carried a 50 note; maybe in 2001-2 I might have had difficulty to get change for it, but I guess not now anymore -- filling the car's tank is about 40 euros, a lunch will easily cost about 10. On the other hand, I see no purpose or utility in the 1 c and 2 c coins, the cheapest thing you can buy being 5 c. On the other hand again, when abroad, I had difficulty in buying stuff with 5 euro notes, receiving change in a currency without any use (or exchange rate) elsewhere and that anyway couldn't be taken out of that country. 1 or 2 euro notes would make sense in that context, as has been pointed out sometimes; or carrying dollars. Xyzt1234 11:51, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

In Spain, when you withdraw cash from a cash machine, you normally get €20 and €50 notes, although this depends on the individual bank. La Caixa, for example, is notorious for not letting you withdraw anything less than €20, whereas Cajasol and some others would let you withdraw notes of €10. On the 1 cent and 2 cent coin use: it is true, that in general, 1 and 2 cent coins can be pretty useless, but in Spain, unless you're short-changed, your change is given exact to the cent. This may have to do with the fact that many - especially elderly - people still prefer to calculate things back to pesetas, and if you consider pesetas, two cents are equal to over three pesetas, which, although being equally worthless, is something that you can get your head around. (It is not uncommon elsewhere to give a peseta amount if you want to stress the size of an amount). George Adam Horváth (talk) 10:41, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

A minibank can not earn notoriety for refusing to dish out €10 notes, and please don't ask it for €5s. Banknotes larger than say $20 are more common from minibanks, even 5 years back in time(83.108.30.141 (talk) 19:48, 10 July 2010 (UTC))

Luxembourg

On this article it says that Luxembourg do not have any banknote printing facilities but on the ECB's offical website it shows figures for banknotes they have apparently printed. Does anyone know which one is right. Do they or don't they have printing facilities? The ECB page I am referring to is http://www.ecb.int/bc/faqbc/figures/html/index.en.html#banknotes

Note that the column showing Luxembourg in that document is headed "NCBs (National Central Banks) commissioning banknotes", that is, ordering them to be produced - it does not follow that they produce them themselves. You would have to check the printing code on the front of one of the "Luxembourg" notes to determine where it was actually printed. -- Arwel 17:05, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

To further clarify this issue, have a look at this Bank of Luxembourg web page: http://www.bcl.lu/en/publications/rapports_annuels/AR_1999/ - section 6 of that document states that the BCL has commissioned two specialist printers for euro notes to be put into circulation as of 1 January 2002: "Joh. Enschedé en Zonen" in the Netherlands and "Bundesdruckerei" in Germany. A similar thing happened in 2002 when BCL commissioned Setec to print 100e notes, see the BCL annual report for 2002 section 2.4. There are no euronotes printed in Luxembourg, they just had to make sure that a certain amount of notes was printed somewhere. -- Avij 01:05, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Magnetic Ink

Hope this doesn't sound stupid, but what exactly is magnetic ink, and what does it do? - Gerbon689 12:40, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I believe it is just as it sounds: Ink with magnetic properties (probably due to the ink containing tiny magnetic particles). Thus the note printed with genuine ink can be detected with a simple magnetic detector. Seabhcán 16:18, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Actually the way I phrased that question was stupid. It was just more, "what does it do" but thanks. - Gerbon

Euro and Bulgaria

Euro banknotes must bear the name "Eur"o in all the official languages of the EU. Therefore, once Bulgaria joins the EU, banknotes will have to be redesigned, not later when the country joins the eurozone.

That was the case of Greece: they didn't join the euro in 1999 but notes already showed "euro" in latin and greek scripts( EYPO "evro").

it was foreseeable in 1998 that Greece will join the euro, so the Greek name had to be put on the notes. The new series of euro notes will come at the end of the decade, not in 2007 when Bulgaria joins, but probably before Bulgaria has the euro.

Thewikipedian May 7th, 2005 20:44 UTC+1

Could anyone post what "euro" in Cyrllic would look like? LeoO3 16:08, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Assuming it's pronounced "evro", it would be "EBPO". -- Arwel 16:48, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

What if it's pronounced "euro"? LeoO3 19:31, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

In Russian it's pronounced 'YeVro', Bulgarian is very probably the same, It is writen 'ЕBРО'. If it were pronounced 'euro' it would look like 'ЮРО' (but this might not appear correctly on your broswer.) Seabhcán 16:33, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

A quick look at a couple of Bulgarian websites confirms it is "EBPO" (pronounced "evro" - Bulgarian "E" doesn't have an initial "y" sound as in Russian.) Vilcxjo 23:42, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Thing is, Bulgaria is most likely going to join the euro very soon after it joins the EU, due to their very strict monetary policy. 2009 is very likely (if it joined the ERMII on the day it'll join the EU). ナイトスタリオン ㇳ–ㇰ 15:10, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

There is no "inter-Cyrillic" spelling for Euro, as there is an "inter-Roman", that's pronounced differently in different countries? Would be more practical. 惑乱 分からん 19:34, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

OK, checking out the different cyrillic Slavic Wikipedia. The spelling EBPO or Eвро seems to be the most common, even in Russian, which should give an overall indication. I couldn't find the Belarussian spelling, but I suspect it's similar to the others. Only Ukrainian uses Євро, but Ukraine isn't expected to join the Eurozone anytime soon, anyway. =S 惑乱 分からん 17:33, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Dear all, it is wrong to assume that Bulgaria's accession to the EU will have any effect on Euro notes. Joining the EU does not mean automatic adoption of the EURO as a currency. Please check your sources. It will take several years to Bulgaria to be ready.

Well, actually, joining the EU would mean an obligatory adoption of the Euro, as long as the convergence criteria is fulfilled, with economical sanctions by EU for intentionally ignoring them. Bulgaria is apparently aiming to get the Euro in only about 2-3 years, and in the future Serbia, Macedonia, and Belarus might possibly join the Eurozone. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 13:24, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Dear All, Recently I made an inquiry to the ECB about a possible re-design/update of the euro banknotes. Although they were not willing to disclose further information, they did confirm that the euro banknotes will bear the cyrillic spelling, as well as more three-letter abbreviations of the ECB in other languages, since for example Hungary's EKB is currently absent. As far as I know, the next update of the euro is due to begin in 2009, and as far as I know it will now include the proper spelling for all EU member states - save for Latvia and Hungary, see Const. treaty, Declaration by Hungary and Latvia on the spelling of euro. It is common practice for issuing bodies to alter, modify and update the basic bank note design every 7 years. This is because of wear-and-tear, and also because of forgeries. Wear-and-tear is a serious problem with the euro, bank notes with a high rate of rotation (ie. 5, 10 and 20€) hardly live up to more than a year. So the new notes will be phased in whilst the old ones will be phased out. I believe some facts need to be corrected. After the Treaty of Nice all acceeding countries must agree to adopt the euro. All 12 new members have agreed to that. The principle is that at the time of accession a country MUST accept and ratify every agreement. This is why, for example, Bulgaria and Romania HAD to ratify the Constitutional Treaty upon accession. The presumption is that eventually ALL EU members will have the euro as their currency. Yes, even Denmark, Sweden and the UK. But this also means that the ECB as an authority must provide all the required aspects of the cash currency in terms of languages and design. Thus it makes sense to include ALL the official spellings of the euro on the euro notes, regardless of when a country is actually ready to adopt the euro. Regards, George Adam Horváth 06:53, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, UK and Denmark currently could withhold an opt-out clause, meaning Euro adoption is optional. Sweden has chosen not to peg their currency to the Euro, thus deliberately choosing not to fulfill the criteria for adoption. This move is currently tolerated by the ECB, but similar moves will probably not be tolerated for newer EU members. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 18:02, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

"...but similar moves will probably not be tolerated for newer EU members." Absolutely correct, they will NOT, because only Denmark and the UK managed to get out of the common currency, the rest were not given the option at all. In laymen's terms, from the 2004 accessions onwards: you either adopt the euro, or you don't get into the EU.George Adam Horváth (talk) 10:47, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I travel to Germany twice a month for my work. I keep a bank account there and I withdraw Euro bills at least once a month, usually 500 Euros at a time. Invariably, the machine gives me: one 200 Euros, two 100 Euros, one 50 Euros, two 20 Euros, one 10 Euros. Always the same. I've seen just once in my a 500 Euro bill. It was in Zürich. Several of my European colleagues and myself went out one night, and one guy pulled out a 500 Euro bill. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.45.201.74 (talk) 16:53, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Euro banknote serial codes

Are the number parts of the Euro banknote serial codes unique across banks, or do they repeat in different banks? If they are unique, which part of the number span is dedicated to which bank? — JIP | Talk 13:30, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

No, they're not unique, there can be notes which have the same number part but have a different serial number letter (L through Z). However, the serial number checksum algorithm limits the number of possible collisions, because the serial number letter is included when calculating the checksum. Let's take serial number U08217383936 as an example. If you try to change U (France) to Z (Belgium) you'll end up with an invalid serial number. In fact, the only possibility in this case besides U is L (Finland). -- Avij 01:29, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

RFID Chips in Euro Notes

It seems there may indeed be RFID chips in Euro notes. there is more info on this here:

info here

pictures here

first link: a prewiew of the possible future, but I guess improbable.

second link: an old hoax. Metal strips explode when microwaved, regardless whether they have rfids in them or not. --androl 18:52, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

EU territories depicted

From the article: "The following member overseas territories are shown: the Azores, French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Madeira, Martinique, Réunion, and the Canary Islands."

Looking at the map depicted on the back (I've never seen an actual bill yet), I can see the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islands (plus, of course, the rest of Europe that currently isn't in the Eurozone and the fact that Cyprus isn't shown), but none of the French territories (especially French Guiana, being larger) - am I missing something? Where does it show the French overseas territories? --Canuckguy 17:52, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

In the lower left part, in little boxes besides the semi-European islands. ナイトスタリオン ✉ 22:33, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

'Specimen'

Can't we get pictures of the notes without a giant 'specimen' stamped over them? +Hexagon1 (talk) 09:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

No, its illegal. Have you ever tried to scan money? See EURion constellation. Seabhcán 10:30, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Well can we make it less pronounced (along the lines of this?) And yeah, I've scanned money before, Photoshop only restricts the printing there of, not saving (CS2) +Hexagon1 (talk) 13:05, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Many scanner software however does prevent the scanning of currency Nil Einne (talk) 16:17, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Hexagon, the ECB has set very clear guidelines to the reproduction of the euro banknotes. One element of those guidelines is that scans or samples must bear the word specimen, to inhibit reproduction. Further information is available on the ECB's portal. In fact, the images you see on the page are provided by the ECB itself. Regards, George Adam Horváth 06:58, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Why do the banknotes look different in brochures?

One thing I've never understood. Why do the banknote images printed in brochures, posters and other information sheets look different from what the banknotes really are? I'm referring to the hologram stripe/square, which is present on the actual banknotes but absent from the brochures. Instead there's an elaborate engraved image whose shape varies between the different valued notes. This article, and the ECB webpage, shows the banknotes as they really are, but nothing else seems to. JIP | Talk 15:12, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I think many companies continue to use the promotional images which were issued before it was introduced in cash. I assume this is because, as far as I know, as these images are not actual depictions, they don't have to carry "SPECIMEN" on them. - ^Red_Hot 18:10, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

No accurate banknote images were shown to the public until the very last days before introducing the Euro. The brochures supposed to show the design of the banknotes, so the public could get familiar with it. They did not show any of the security features, probably to avoid to give a chance for criminals to get prepared for counterfeiting.--Timur lenk 16:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Slovenia

Does anyone know what Slovenia's banknote code will be? Or if it has even been assigned. - ^Red_Hot 18:10, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Never mind. It hasn't. - ^Red_Hot 12:09, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Slovenia will not print banknotes from the current series. And the next series (starting 2008) will probably have 2-digit ISO codes, SI for Slovenia. --androl 18:54, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I know. I posted "Never mind. It hasn't." because I e-mailed the ECB about it - they said they're not sure what they're gonna do yet, but gave me the impression they would still have banknotes from this series (there are several empty spaces they could use in the mean time anyway) - ^Рэд_хот 09:40, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Deleting old banknotes

Shouldn't the old images of the banknotes (freely available in their history) be deleted by an admin, as they are the same as the present, but don't have "SPECIMEN" as required? - ^Red_Hot 18:17, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Bar codes in the note

The article states that "when held up to the light, metallic bars can be seen to the right of the watermark". Can somebody verify the bars are metallic? I have never seen translucent metals, and I believe whoever wrote this is confusing thicker paper with metal foils. Furthermore, I've done a random check with the bar codes, and I have found the code for the 50 euro note (0110 1010) to be wrong. I checked with a 100 euro note, and it works there. The code for the 50 euro note in the article, appears to be the real code found on the notes mirrored horizontally, which on the note is 0101 0110. Could somebody please verify this? Regards, George Adam Horváth 07:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Architecture

The architectural examples depicted on the banknotes are not supposed to be identifiable as specific places, but I remember reading that, when the draft banknote designs were published, the examples were identified and some even turned out not to be from Europe. I assume that they were altered for the finalised banknote designs. Does anyone have more information about this?--GagHalfrunt 19:37, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

euro: series 2

In a recent inquiry I made to the ECB, I was told that "The current plan is to introduce the first denomination of the second series as of 1 January 2011 and the second denomination one year thereafter." I would like the article to cite something like this, but I cannot find this in any other reasonable source, but the e-mail I got from the information department. Could somebody please help? George Adam Horváth (talk) 10:28, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Special features for people with impaired sight

Although there have been other currencies pre-dating the euro that were specifically designed in similar ways (different sizes, colours, and ridges) to aid the visually impaired, the introduction of the euro constitutes the first time that authorities have consulted associations representing the blind before, rather than after, the release of the currency.

Is there a citation for this? The Reserve Bank of Australia claims to have consulted "consulted with a number of representative groups while plans for the new series of polymer notes were being developed." Zipzipzip (talk) 19:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Added a 'fact' tag, as I'm pretty sure this is nonsence. The old Dutch guilder bank notes had specific markings for the blind (raised dots on the older ones, geometric figures on the new ones), and I really doubt the designer just though of something just hoping it would be useful for the blind. Jalwikip (talk) 12:07, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Deutsche_Mark#Banknotes_of_the_fourth_series_.281990.E2.80.932002.29 featured braille signs.--85.179.62.100 (talk) 15:39, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

'removed annoying fair use stuff', now the bot removed the images

Jalwikip: I dont't think this was the right action to take - someone (the uploader? an admin?) should place the appropriate fair use statement on the images and restore them. 84.132.51.121 (talk) 09:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Title

Anyone object to following the naming convention of similar articles and renaming Banknotes of the euro?- _JLogan^t: 20:53, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

There seems to be consensus in the Talk:Euro coins that the tittle should stay as it is. Miguel.mateo (talk) 00:02, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

One person vs one is not a consensus. But yes, renaming this would depend on the outcome of that.- _JLogan^t: 09:39, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

GMO cotton

Should it maybe be mentioned in the part about the material of the money that it is of modified origin? Times article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.194.159.39 (talk) 22:40, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

What's the Rationale for Large Denomination Bills (200 and 500)

The world's most popular currency, the US dollar, has currently no denomination greater than $100 (about 72 Euro today). Larger bills did exist, but circulation was ceased in an effort to fight crime [1], because criminals (e.g. drug dealers, tax evadars) arguably are the main users of large denomination bills. I am certain that this argument was known when the Euro denominations were set, yet high denomination bills were still introduced. The euro's highest denomintation is about seven times higher than the US dollar highest denomintation. Why?

TippTopp (talk) 12:00, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

The "rationale" is probably to keep the sequence

• 1, 2 ,5
• 10, 20, 50
• 100, 200, 500

One could probably find a source for that, but I doubt one could find a reliable source for not overriding that on other grounds. --Boson (talk) 16:49, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I think they were a) taking account of the possibility the value might have a sudden drop and b) catering to countries that had large denominations (be they of high value or not) and just liked to have them around. Theoretically it might also be pressure from those (criminals or just big businessmen) who moved large amounts of their disposable income around in suit cases and didn't want to be weighed down too much by lots of notes. Considering the cost of designing, printing and circulating notes, I don't think it was to keep it in sequence unless the designers were all OCD. Though without sources, this is all speculation and hence rather pointless to be honest.- _J.Logan`^t: 18:04, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Other possibilities influencing the decision in favour of (retaining) large denominations (apart from security assessments) are the different customs in Europe and America regarding the amount of cash withdrawals and the use of banknotes as a store of value, possibly influenced by low interest rates and low inflation expectations (not to mention crime rates). See, for instance, http://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/other/reviewoftheinternationalroleoftheeuro2007en.pdf.

See also http://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/key/date/2000/html/sp001211.en.html, which notes the repeated sequence, though does not discuss reasons for retaining that sequence or otherwise.

Perhaps one should add statistics on the volume of each denomination issued and in circulation (inside and outside the euro area) and the historical development of demand for the different denominations. This might also provide perspective for the the counterfeiting statistics --Boson (talk) 20:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

As far as I know, one of the reasons behind it was tradition: Germany, previously issuing the German Mark and the Netherlands, with the Guilder, were both users of large-denomination notes. People there got used to having the option of having large denomination banknotes, so the ECB followed suit, and they issued the 200 and 500 euro notes. Other countries, like Portugal, Italy and Spain didn't have a tradition of having large denomination banknotes (relative to the actual value of the note). This is why Portugal decided to opt-out, and introduce notes up to 100 euro, but not higher.

Another reason could be the reduction of "pressure" on the circulating currency. By introducing large denomination notes, you alleviate the pressure on the money in circulation, by reducing the velocity of circulation of the fastest denominations, and spreading that out over several denominations. The ECB was aware of the fact that the euro was going to be a world currency, with a very large velocity of circulation, so it was easier to do this. The sheer volume of the euro notes in circulation is baffling, so you really want to make sure notes last as long as possible, without having to churn out notes more often than necessary.

Did Portugal just happen to opt out of the Euro? They should have been told they do not own any way back. Who chose to leave them in oblivion of such a knowledge? (83.108.30.141 (talk) 19:35, 10 July 2010 (UTC))

That's the theory. In practice, you can see that the 200 and 500 notes circulating today are mostly from the first series (Signature: Duisenberg) while practically all of the other notes are already from the second series (Signature: Trichet). This goes to show that even with the attempts made by the ECB, the velocity of notes under 100 euro is HUGE, while the others are somewhat slower. George Adam Horváth (talk) 18:16, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

The Euro notes seem to be descendants of the Deutch Mark notes, but I will enlighten you all on the largest banknotes that existed: DeM 1000, NlG 1000, ATS 5K, DeM 500, BeF 10K, and I will just mention FiM 1000. Try to figure out the value of these obsolete banknotes. BTW There is nothing rational or rationale about low banknotes such as €1 or €2. (83.108.30.141 (talk) 19:31, 10 July 2010 (UTC))

There is one: buying something inexpensive in a country that accepts both euro and USD banknotes as payment, but gives the change in pointless banknotes. That has been noted as one of the uses of the 1 USD banknote. --85.247.204.187 (talk) 17:44, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

When I think of $1 bills, I seem to think of Central America for some reason. Farther south lies Panama and Ecuador. Legal currency in both these countries is USD. If $1 bills were cool stuff, they just would not bother with making $1 coins. --82.134.28.194 (talk) 12:25, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

I'd like to propose that this article should be renamed "Banknotes of the euro" to be consistent with other articles of this type. The naming convention has been discussed previously here and this article was top of the list. Don't know if it got discussed then but I thought I'd raise it here and see what people think. The naming convention is described in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Numismatics/Style.Cnbrb (talk) 18:38, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Printing works

In my opinion Printer John. Enschede Security Printing (Netherlands - Haarlem) is nowadays also printing 20e notes for Finland, Which are mainly pooled to spain. I'm not sure about this though. Please verify and indeed yes, change Thx! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.101.240.11 (talk) 14:35, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I confirm the existence of notes with the G/L combination! Here there are some notes of this kind inserted on EuroBillTracker. I also noticed that there are other three combinations not shown in the table: E/P, P/M and R/P. Ciao! (Bananza from Wiki-it) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.152.110.130 (talk) 00:38, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Malta

Are you sure Malta are not on the latest banknotes, or will be? They have managed to have Malta on the newest coins. Then it should be possible to have Malta on the banknotes also. My euro-wallet has only older banknotes so I could not see for myself. --217.208.214.64 (talk) 17:32, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

New printing combination: F/S

Hi, I wanna inform you that since the beginning og January there are some new 50 € notes printed by Austria for Italy, meaning that they have F in the short code and S in the serial number. This is a new combination, so maybe it's time to update the table in this article! Here's a picture to prove the existence of these notes. The information is taken from EuroBillTracker. I don't want to mess up with such an important article without having an account on international Wiki, so I prefer to inform you and having it done by someone more qualified! Ciao! (Bananza from Wiki-it) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.152.110.130 (talk) 23:56, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

individual note pages

Is this idea worth pursuing?: 5 euro note

Please contribute if you think we can add more, perhaps they would mainly be useful when we have a second series, or are they totally redundant? Most major English speaking currencies on Wikipedia seem to make a page out of it even if there isn't much to say but should we?- _J.Logan`^t: 19:00, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Annoying size differences...

Could someone please add more text about the annoying size differences of euros. It drives me nuts trying to fit those huge larger bills to my wallet. Also counting bills on your hand is one madness because the edges does not match. Tried to cut 20 euro bill to size of 10 euro bill few times and eventually sellers accidently accepted them. But if I'd cut 100 bill to size of 5 it would be too noticable... Whoever came with an idea of making them all different sizes must have been insane. I understand that for blinds it gives a hint about the value of the piece of paper they're holding on their hands, but couldn't there be another way to do it than sizing up?! Coins are a different matter though, since you don't handle them in bundles. Good thing euro seems to sink so low, European countries gets their own money back again. At least they were mostly all same dimensions! Just a thought, comments please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.77.133.20 (talk) 16:48, 14 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.8.224.236 (talk)

You make no sense, buddy. The Euro is doing very well (in comparison to the US dollar, at least). And it's clear you're not a frequent user of Euro bills. I am, and I find no problem fitting big cuts in my wallet. Even the 500. Fold them if necessary. And don't let such small matters drive you insane. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.45.201.74 (talk) 16:58, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Sigh, do I feed the troll or delete this useless section ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.165.76.2 (talk) 10:15, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

It is really just American banknotes that go in the same colour, and the same size. That is why Ashton Kutschner could play a practical joke on Rihanna, and she got Punk*d. --85.164.220.141 (talk) 01:46, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Personally i love the euro but i have to say i have a problem with its height due to how it fits in my wallet. I think its not a big deal but it is an inconvenience and that probably 72 millimeters is enough and to make a better distinction they can add more length. Although at least the 50 bank note could be up to that since greater sums are more rarely used. Personally i always pay by card but i keep a certain amount of cash just in case and i don't want people to see that i hold cash when i draw my wallet. Its just a thought anyway. Purusbonum (talk) 15:44, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

What a silly discussion. I've lived in Europe and the US, and it's simply a matter of getting a new wallet. Wallets aren't all that expensive, and the Euro bills are no bigger than the old Deutsche Mark bills were. In the US people frequently get confused about what denomination the customer gave the cashier. Usually these are honest mistakes, but sometimes they are scams. The new coloring of the US bills is a big step forward, but it still doesn't go far enough. The $20 bill is still not that distinct from the $1 bill. Bostoner (talk) 23:27, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Gibberish

According to the article: "Country codes are alphabetised according to the countries' names in the official language of each country, but reversed"

What on earth does this mean? What is the reverse of a letter? For example, the name of Germany in the German language is "Deutschland", while the identifying letter for German euro notes is X. Is X supposed to be the reverse of D? In what sense? How is T for Ireland the reverse of I?

Someone needs to do a re-write to explain this properly. Or am I just stupid? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.254.54 (talk) 00:33, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

It is totally incomprehensible and should be deleted or rewritten by someone who does know what to write 78.105.243.103 (talk) 11:38, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

What it means is that they put the names of the 15 states that were EU members by that time in alphabetical order, according to their own language: België, Deutschland, Danmark, Ελλάδα [Ellada], España, France, Ireland , Italia, Luxembourg, Nederland, Österreich, Portugal, Suomi, Sverige, United Kingdom. Then they matched that list with a reversed alphabet, starting with Z. Then they seem to have moved Greece to let them have a letter that is similar to one in the Greek alphabet. Also the letters Q and O were left out. Boivie (talk) 10:39, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Removed in the cleanup... – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 19:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Member overseas territories

The text currently reads:

The following member overseas territories are shown: the Azores, French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Madeira, Martinique, Réunion, Saint Pierre and Miquelon and the Canary Islands. Cyprus and Malta are not shown, as they only joined the EU in 2004; also Malta is too small to be shown, with the minimum size for depiction being 400 km2.

As far as I know, this is in error. I do not think Saint Pierre and Miquelon are depicted. Also the text should perhaps note that Mayotte is not shown? (This is now a part of France, an overseas department as of 2011). It is however, also too small to be depicted (at least going by what Wikipedia has for the size of Mayotte).

Can someone check on the above?

zoney ♣ talk 16:07, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Request for an update

"European Central Bank in five languages (BCE, ECB, EZB, ΕΚΤ, EKP),[2]" is listed in this entry and on the ECB website. No where can I find the five languages [used on the notes] and the full names of each [I assume ECB is European Central Bank or some such in English] bank in their native languages [my class stumped me with this question after a show and tell including Euro Bank Notes]. Please and thank you to whomever has this info, it was not readily available anywhere I looked on the web [actually a first for me] and IMHO would be a good "update" to this entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.136.20.205 (talk) 15:29, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

If you go to the European Central Bank article and click on "show" next to the title in the infobox on the right, you will get a list of the names of the ECB in various langauges. Does that help?--Boson (talk) 16:52, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

That "five languages" statement was at least confusing if not just wrong. These five variants of ECB initials cover more than five languages. Out of 23 official languages of the current 27-member EU, only Bulgarian, Danish, Hungarian, Maltese and Polish are not covered by the these (BCE, ECB, EZB, ΕΚΤ, EKP). I now updated the article to clarify this. Oranž tõru (talk) 23:52, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Scrambled indica®

One can find some security features on this website, which are not "advertised" for the public by the ECB, amongst others, the EURion. I assume there must be many more, which are only supposed to be known by certain people, e.g. bank employees. Here is one: the Scrambled indica® optical security feature, which is the patent of the Graphic Security Systems Corporation (GSSC). I've discovered it on Ron Wise's World Paper Money website:

100 EEK note

The year 1995 is indicated on the optical decoder, and the demonstrated 100 EEK banknote was issued in 1999, so it is very likely that this security feature is incorporated in the more widely used EURO banknotes. Do any of you have info about it?

Do any of you know about other "secret" security features?

Timur lenk

New banknotes

Update article with information on new bills: http://www.ecb.eu/press/pressconf/2012/html/is121108.en.html Now, coming to the banknotes; let me read the statement. I am pleased to be able to announce that the European Central Bank and the national central banks of the Eurosystem are to introduce a second series of euro banknotes. Called the “Europa” series, it will include a portrait of Europa – a figure from Greek mythology and the origin of the name of our continent – in the watermark and the hologram. The new banknotes will be introduced gradually over several years, starting with the €5 banknote in May 2013.

The Europa series has benefited from advances in banknote technology since the first series was introduced over ten years ago. Its security features have been enhanced, which will help to make the banknotes even more secure. Three new features – the portrait watermark, portrait hologram and emerald number – have been unveiled today.

The first series will initially circulate alongside the new banknotes, but will gradually be withdrawn and eventually cease to be legal tender. The date when this occurs will be announced well in advance. However, the banknotes of the first series will retain their value indefinitely and can be exchanged at the Eurosystem national central banks at any time.

The ECB will be revealing the details of the new 5 euro banknote in two phases starting today with three of the new security features that it contains. 157.193.53.59 (talk) 12:33, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: 93.87.126.133 (talk · contribs) 18:58, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Seems worthy

Article seems worthy of being a good article. I don't see why it shouldn't be.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Euro banknotes/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk · contribs) 12:11, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 12:11, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Initial comments

I've now completed a quick initial read of the article, but I've not checked any references or citations, and it appears to be at or about GA-level, but there do appear to be a few areas that need minor improvements.

I'm now going to work my way through the article: starting at the History section, work my way to the end and then go back and look at the WP:Lead. Pyrotec (talk) 16:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

• History -

• The article states: After tough negotiations, particularly due to opposition from the United Kingdom,[2] the Maastricht Treaty entered into force in 1993 with the goal of creating economic and monetary union by 1999 for all EU states except the UK and Denmark (even though Denmark has a fixed exchange rate policy with the euro).[2], but information does not seem to appear on the web page corresponding to ref 2. Done

• Denominations -

• The abbreviations "BCE, ECB, EZB, ΕΚΤ, EKP" need to be defined, or explained. Putting EKP in wikipedia gives the article Communist Party of Estonia and BCE gives a disabiguation page - I suspect that neither of these two articles are relevant to what is being discussed here.  Done
• Ref 3 leads to the denominations "tab" of the Bank notes web page which shows images of the euro notes, but it does not confirm the rest of the claims. They be appear to be verifiable on the "design elements" tab of the bank notes web page. It would be help to the reader by making it clear that both "tabs" should be viewed to verify the claims supported by ref 3. However, in the Specification section the "design elements" tab page is reference 12, so perhaps is intended to have separate citations for the two web pages, in which case many of the citations attributed to ref 3 are not verifiable by ref 3 (but they would be verifiable by ref 12). Done
• The third paragraph is completely unreferenced. Done

• Specification -

• Ref 5 has a broken web link after the publisher's name (EuroTracer), but it does not appear to be needed since the title is a live web link.  Done
• Its not clear why ref 6 has a "www.eurotracer.net. 2002" after the publisher's name and refs 7 to 11 have ".eurotracer.net. 2002" after the publisher's name.  Done
• The first paragraph after the table needs a minor copyedit: its not clear why there is discussion about a map, since this article does not have a map. The map under discussion is that in ref 12.
• The final paragraph make no sense, i.e. "The first reprints of the note use ...", since there has been no discussion of printing or reprinting. That information is not given until the second subsection of the following section, neither are Willem Duisenberg, Jean-Claude Trichet and Mario Draghi wikilinked here (this it their first occurrence). There are wikilinked in the following, Design section, but Willem Duisenberg has become Wim Duisenberg!! Done
• It might help if this section was placed after the Design section.

• Design -
  • unnamed subsection & Changes subsection -

• Most of the statements attributed to ref 3 are not verifiable by ref 3 (but they would be verifiable by ref 12). Done
• Reg 16 has a broken web link - it gives a 404 error message. Done

....stopping at this point. To be continued. Pyrotec (talk) 19:04, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

• • Security features -

Article not touched by writer since review, so failing. Wizardman 04:02, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

National identification codes in new notes

So, what does the second letter mean? The example picture has "VA" as the first two characters on the note, I just got one which has "UF". First note is Spanish and the other French, determined by the first letter. The info seems to be missing from the article. 85.217.40.33 (talk) 05:48, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Errors in Manchester decoding

Manchester Code doesn't seems correct: 1 is represented by a top-bottom transition, 0 by a bottom-top transition 

(ad exemplum: 1 is represented (in electronics) by a 5Volts to -5volts and 0 by vice versa), so not by bright and dark lines but by thick and thin lines, see: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marek Stone (talk • contribs) 22:51, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

If so is true, I don't know anything about Manchester coding, then WP:BE BOLD and edit it, please. – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 14:43, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Euro banknotes/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Retrolord (talk · contribs) 03:25, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

I will review. ★★King•Retrolord★★ 03:25, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that. – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 09:16, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Can the photos of the notes not have specimen written on them? A quick google image search brings up a few candidates, is there some reason for this? ★★King•Retrolord★★ 09:20, 26 July 2013 (UTC) N The ECB only allows illustrations of banknotes which do not resemble real notes. – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 21:16, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

The section at Tracking is convoluted and needs major improvements to the English. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:22, 28 July 2013 (UTC) Y Think it's done... – Plarem ^{(User talk)}

References

• 51 - Police seize 11 million fake euros in Colombia (dead since 18 Aug 2010)  Done – Plarem ^{(User talk)}
• 62 - Greece presses demand for one-euro notes (dead since 13 June 2013)  Doing... WP:WAYBACK doesn't do those type of websites... Will do that tomorrow... – Plarem ^{(User talk)}  Done – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 11:10, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
• 58 - Europa Series Design - ECB - Our Money (dead since 13 July 2013)  Done – Plarem ^{(User talk)}
• 59 - http://www.new-euro-banknotes.eu/Europa-Series/Europa-Series-Design2 (dead since 13 July 2013) and should not be a naked URL.  Done – Plarem ^{(User talk)}

See WP:WAYBACK for possible remedies. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:58, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Review on hold

User:Retrolord will no longer be reviewing this GAN. Please consider requesting another reviewer. See: Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations#Retrolord. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:40, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

New reviewer

Retrolord has been indefinitely blocked, but I can finish this one up. I should have my comments posted in the next 3-7 days; sorry for the delay in your review. -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:08, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for taking over this review... I hope we get this over and done with as quickly as possible, because I would like to have my Good Topic as soon as possible, but there is no rush. – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 21:38, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

• I've made some tweaks for grammar and readability as I've gone along; please feel free to revert any with which you disagree. Agree
• The lead is five paragraphs, whereas WP:LEAD allows a maximum of four. Can some of the shorter ones simply be combined?  Done
• The "better source needed" tag from Jan '13 needs to be addressed.  Doing...  Done
• This may just be a format that I'm not familiar with, but why write "113.50 million" instead of "113.5 million"? Y Updated
• " slowly expanded behind the rest of the EU" -- what does "behind" mean here? Y I'm not so sure, but I changed it in the History section as well. – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 10:42, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
• "its political authority" -- is "its" here "the Euro's"? This might be clarified.  Done
• I broke up a large paragraph that was all one sentence; I think it's more readable this way. Let me know if that's all right with you.[2] -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:55, 30 July 2013 (UTC) Agree It was very unreadable, thanks for that. – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 10:42, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
• " Cyprus and Malta were not shown, because they were not in the European Union in 2002, when the banknotes were issued, even though they joined the Eurozone in 2008. Cyprus was not depicted on the banknotes because the map did not stretch that far east, and Malta because it was too small to be depicted, the minimum size for depiction being 400 km2." -- this confuses me. First the text says that C & M weren't shown because they weren't EU members; then it gives a different reason. Which is correct? Y Both are correct. I combined them into one sentence. Hope that's OK. – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 10:42, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
• The information about the ECB president's signature is repeated in two sections; one of these should be cut. -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:04, 30 July 2013 (UTC)  Done
  • This actually still needs attention; the two sections I'm looking at are
    • • • • The first notes have the signature of Wim Duisenberg, who was the first president of the European Central Bank. Duisenberg was replaced by Jean-Claude Trichet in 2003. The banknotes printed from 2003 to 2012 use Trichet's signature.[36] On 1 November 2011, Mario Draghi assumed the presidency of the ECB,[37] and banknotes bearing his signature appeared in circulation in March 2012.
  • and
    • • • • The euro banknotes have to bear the signature of the president of the European Central Bank.[6] Banknotes printed after March 2012 bear the signature of the current ECB President, Mario Draghi.[6] Notes printed after November 2003 to March 2012 show Jean Claude Trichet's signature,[6] replacing that of the first president, Wim Duisenberg,[6] who was the president of the European Central Bank when the first euro banknotes and coins were issued.[6]
  • This seems like unneeded repetition, especially since they're only two paragraphs apart. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:23, 1 August 2013 (UTC) Y Now it's done I edited another paragraph which talks about the ECB President's signature... – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 14:04, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

More comments; thanks for all your work on these points so far.

• "the final designs still bear close similarities to their specific prototypes and thus are not truly generic" -- the source doesn't seem to support this statement; it actually emphasizes the opposite, suggesting that he was successful in making them generic. ("But Mr. Kalina, guided by the need to stress a European identity over any national loyalties, painstakingly eradicated all recognizable vestiges of each image, pixel by pixel.") This seems to be original research.  Done – Plarem ^{(User talk)}
  • I've shortened this somewhat redundant sentence; if you object, just let me know. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:21, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
• " it is thought that the euro notes have at least thirty different security features" -- citation?  Done It was like that when I begun work on the article. Now I said 11, because that's how many are listed. – Plarem ^{(User talk)}
• Many of the citations seem to need clean-up; it's not correct to list "ECB" as both the "work" and "publisher".  Done
  • Not sure  Question: Will I just remove the work altogether and expand the publisher to 'European Central Bank'? – Plarem ^{(User talk)}
    • Yep, that'd be perfect. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:05, 2 August 2013 (UTC)  Done
• "Watermarks[39] –" -- why is it necessary to cite the word "Watermarks" here? Y It isn't necessary... – Plarem ^{(User talk)}
• "There are possibly three watermarks on the euro notes." -- is there a source for this? Also, if there are standard, digital, infrared, and ultraviolet watermarks on the notes, isn't that four? Y Think it's done... – Plarem ^{(User talk)}

• I'd still like a source here that says specifically that there are four watermarks, rather than assembling this information piecemeal, which seems a bit WP:OR. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:17, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

• The table for Manchester code has been tagged as dubious since March; this needs to be resolved for the article to pass. Is there a source for this information? Y Can you check it? I put in a reference. The user that marked it dubious didn't answer back when I told him to change it.///// Hi, I don't know exactly where to post, but just reading the wikipedia manchester code and differential manchester encoding page It's easy to understand that the the barcode reading method is wrong, as manchester code says bottomUp represents 0 and a upBottom represents 1, whith the transition in the middle of the period, so in every period there is a transition which is the same as a thin black bar is 1 and a thick black bar is 0. So 20= 1111, 5= 001, 50= 00111, 10=1100, and this is looking at the note from behind, looking left to right*///// – Plarem ^{(User talk)}
• I couldn't confirm the information about the EURion constellation or the bar codes at the given source. Am I overlooking it? -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:23, 1 August 2013 (UTC)  Done – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 14:56, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

• How are the figures for the Statistics section calculated? To take the 10-euro note as an example, 2,170,679,800 x 10 doesn't equal 21,706,797,700. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:17, 2 August 2013 (UTC) N These are taken from the ECB website. The place where I took it from is in the reference. – Plarem ^{(User talk)}
• Oberthur needs disambiguation. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:17, 2 August 2013 (UTC)  Done – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 15:44, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
• "Europa Series" -- this section needs updating; if these notes are already out, there's no need for this to be in future tense. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:57, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
• "The new notes will also reflect the expansion of the European Union; the current issues do not include the recent members Cyprus and Malta (Cyprus is off the map to the east and Malta was too small to be depicted.[6])." -- seems to be a repetition of information already in the article. Also, is it clear enough to still call the prior banknotes "the current issues" when the new ones are also in circulation? -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:57, 2 August 2013 (UTC)  Done – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 15:02, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
• "There has been a rapid growth in the counterfeiting of euro banknotes since the launch of the currency in 2002." -- the source for this statement actually seems to show a decline over the last few years--am I reading this wrong?  Done – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 15:02, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
• "currently" should be rewritten per WP:REALTIME

Closing review

There's a lot of good information here, and this one is clearly on its way to being a Good Article; I really appreciate all of your work on it. At the same time, I think this may have been a bit of an early nomination. Several indicators (longstanding but unaddressed cleanup tags, repetition between sections, and sections needing updating to the present date) suggest to me that this one hasn't had a good top-to-bottom readthrough since at least January; I'm also concerned that we've already had to change several pieces of factual information as we go (number of security features, number of watermarks, whether or not the bridges on the bills are generic). The level of double-checking and attention that this one needs seems to me to exceed what we can do in a reasonable review.

For these reasons, I'm closing this review for now with the recommendation that you renominate this one when it's more ready--updated, proofread, and double-checked for accuracy. The suggestions above should give you a starting point. Thanks again for all your work on these--I hope you make it to your Good Topic soon! -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:57, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing this. – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 15:44, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Valora

Please stop associating the Valora printer to Valora : it's not the same company, as written in the Portuguese and French articles, this printer is a joint-venture company between Banco de Portugal and De La Rue plc. My initial edit, finally removed and remade by another guy, made a difference between them, showing it's in Portugal. Should I need to create a new article, like I did in my native language, to make people understanding these notes are NOT printed in Switzerland? Or remake the initial edit I made? --Dark Corlath (talk) 22:18, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Bar code?

Where exactly is the bar code? Is it also in the Europa series? – Kaihsu (talk) 18:54, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Some suggestions

1. Is there any guidance on the naming of these articles? I noticed a lot of similar articles named "Banknotes of the X" (such as Banknotes of the Swiss Franc) rather than "X banknotes".
2. The security features section seems to just be a huge run of images on the RHS of the page. Seems like it could use some layout love (maybe intersperse left/right or something?). (As a side note: Wow, those illustrations are detailed and complete)

– Ilyanep (Talk) 00:01, 30 July 2015 (UTC)