Talk:Renminbi/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Banknote printing and minting

I added a quick section on the engraving and minting of the renminbi by the Chinese government. Anyone have any more info to add? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lord Phat (talk • contribs) 02:37, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Olympic special edition 10 yuan bill

There's a special note out there, that is legal tender as far as i know, and it's very much sought after. Somebody might want to write something about it. Here's some info: [1] --84.59.22.9 (talk) 22:50, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Fen

Actually the fen is not in use anymore, but I don't have anymore information about that and I'm too lazy to change the article.

This is not true - the fen is still in daily use. --Shannonr 00:52, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

I haven't seen any of the fen banknotes that are mentioned in the text. Do you or anybody else have any idea if these are still in circulation at all? CyeZ 15:06, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

I have seen the 1 fen banknotes once in September 2005. But they were given as 1 Yuan notes to a "fresh" unwary tourist, so I don't know if they are really still in circulation. The fen coins however are very much in use today. Ofer -- 22 November 2005

Is there any evidence anyone can provide at to the current status of the 1, 2 and 5 fen coin, ? The coin catalog 2004 from the Peoples Banks states they are still valid and all other banknotes from 1 Jiao to 10 Yuan of series 2 have been withdrawn. Some on-line stories: 1, Ebay sale 2005 1 fen coin, Beijingist: Coin of the realmDiscussion about the fen and jiao denominations —Preceding unsigned comment added by Enlil Ninlil (talk • contribs)

Very well. Interesting read. Let's summarize these blogs and put the in the article, with proper citation. --Chochopk 06:45, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I recently obtained a coin marked with "壹分", "1983" and "中華人民共和國". That's a PRC coin, and a 壹分-coin is a 1-fen coin, isn't it? I only know how to pronounce Chinese characters according to Japanese pronunciation. Maybe a little old, and I didn't find it in normal circulation (I found it in a washing machine in Kyōto, Japan, probably lost by a Chinese user of that washing machine), but I also found some other coins at the same point: 5角, minted by 中國人民銀行 in 2003, two 1角-coins (minted in 2001 and 2002 respectively, from the same institution) as well as a 1元-coin minted in 中華人民共和國 in 1995. Since some of the coins were minted quite recently, I would assume that they were taken from regular circulation in PRC quite recently. (Stefan2 08:12, 28 January 2007 (UTC))

Today (3/4/07) I received two new 1 fen coins, dated 2005 and 2006. Seems that PRC has resumed minting them. (Tanelix 16:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC))

Under what situation did you receive them? --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 08:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

In a lot of circulated Chinese coins from a German dealer. There were dozens of 2005's and one 2006. (Tanelix 11:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC))

In fact, 1 fen, 2fen ,5 fen coin does not appeared since third series, the fen used now is the 2nd series Tnds (talk) 16:54, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Links for non-economists and more context

Hi, I found this an interesting article but I didn't understand a fair bit of it. For example, what do these terms mean, and what is their relevance?

• appreciation
• swap center
• current account, capital account

Lupin 15:45, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Other languages printed on Chinese paper currency

I have noticed that there are several other languages (other than Chinese) that are printed on Chinese paper currency. Which specific languages are they?

They are Mongolian language, Tibetan language, Uyghur language, and Zhuang language. I believe that is the order they appear on the note. The big Latin letters are pinyin. ([Reference in Chinese])

I thought it was also in Yi?

No, there's no Yi on the banknotes. -- ran (talk) 19:05, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Yuan Renminbi Relationship

What exactly is the relationship? Is one Yuan equal to one Renminbi? Or is Renminbi the "currency" and Yuan the "unit of currency? At one point, the article gives a conversion rate "8.28 renminbi to the U.S. dollar", but elsewhere it seems to use Yuan in that role. I think the article should clarify the meaning. Monito 00:32, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

As I'm understanding it, the rough equivalents are that "renminbi" is roughly equivalent to "(the) US Dollar", in that it refers to the currency specific to the country and its base unit; while "yuan" is rough equivalent to the basic word "dollar", in that it can refer to a specific unit of a specific country's currency within that country, but is really a general word for such a unit.

We can refer to a dollar and mean one of any currency that uses the word (Australia, Canada, US, HK, Singapore, or any of the other currencies listed at dollar, and you could say "dollar" to mean any basic unit, especially if it's got a nearly 1:1 exchange rate, although that's purely analogical. But if a US citizen says "dollar" and "yuan" in the same sentence, it's likely it's a US Dollar and a Renminbi being discussed. A PRC citizen saying "yuan", without a modifier, would be referring to a renminbi.

Oh dear, I've rambled. I hope I was at least on point with my analysis. Short answer: a Renminbi is a yuan (coin/unit), and a Renminbi is a Yuan (the unit, specific to PRC), but a dollar is also a yuan (coin/unit), whatever dollar you choose. Azure Haights 09:13, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

So you mean that renminbi, yuan and dollar are all the same—but not really. One thing at least is clear: you are just as confused as Monito and me. I hope someone can really explain this.
—Herbee 14:17, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

I think I just explained it badly. Better short answer: "Renminbi" is the absolute name for the currency of the PRoC. "Yuan" is the word for "coin", and by extension the general term for a base unit; which currency (and which unit) can change by context.

Since "yuan," to my knowledge, is only in use within (the People's Republic of) China, and this is an English Wikipedia, "yuan" by context is interchangeable with, and refers only to, the Renminbi. In the native context, "yuan" refers to the base unit, the same way we mention "a dollar" without talking about U.S. currency as a whole. Again, "Renminbi" -> "the Dollar"; "yuan" -> "a dollar".

Did that help? Azure Haights 07:49, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. That last succinct explanation contrasting "the Dollar" with "a dollar" nails it. Monito 00:15, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

This explanation should be added neatly into the beginning of the actual article. I came to this page specifically for this information and did not "get it" untill this far down the discussion page. 129.94.6.28 03:45, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

FWIW, the Economist, which knows a damn sight more about these things than I do (hence why I read it), invariably refers to "the yuan" in the same way that it refers to "the dollar", "the pound" or "the euro". According to this explanation, they're wrong to do so, right? Js farrar 00:18, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

The Renminbi is split not into two, but three, base units: yuan, jiao and fen, respectively 1/1, 1/10 and 1/100.

That's another illuminating statement. Few people would agree that the US Dollar is split into three base units: dollar, dime and cent. Exactly what is it that makes jiao and fen base units, unlike dime and cent?
—Herbee 14:17, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

The US dollar has three base units: dollar, cent, and mill which are 1/1, 1/100, and 1/1000 of the dollar. Monito 01:05, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Four, actually. The dime is also officially a unit, though hardly anyone ever uses it that way (though the US dime does still say "One dime" on it, rather than "Ten cents") Nik42 04:46, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Incidentally, does anyone actually use jiao, or is it like the US dime? For example, would you refer to a price of .50 yuan as "5 jiao", or would you say "50 fen"? Nik42 04:49, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Almost certainly would call it "5 jiao" not "50 fen".

No one would say 50 fen, it's invariably 5 jiao. Similarly, no one would say 53 fen, instead it's 5 jiao 3 fen. -- ran (talk) 19:03, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's correct to say "Renminbi or Yuan is..." as it currently does at the opening. Renminbi is the name of the currency, and Yuan is its unit. Thus in Chinese, you can have "Renminbi Yuan", which means "one yuan of the Renminbi currency".

There isn't really an equivalent distinction in the English world, since the name of the currency (Pound sterling, US dollar) contains or is the same as the unit (pound, dollar). However, in the Chinese world, the name of the currency and its unit are different. For example, many present or former currencies use the same unit "Yuan", but they are differentiated by a currency name (人民币, 新台币, 港币, 金圆券 etc).

The difference between the two terms can also be seen from their usage: in Chinese you wouldn't say "this vase costs 10 Renminbi" (10人民币), you would say "this vase costs 10 yuan" (10元), or "10 yuan of Renminbi" (10元人民币/10块人民币). That is, "yuan" is a unit of measure, but "renminbi" is not.

I am editing the opening accordingly. --Sumple (Talk) 05:37, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

That's broadly similar to fairly common use of the term "sterling" in isolation, then, though in that case it's basically just a shorthand. I have to say that my experience is very similar to Js farrar's; for example the BBC invariably reports the money market rates as "the Chinese Yuan". Is the current article title really in keeping with "common name in English"? Alai 00:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Historical reasoning - it was confusing to call everything yuan

I agree with sumple. Historically, China had a diverse set of currencies.

The Central Bank of China, Bank of Communications, Farmers Bank of China and Bank of China were the only issuers of "national currency" (國幣) and later "legal currency" (法幣). Later, the Central Bank of China issued Gold Yuan (金元) and Silver Yuan (銀圓) due to inflation. Provincial Banks also issued "Local Currency" (流通券) and National Currency. Finally, Communist banks issued "Border Area Currencies". All had different rates of exchange. All were denominated in Yuan.

The "Renminbi" was made to unify the Communist currencies under the People's Bank of China. It was named to separate it from the concurrently circulating "Silver Yuan" and later "Taiwan Dollar" (both issued by the Central Bank of China).

Add to all of that, some currencies were not denominated in yuan, but coppers and taels.

Therefore, the name of the currency is a carryover from a confusing era of instability. ViXx (talk) 13:56, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

New currencies

Does anyone know what the new group of currencies the Renminbi is to be loosely valued against consists of? --Krinberry 19:54, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

How's USD, Euro and Gold? --Chewxy

According to the article text, it's USD, EUR, JPY, KRW, and, to a smaller extent, also GBP, THB, RUB, AUD, CAD and SGD, so no XAU. (Stefan2 08:27, 28 January 2007 (UTC))

POV segment

The following text appears in the "Current CNY Exchange Rates" segment. It seems a little POV, perhaps even propagandistic.

The reform of the capital policy in China cannot change too drastically, and it must be adjusted step by step. The current exchange rate of the RMB yuan and the US dollars reflects the real market value of the RMB yuan, and remaining the currect exchange rate is benifitial for the world economy and also crucial for the peace and development of the world, both for developed and developing worlds. China is a big superpower and is a responsible country, therefore China needs to take extra precautions to regulate the value of its currency and take the presure for maintaining the current exchange rate.

I'm not sure whether it should be reworked, or removed. Ordinary Person 13:33, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

What about "The government states that ..." --Chochopk 17:56, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Website for picture of Chinese currency

[2]

from the Official Govt Website. Why not make a table for all the series similar to that of the 5th series table? Heilme 08:17, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I am the webmaster of sinobanknote.com, take a look at this --Chochopk 09:23, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Wow! That's a really extensive collection of PRC notes. Can you use those image for here? Heilme 08:17, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Got to check with "copyright" policy here. There are a whole lot of copyright paranoid people here. --Chochopk 09:45, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

It's yours, right? Heilme 10:50, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

yes. But some people will come along and say "the central bank still holds the copy right of the design, blah blah blah". --Chochopk 21:00, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Translation

"The currency number at the bottom of the reverse is added with “YUAN” indicating the pinyin of “dollar”(圓) in Chinese language."

This could also be written in several other ways:

"The currency number at the bottom of the reverse is added with “YUAN” indicating the pinyin of “euro”(圓) in Chinese language."

"The currency number at the bottom of the reverse is added with “YUAN” indicating the pinyin of “yen”(圓) in Chinese language."

"The currency number at the bottom of the reverse is added with “YUAN” indicating the pinyin of “won”(圓) in Chinese language."

etc.

Why translate "yuan" into "dollar" and not into any of the other meanings? This needs to be formulated in a better way. (Stefan2 11:58, 25 July 2006 (UTC))

I think this whole thing needs to be reworked.

1. "YUAN" is the pinyin of 圓
2. 圓 is the Chinese word for dollar, which is the unit
3. Renminbi means "People's currency"

--Chochopk 18:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Why isnt this page called Chinese Renminbi, like the Afghan afghani or Mauritanian ouguiya? Enlil Ninlil 11:58, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

"圓 is the Chinese word for dollar, which is the unit"

圓 is not only the Chinese word for dollar, it's also the Chinese word for euro, yen, won, circle and other things. Why translate 圓 as "dollar" when the same character is used for several other currencies as well? No one would talk about "PRC dollar" (although 圓 is translated as "dollar" when talking about e.g. ROC 圓 or US 圓). (Stefan2 08:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC))

This looks like another transliteration/translation confusion. "Yuan" in the English language means only the Chinese Renminbi Yuan. All other "Yuan"s have other names: dollar, euro, yen, won, etc.

It is certainly correct to say, in the English Wikipedia, that "Yuan" = "Renminbi Yuan", even if 元 does not equal 人民币元 in Chinese.

Make sense? --Sumple (Talk) 11:15, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

100 note

What is the 100 yuan(2000) note? i have never seen that before! is that true? --User:Yacht (talk) 05:32, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Do you mean the orange one with a dragon on it? It's a commemorative note that celebrates the new millennium. And it's polymer. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 06:56, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

45 year old women didn't know she's on RMB

http://udn.com/NEWS/WORLD/WOR1/3705384.shtml (in Chinese) --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 06:22, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

For those of us who don't read Chinese, could you summarise? (a bit more than "45 year old women didn't know she's on RMB" please!). -- Arwel (talk) 17:34, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

(very quickly done translation with some omission)

She's the girl on the right side the 1 yuan note of the 4th series. She is an ethnic Dong from Guizhou. Her name is Shi Naiyin (石奶引). She is now a 45-year old woman.

She's never known that her portrait was used on the currency, until she's found a few years ago. It was then she remembered what happened so many years ago.

It was about 1978, when she was only 16. She was on her way to a bazaar with her friends, dressed in traditional Dong outfit. In the crowded market, somebody grabbed her from the back. It was a complete stranger, with 2 other men standing next to him.

The man asked her to stand out and turn aside. Then he quickly drew her portrait. She stood at the his request, but with doubt. After she got home, she didn't tell this event to her parents nor her friends. It has been forgotten since then.

She was married at age of 23 and has a son and a daughter. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 22:12, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Mainland or not?

For a recent reversion between me and User:Secrecy

Are Hong Kong part of the People's Republic of China	Yes
Is renminbi the currency of Hong Kong	No
Is renminbi the currency of Mainland China	Yes
Is Hong Kong a separate economy from the Mainland	Yes. See one country, two systems

--ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 07:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

• But you should also state that the renminbi can be used in theme parks like Disneyland, Ocean park in Hong Kong. But I dont know about Macau? Enlil Ninlil 06:40, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that is worth mentioning. And small businesses on the street, if they choose to. However, the acceptance is completely voluntary, the same manner euro might be accepted by hotels in Switzerland. I don't know about Macau either. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 06:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

NOT ABOUT HONG KONG.

Are Hong Kong part of the People's Republic of China	{{NOT ABOUT HONG KONG}}
Is renminbi the currency of Hong Kong	{{NOT ABOUT HONG KONG}}
Is renminbi the currency of PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF China	Yes
NAME OF COUNTRY PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA CHANGE IN 1997?	No
Is Hong Kong a separate economy?	{{NOT ABOUT HONG KONG}}

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Secrecy (talk • contribs) 01:16, 17 March 2007

What is your point with a non-existing template, and "Northern Ontario" and its flag? --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 01:32, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. The US Dollar is accepted in many places around the world. In shops at Shanghai airport, for example, you can only pay in US dollars. That does not make the US dollar China's currency, does it?

Whether individual businesses or organisations choose to receive a foreign currency or not does not, as a matter of common usage, determine whether it is that territory's currency. --Sumple (Talk) 23:16, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you in principle, Sumple. So do you agree with my edit (Renminbi is the currency of Mainland of the People's Republic of China), or Secrecy's edit (Renminbi is the currency of the People's Republic of China). My point is that Secrecy's edit implies that Renminbi is also the currency of Hong Kong, which would contradict your point. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 23:54, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I agree with Chochopk's edits, that the Renminbi is not the currency of Hong Kong.

Ocean Park takes RMB because it is their choice. If RMB was Hong Kong's currency, you'd be able to use it everywhere - which you can't. --Sumple (Talk) 01:36, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the legal situation is this: the Renminbi is the legal tender currency of the People's Republic of China, which includes Hong Kong (Art 16, People's Bank of China Law) [3]

However, laws of the People's Republic of China do not apply to Hong Kong, unless expressly extended to Hong Kong by a resolution of the National People's Congress (Art 18, Basic Law).

As a result, Art 16 of the People's Bank Law does not apply to Hong Kong. As a result, the Renminbi is not, at law, legal tender in Hong Kong. --Sumple (Talk) 01:58, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

But it is the legal tender of the "People's Republic of China" not "mainland China". SchmuckyTheCat 18:21, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

NOT ABOUT HONG KONG! NOT HK POV! INTERNATIONAL. NATIONAL $$ OF PRC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Secrecy (talk • contribs) 05:56, 18 March 2007

---

Thank you, Sumple, for citing the laws. Let me copy the articles here.

• Article 16 of the People's Bank of China Law:

“ 中华人民共和国的法定货币是人民币。以人民币支付中华人民共和国境内的一切公共的和私人的债务，任何单位和个人不得拒收。 ”

• My translation:

“ The legal tender of the People's Republic of China is the renminbi. No organizations or individuals may reject payments made in renminbi for all debt, private or public, in the territory of the People's Republic of China. ”

Use Google translate if you want.

• Article 18 of the Basic Law of Hong Kong:

“ ... National laws shall not be applied in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region except for those listed in Annex III to this Law. The laws listed therein shall be applied locally by way of promulgation or legislation by the Region. ... ”

--ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 06:03, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

NOT SAY MAINLAND DO IT? NOT ABOUT HONG KONG. STOP MENTION HONG KONG. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Secrecy (talk • contribs) 06:14, 18 March 2007

Of course it has to do with Hong Kong. When you say "People's Republic of China", it includes Hong Kong. Of course it is related. And would you please sign your name with --~~~~? --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 06:22, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

• Ge man I was just stating that it could be used at the theme parks. Guess I will choose who to talk too and ignore the rest. Enlil Ninlil 08:38, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Chochopk, that there are other legal currencies in China does not mean this is the "mainland" currency. It is THE national currency.

In fact, the way it is currently written a reader might mis-assume that it is some private internal only currency, which isn't at all the case. In fact it is well used (as is the HK dollar) by any number of bordering Asian countries which have unstable currencies. And of course, it is the international currency of the PRC.

What this comes down to is Wikipedia policy of attribution. The source provided never says "mainland". SchmuckyTheCat 18:21, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Of course, attribution and references are important. But we can't take it word by word. Otherwise, Wikipedia would become Wikisource. I have quoted two articles above, one is in line with your argument (renminbi is the currency of the PRC), but I also quote an article of the Basic Law of HK. My concern, for a better Wikipedia, is that the statement "renminbi is the currency of the PRC" is not factually and logically correct because of HK. This is a simple logical deduction that Secrecy has, unfortunately, not recognized. I am not sure what you mean by "some private internal only currency". If wording is your concern, I think we can find a way to resolve this. But the only alternative I can think of right now, "renminbi is the currency of the PRC, except Hong Kong and Macau" would trigger even more POV debate because people will question "does it imply Taiwan is not part of PRC or Taiwan is, and uses renminbi?" Mainland seems to be the only neutral and factually correct word. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 05:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

No, it means that like everything else, the situation is complicated because of the political issue, but calling it the "mainland" currency is just plain wrong. We don't re-print sources word for word, we paraphrase multiple sources into a coherent hole. We don't make shit up. If there is a need for a disclaimer a short paragraph in the introduction will do and it should be easy enough to word it. I'll put some wording here to discuss later.

Secrecy is incoherent. I believe his last statement meant "The law doesn't say mainland. This article is not about Hong Kong. Hong Kong doesn't change the PRC."

FYI, an internal currency is a currency only used internally by citizens of the country. It was a common thing for many historical totalitarian regimes. The renminbi used to trade this way which the article states poorly: "With the opening of the mainland Chinese economy in 1978, a dual track currency system was instituted, with renminbi usable only domestically, and with foreigners forced to use foreign exchange certificates." The North Korean won and Cuban peso are still internal currencies.

SchmuckyTheCat 06:06, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Do you know what "境内" refers to, as used in Chinese laws? - Privacy 21:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I removed the "mainland" designation again while changing the "Influence" section to cover Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, and bordering countries. While looking for quality references I was surprised to read just how accepted renminbi usage in HK and MO is. With banks allowing renminbi based accounts with debit/credit card usage it pretty much is a legal second currency. This is obviously going to rise as economic integration occurs. SchmuckyTheCat 03:48, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

First, I would like to say SchmuckyTheCat's recent contribution was valuable. Even though he/she and I have different stand points on this debate, my appreciation should not go unnoted. Even though I can have a bank account in renminbi in HK or MO, that doesn't mean we should omit the word "mainland". I can also have an account in USD in Taiwan. Should I put Taiwan in the infobox of the USD's article? From this whole debate here, at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 March 18, and edit like this, I get the feeling that SchmuckyTheCat is a Chinese patriot. But what many fail to realize is that removal of the word "mainland" is separatism. It implies that HK is not part of the PRC. I will try to edit and make some middle ground. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 06:08, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not a Chinese patriot, in fact, I've refused to relocate to Beijing because I'd rather not live in red China. Hong Kong is fine though. I'm not even Chinese. I own a PRC flag, but only because I busted out laughing because the tag says "made in Taiwan".

I view the usage of "mainland" opposite of you. By insisting on including it, it gives the appearance that Hong Kong/mainland issues are equals, state-to-state, instead of intracountry. It is inappropriate, as the Central People's Congress always has ultimate authority of interpretation. It is on intracountry issues alone that the PRC uses the term. SchmuckyTheCat 06:48, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Very well, I take back my statement about being a patriot. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 07:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

My two cents: It should be "mainland of the PRC", as it's not used in Macau and Hong Kong. —Nightstallion (?) 13:19, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

It's tricky to translate "境内" as appeared in legislations into English. In laws that are not listed in the Annex III of either or both basic laws of Hong Kong and Macao, "境内" excludes Hong Kong and Macao. — Instantnood 22:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

There is nothing special about "境内", it just means "within the territory of". But that does not necessarily mean it applies to all parts of the territories described, because there are frequently exceptions.

For example, Christmas Island is excised, by a special law, from Australia's migration zone, so that boat people arriving in Christmas Island don't count as having "touched base" in Australia.

That doesn't mean that 1) Christmas Island is not a part of Australian territory, or that 2) Australian migration laws are not laws in Christmas Island. It's just a general law which is limited in its application to a certain part of the territory.

I think the same concept would apply to those laws that do not apply to Hong Kong and Macao. --Sumple (Talk) 00:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

If Christmas Island has a special law and Australia's migration law does not apply there, then Australia's migration law is not a law there. Only if and when the special law is removed, then you can say that Australia's migration law is a law in Christmas Island. Renminbi is just not legal tender in Hong Kong and Macau. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 13:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

But the name of the immigration law is still "of Australia" not "some term that means Australia minus some subset". HK and MO are the exception to the rules of the PRC, that doesn't mean the PRC gets some new name. SchmuckyTheCat 14:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Law titles are named so because the just don't sound nice, like "of Australia except Christmas Island". I am not saying that PRC is getting a new name, nor am I challenging the title of the law. But the "user" attribute in the infobox is not intended for law titles, or direct quotations of a selected law. It is intended for a logical combination of the actual legal users. In the infobox of the United States dollar, users include Turks and Caicos Islands. I bet no American law says that the USD is the currency of T&C Islands. Should I remove it? --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 14:38, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Then that makes it even more an informal designation, and even more ridiculous to use "mainland" when they (even Taiwan!) are discussing full convertibility and while the article itself describes usage of the RMB as the primary currency in other countries and regions of other countries. Again with the comparisons, it doesn't say "Metropolitan France" in the box for French franc just because of the existence of the CFA franc and CFP franc. The RMB is the national currency of the PRC. That HK and MO maintain separate currencies doesn't change that.

PS, you should add the infobox to CFA franc. SchmuckyTheCat 15:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

No where outside of mainland China has a law providing that the RMB is a legal tender there. No where outside of mainland China is having the RMB as a de facto official currency. - Privacy 16:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing out the thing about French franc, I have made the correction. I made the edit on FRF because I still stand by my argument. The RMB is approximately the currency of the PRC because HK and MO maintain separate currencies. I will also make the similar change to euro too, after I review its recent changes. And btw, CFA franc has been split to West African CFA franc and Central African CFA franc, and what should remain on CFA franc is the currency before they split decades ago. But the migration has not completed. If you like to use legal reason so much, then I'll use legal reasoning. The federal law of the U.S. specify a minimum wage (e.g. $6), a state may have a higher minimum wage (e.g. $7). It is not legal to pay $6.5 in that state. And if somebody asked me what places have a minimum wage higher than $6.5, I would have to include that state. The fact that a state is a subordinate entity of the federal government, or the existence of a federal minimum wage does not change my 2 statements above. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 15:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

What I'm trying to say is that when you interpret laws, you can't just pick one law. You need to take all that apply. And law title is pointless without its content. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 15:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey guys, I noticed a bit of edit warring on history... please don't edit war.

Thought I'll just throw a couple of ideas around. Let's say, hypothetically, a Somali law designates the Shilling as its currency, but due to rebellions and all that it's actually only used in the Capital (it's used more widely than that... but for this thought experiment just assume it is). What would you put under the "User" heading?

Second hypothetical. Let's say the US Constitution was changed to allow each state to specify its own currency. A federal law prescribes the USD as the currency, but almost all states legislate to use the Mexican Peso instead, so that the USD is legal tender only in Washington DC and Florida. What would you put under the "User" heading?

Just some thoughts. Ignore it if you think it's irrelevant. --Sumple (Talk) 13:37, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

The Somalia example is a little different, because what the rebellion uses hardly has any legal basis, or the legality is debatable. In the case of renminbi, we know what the laws say, and the situation is stable. It's just that SchmuckyTheCat chose to selectively look at a subset of relevant laws. In the second example, I would put user of the USD = DC + FL, while user of MXN = Mexico + (U.S. - DC - FL). --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 17:40, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

There are rules, and there are exceptions. The rule is that RMB is the currency of the PRC. The exception is HK. HK is always the exception. We don't change the rule to suit the exception, we simply note the exception. That's been done in the text. SchmuckyTheCat 14:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Exceptions are also rules. And with multiple rules, you make a compound rule. I can say "no one under 18 may smoke". Equivalently, I can say "Everyone may smoke, except those who are under 18". --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 17:18, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Maybe the word "mainland" could cause confusion to some people, since Hong Kong and Macau are geographically located on the mainland? Only politically are they excluded from it, which is what is intended here. (Stefan2 21:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC))

There is a link to it and the article explains that in the first 3 lines. And the maps are also very catchy to the eyes. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 21:54, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Arbitary Section Break

I am starting to understand what you're saying. Renminbi used to be an internal currency, with a "foreign exchange certificate" (外匯券) designated for foreigners. That system ended around 1994, I think. I still don't know why you say saying "mainland" is plain wrong. "Mainland" is a territorial term, which include 22 privinces, 5 autonomous regions, and 4 municipalities. If readers confuse that with "domestic use" or "for domestic citizens" only, then it's really their fault. Besides providing a wiki link to Mainland China, there are ways we can deliver factually correct, comprehensive, and complete info, such as

The renminbi or ren min bi (simplified Chinese: 人民币; traditional Chinese: 人民幣; pinyin: rénmínbì; lit. 'people's currency') is the official currency in the mainland of the People's Republic of China (PRC). (references). The two special administrative regions, Hong Kong and Macau, have their own currencies.

From 19xx to 19xx, a dual system was used where the renminbi was used by the citizens, while foreign exchange certificate was used by foreign tourists.

--ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 06:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

- <deindent> Can I just say as an outside editor passing by that its ridiculous to refer to the currency of mainland china. Its the Currency of the People's Republic of China and all that you need to do is add a short note to explain that the Basic law applies so its not the currency of Hong Kong and Macau. By the way, I don't think mainland china is a neutral term anyway. In the UK it was the term used to describe the PROC when Taiwan was the recognised Chinese government so the term is inevitably going to be read as pro-Taiwan. Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:36, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, things have changed, haven't they? Now that the U.K. recognises the PRC the sole representative of China. So the term "Mainland China" spoken by a British would be equivalent to the "Mainland China" spoken by the PRC government. The PRC government would not say the renminbi is the currency of HK. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 07:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I support Chocopk's proposal. I guess to be absolutely accurate, the legal situation is that the Renminbi is the official currency of the People's Republic of China. However, under the the One Country, Two Systems arrangement, it is not legal tender in the two SARs, each of which has its own currency.

It would also be correct to say that it is only legal tender in "mainland China". --Sumple (Talk) 08:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

The whole point is that things haven't changed. Mainland China is not a neutral term in the UK (and I'm sure elsewhere). You should simply say China and add an explanatory note. Anything else is just goingt o look a little silly. Spartaz ^Humbug! 08:35, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

This is starting to get lame, even though the degree of lameness can never reach that of "what's the plural of 'euro'? euro or euros?". I have been trying to explain why the use of "Mainland" is not only accurate, but also NPOV. And it should not involve the ROC. Now I am forced to enumerate this table. Questions and what would each political group answer.

	Mainlander	Hong Konger	Old school (pre-1980) Kuomintang	Pan-Blue Coalition	Pan-Green Coalition
Who is China?	PRC	PRC	ROC	Now a divided state	PRC (we're not in it)
Is Hong Kong part of China?	Yes	Yes	Yes, and it should be of ROC	Yes	Yes, but none of our business
How would you precisely refer to the 22 provinces (not including Taiwan), 5 autonomous regions, 2 special administrative regions, 4 municipalities	Mainland and the 2 SARs	Mainland and the 2 SARs	China is not divided that way. This (the status in 1949) is the right way.	Mainland and HK and Macau	China
How would you refer to the previous question, less the 2 SARs?	Mainland	Mainland	I told you China is not divided that way	Mainland	Mainland
Is the renminbi the currency of China?	Yes, but HK and Macau, under one country, two systems, may have their own currencies. Taiwan, because it has not reunified, uses its own currency.		Renminbi is the illegitimate currency of the illegitimate regime	Partial, ROC has its own currency	Yes, HK and Macau have their own currencies. This question does not concern Taiwan.
Is the renminbi the currency of the PRC?	How is this question different from the previous one?		I told you PRC is illegitimate	Yes, but HK and Macau have their own currencies	How is this question different from the previous one?
Is the renminbi the currency of the Mainland China?	Yes	Yes	Maybe now, but when we take back the Mainland, it won't be anymore	Yes	Yes

Now,

1. if you disagree with the outcome of this table, point out where
2. if you agree with the outcome of this table, then how is a statement "Renminbi is the currency of Mainland China of the People's Republic of China" inaccurate, incomplete, or inappropriate? Except the old-school Kuomintang, which is now almost non-existing, all groupss would agree with my proposal.

For further information, see

• Republic of China
• People's Republic of China
• One country, two systems
• Political status of Taiwan
• Political divisions of China
• History of the political divisions of China

And these two maps

--ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 09:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Spartaz, I don't know how it is in the UK, but the term "mainland China" is definitely not "pro-Taiwan" or "non-neutral" elsewhere. It is used by the Taiwanese and Chinese governments alike, and by many foreign governments, too.

And I agree, this is definitely heading towards WP:LAME. (and, btw, LOL @ table!) --Sumple (Talk) 10:37, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

No, I'm not going to waste my time if you are going to be disparaging when I'm only trying to óffer another perspective. Do what you like, I'm taking the article off my watchlist. Spartaz ^Humbug! 10:45, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Is it undervalued?

I question the accuracy of this particular quote:

As of May 5, 2007 the renminbi traded at 7.704 yuan per U.S. dollar which is a 7.5% increase since the removal of the peg. Even though some American politicians accuse China of Undervaluing it's Currency, most of the economists agree that it is either slighty undervalued or not all all.

The most recent issue of The Economist believes that the Renminbi may be undervalued by up to 40%. The Wall Street Journal and Financial Times have made similar statements. I can't find a single reputable source for someone who doesn't think the yuan is undervalued. Can someone back up this last statement, as it seems to me like thinly-veiled anti-Americanism. Sloverlord 15:51, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

=S people can be patriotic without being anti-American, you know. In any case, the sentence is uncited speculation, and weasel wording ("most of the economists", which economists?) and should be deleted. --PalaceGuard008 07:38, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I have modified the sentence in line with the source supplied. --PalaceGuard008 07:41, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Two Jiao

- So what issue would the 2 jiao coin be if it were issued in 1980? * Ref 1 http://www.numismaster.com/ta/inside_numis2.jsp?page=PriceGuideInfoDenom&PriceGuideId=449&ad=449&DenominationId=2542&CountryId=1275 Enlil Ninlil 02:23, 30 July 2007 (UTC

3rd series. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 08:57, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Please stop moving this article to Chinese renminbi

Please stop moving this article to Chinese renminbi. The common names for the currency are "Renminbi", "Renminbi Yuan" or "Chinese Yuan". The country name should be part of the heading only if it is part of the name of the currency, which it is not here. See also Pound stirling, which, quite sensibly, is at Pound stirling and not British Pound stirling. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 17:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I like to dissagree, like the Lao kip, Ghanaian cedi and Vietnamese đồng all should be standardised which those you mentioned are not, along with the euro. Enlil Ninlil 04:57, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I can't agree either and have moved the article back. This is a Chinese currency and the word Chinese should be in the article title. Incidently, I would quite happily have British pound stirling and may suggest this move.
Dove1950 09:58, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Enlil and Dove, "Chinese renminbi" or "Chinese yuan renminbi" should be the title. —Nightstallion 10:12, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I usually stay out of sensitive naming discussion. But for this one I must point out that "Chinese yuan renminbi" is not appropriate (But "Chinese renminbi yuan" may be OK). Renminbi means "People's currency". It disambiguates different yuans in the Chinese language. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 10:25, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I'd be happy with "Chinese renminbi yuan" althoguh I believe a law was passed renaming the currency "renminbi" with yuan "downgraded" to a unit of that currency, like the cent is a unit of the dollar currency. Nonetheless, Chinese renminbi yuan would be much clearer.
Dove1950 10:51, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

What ever the currency is called it should have the country name first. The only exception for circulating currencies would be those used by more than one nation in a currency union, such as the Euro, East Carribean dollar etc Enlil Ninlil 03:37, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Yep, precisely. I'd be for the current title, if yuan has indeed now been downgraded. —Nightstallion 16:58, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

The dollar, kip, cedi, and dong are all currency units, not currency names. If you adopt that standard, then this article should be at "Chinese Yuan", not "Chinese renminbi". Again, the name of the currency is "Renminbi", not "Chinese renminbi", just as the Pound stirling is the Pound stirling, not the British Pound stirling.

Just as you can call it "British Pound", so you can call the Renminbi the "Chinese Yuan". To take another Chinese example, the New Taiwan Dollar is the currency of the Republic of China, there being no state called "Taiwan" as such. You can call it the "Taiwanese Dollar", or you can call it the "New Taiwan Dollar", but you can't call it the Republic of China New Taiwan Dollar.

Putting this article at Chinese renminbi is, I think, due to a mis-application of the rule found in English where currency names are identified by country + unit: e.g. US Dollar or Australian Dollar. Note that this rule is not even consistent in the English-speaking world, the most notable exception being the Pound stirling, which, at risk of sounding repetitive, I stress again is not called the "British Pound stirling" - it's either "Pound stirling" or "British Pound".

Likewise, it's either "Renminbi" or "Chinese Yuan". Take your pick.

Normally I am happy to go according to majority opinion on these issues, but this is an error based on a mis-understanding of Chinese currency systems akin to the "Renminbi also known as Yuan" error that persisted on this article for a long time. And no, Dove1950, there was never a "downgrade" of Yuan - the currency from its inception was known as the "Renminbi" whose principal unit is the "Yuan". The two names are not equivalent.

On the latter point see The People's Bank of China Law of the People's Republic of China]:

第三章 人民币

第十五条 中华人民共和国的法定货币是人民币。以人民币支付中华人民共和国境内的一切公共的和私人的债务，任何单位和个人不得拒收。 第十六条 人民币的单位为元，人民币辅币单位为角、分。

which translates as:

Chapter III Renminbi

Article 15: The legal tender currency of the People's Republic of China is the Renminbi. No work unit or person shall refuse to accept the Renminbi for the repayment of all public and private debts within the territory of the People's Republic of China

Article 16: The unit of the Renminbi is the Yuan. Subsidiary units are the Jiao and the Fen.

Perhaps this distinction between the "currency name" and the "currency unit" is unfamiliar in English - but I can only stress that it is a crucial distinction in Chinese currencies, and the closest analogy I can find in the English-speaking world is "pound sterling" and "(British) pound". --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 03:04, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

No, I'm right about the "downgrade" according to [4] (search for the text "the currency became officially known as the Renminbi"). Simply calling this article "renminbi" is to remove content and I would ask you to stop. You can hardly claim that it is not Chinese. As to the case of sterling, you'll see that there is an ongoing discussion on this very topic.
Dove1950 10:35, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

It's not a "downgrade" - Chinese currencies have always had a currency name and a unit name (in modern times - usually the Yuan).

I don't know where that article gets its claim about the change of the name from, but note two things: 1. it says 1969 - not exactly "recent"; and 2. it says nothing about a "downgrade". I hope i've made myself clear: the "Renminbi" is the currency name, the "Yuan" is the currency unit. They are quite different concepts; there's no issue of "downgrading" - and your cited source doesn't support the view of a "downgrade".

The Communist regime's currency has been known as the Renminbi at least as far back as before 1949: see this article about the first issued Renminbi note: [5], issued by the Communist regime in 1948.

From the beginning, the currency was known as the "Renminbi" - it is not, as you believe, that it started as the "Chinese Yuan" and later became the "Chinese Renminbi" - it has always been the Chinese Yuan, and at the same time it has always been the Renminbi.

If you read Chinese yuan for the history of various currencies called the "Chinese yuan", you will see that by the time of the Renminbi's inception, there were already several different kinds of "yuan"s. It would simply have been inconceivable for the Communists to start their own currency with the same name.

I have provided the PBC constitutional law as a source to the difference between a "currency name" and a "currency unit".

Would you care to provide a reliable source that ameliorates that difference?

You are right that there is a debate at Pound stirling - and my view is that, given the somewhat analogous situation of the Renminbi to the Pound stirling in terms of having different names to units, until and unless that discussion produces a consensus in favour of moving it to "British Pound stirling", this article either remain at Renminbi or is moved to "Chinese Yuan".

Again, "Chinese renminbi" is a neologism, just like the British Pound stirling. Unless and until that becomes the standard, this article should remain where it was. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:52, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Have a look at this article for the origins of the name "Renminbi" - specifically, that it began as an administrative ordinance of the Communist government in northern China in 1948, shortly before the establishment of the People's Republic of China.

This is a policy proposal to change the name "Renminbi" to "Chinese Yuan" - not the conspicuous absence of "Chinese" when they mention "renminbi" but its presence when they mention "yuan". It says that the currency was named "Renminbi" on the 1st of December, 1948, and has remained so every since. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:56, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

If you really feel the need for disambiguation, call it Renminbi (Chinese currency) - although as there are no other articles with identical names, dab does not seem to be necessary. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:58, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

"Chinese renminbi" follows neither common nor proper usage. Wikipedia has no place creating a certain "consistency" that does not exist in the real world. In English, the currency is either "renminbi" or "Chinese yuan" or "the yuan", NEVER "Chinese renminbi" --Jiang 11:43, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Title should be "Renminbi", it's not officially called the "Chinese Renminbi", its only used in the context by those who try to explain to ignoramuses that it's the Chinese currency. Unlike others like the NIS / New Israeli Shekel (because it inherited the old shekel) or US dollar (because there are other dollars). There is and has been only one Renminbi. Peikoo 13:45, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid you are missing the point. The currency is called the reniminbi and it is Chinese. Hence, the article is called the Chinese renminbi. It's that simple. There is no neologism. Compare, if you must, with Nigerian naira, Thai baht, Geneva genevoise, etc., etc., for other currencies falling in the same category. If you think that the events of 1969 given in the source I quoted didn't happen, then a reference is required which refutes it. Simply quoting the current law is not sufficient, since this is the post-1969 situation. I'm afraid all your references are in Chinese and will need translating before being of any use in this discussion, something I would encourage you to do as there may be valuable information in them.
Dove1950 14:19, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Nigerian naira, Thai baht, Geneva genevoise, etc, is the parallel to Chinese yuan - not a parallel to Renminbi. There is a difference. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Dove1950, did you bother to read the references I supplied which say that the "Renminbi" has been called the "Renminbi" ever since 1948? and equally, its unit has always been the Yuan?

Regardless of whether this happened in 1948 or 1969, however, the important distinction for you to appreciate - and which the other editors posting here do appreciate - is that Renminbi is the name of the currency, Yuan is the unit. The naira, baht, and genevoise are all units.

You can have "one naira", "one baht" and "one genevoise", but there is no such thing as "one Renminbi" - it's "one Yuan". If you want to draw analogies with those currencies, then you should move this article to "Chinese yuan".

I say again, "renminbi" is like "stirling" - you don't say British Pound stirling, and you don't say British Stirling - equally, you can't say "Chinese renminbi". It's neither a common nor proper name. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 23:42, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate the distinction but it is irrelevant to the naming of this article. Regardless of whether the reniminbi is a unit (which it is not) or currency (which it is), it is most definitely Chinese.
Dove1950 16:08, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah and so is dim sum. Should we move that article to Chinese dim sum? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:26, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Links

Nice work User:212.31.188.177 on the accents but a number of links to other articles have been messed up. Please either move these articles (such as Renminbi (disambiguation)) to a new name with the accents added or fix the links to the unaccented names in this article. My preference is the former. Thanks.
Dove1950 19:30, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

A suggestion to move forward from this article move war

I suggest we merge this article to Chinese yuan.

I think we've been discussing the issue in the wrong context. This is really a linguistic issue more than an issue of naming standard for currencies. While the name of the mainland Chinese currency is "Renminbi" in Chinese, it is "Chinese Yuan" in English. The content in this article and the content of Chinese yuan really belongs in one article, with maybe the content of historic yuan moved to Chinese currency if Chinese yuan becomes too big. In my opinion there's really no reason why "Renminbi" should be a different article from "Chinese Yuan" - again, "Chinese Yuan" is the common English name for the mainland Chinese currency.

However, if we do not do a merge, I would prefer this article to remain at "Renminbi". Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:18, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Though I do have to ask - why isn't there a push to move Pound sterling to British pound sterling? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:28, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not opposed to a merger, although this will create a very large article. Regarding the pound, there is such a push. Feel free to contribute to that discussion also.
Dove1950 17:38, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, before we agree to this merge, I'd like to be asserted that "Chinese Yuan" is in fact a more common English name for the mainland Chinese currency than "Renminbi" is. After doing a few quick Google searches, I'm not so sure anymore. But regardless, I still think the content in this article and the content in Chinese yuan should be in one article (again, with content about the historic yuan moved to another article if it becomes too big).

But going back to naming standard for currencies for a moment - as with other subject matter, I am against creating and sticking to naming standards that only exists on WP, which is why I would prefer this article to remain at "Renminbi" if we do not merge. To the best of my knowledge, "Renminbi" is far more common than "Chinese Renminbi". Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:46, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Hong: a move or merger to "Chinese yuan" would be in accordance with common names. The information on the historical yuans can be summarised, and spun off into History of the Chinese yuan or something.

Alternatively maintain separate articles, with this one at Renminbi. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 22:23, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I oppose a merger with Chinese yuan. The term "Chinese yuan" is only contemporaneously used, in English, with the renminbi, so to merge it would be to create unncessary ambiguity. "Chinese yuan" is not used in Chinese to refer to the RMB, and its use in historical contexts is not limited to the renminbi. The article on the existing currency - the renminbi - is independent of past Chinese currencies. Instead, I think "Chinese yuan" should redirect to renminbi, while the content at "Chinese yuan" should be merged with the content at Chinese currency to form a comprehensive article on former Chinese currencies.

To illustrate my point, many of the currencies cited at Chinese yuan actually had the word "yuan" in the name of its currency (eg jin yuan, ying yuan) while the renminbi does not. Usage of the media does not dictate whether two things are in one article or two. This is dictated by how closely they are related or if they are the same thing. They are clearly not, unless all Chinese currencies (even the ones from 2000 years ago) should reside in one article.--Jiang 02:22, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

If I understand your rationale correctly, based on the fact that yuan was also used historically, wouldn't it make more sense to actually redirect Chinese yuan to Chinese currency? At any rate, despite possible ambiguity, I do believe we should still use the most common English term. My first assumption was that "Chinese Yuan" is more commonly used in English than "Renminbi", but I am not 100% sure anymore. Can you comment on what you think is the more common English term? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 05:54, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I see both being used the media. I think Renminbi seems more common for specialist audiences, while yuan is more common for general audiences. The latter means some people will be searching for the article under the name "Chinese yuan" or "yuan" so we might want to direct those terms here instead of an article on historical currencies.--Jiang 06:27, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of how this article is named, the current Chinese yuan article should be a daughter article of this, since it deals with the historical development of the "Chinese yuan" - which is the renminbi for all intents and purposes.

One question, though: is the "New Taiwan Dollar" or its unit ever referred to as "yuan" in the English media? I know it's called "yuan" in Chinese, but does common usage in English usually say "$100" or "100 yuan"? I ask because there might be a China-PRC-ROC-style forking problem if the latter is the case, specifically, with Chinese yuan-Renminbi-New Taiwan dollar corresponding to those three articles. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 06:32, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

This is a daughter article of Chinese yuan, not vice versa. Only two of the 11 currencies listed on that page have anything to do with renminbi. Text-wise, perhaps only 1/8 of that article is relevant to renminbi.

NTD is not usually referred to as "yuan" in English. Though we do have the non-circulating "silver yuan" being used as official currency in Taiwan until 2000.--Jiang 06:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Jiang - if yuan or "Chinese yuan" is more common for general readers, I would think that's a good reason to merge or redirect "Renminbi" to it. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 10:29, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Merging might be a good idea, yeah. —Nightstallion 10:37, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

One thing must be borne in mind throughout this discussion. Accuracy is what matters, not "what's commonly used". This currency is now officially called the renminbi, with units including the yuan. As this has only been the case since 1969, there is a reasonable argument for this article to become part of Chinese yuan, with the section clearly indicating the current name. Chinese currency should be used to include mention of Chinese wén and others. As I said, I don't oppose a merger but I do oppose the underhand methods used to block the movement of this page.
Dove1950 16:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Using the most common name would naturally be the accurate name. I am against setting some artificial naming standard that is only used or mostly used on WP itself and less so in the real world, so I am against naming this article "Chinese renminbi". Regardless, at this point I do support merging the article into Chinese yuan unless it can be shown that "Renminbi" is more commonly used in English to refer to the currency. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:13, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

NB: it has not "only been the case" since 1969 - dunno where that article Dove1950 quoted got its information from, but the currency was definitely called the "Renminbi" officially from the early 1950s, and in some contexts from as early as 1948. See links posted by me above.

And yes, this artificial naming standard is undesirable, especially because it is founded on the assumption of some uniform naming convention of currency which doesn't exist in real life: see, for the umpteenth time, Pound stirling. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 22:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Merging and renaming are very separate matters. This article should not be merged as it is a separate currency from past Chinese currencies. The only thing they share in common is the unit, in which case the Chinese Wikipedia, under the same assumptions, should merge all the articles for every currency in the world into a single monster article.

The article, as it is, is long enough and important enough to stand alone. Historical Chinese currencies have no place sharing the same space.--Jiang 02:42, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

...in which case the Chinese Wikipedia, under the same assumptions, should merge all the articles for every currency in the world... - Not exactly, because 人民幣 is the most common Chinese name for the currency, whereas, as far as I can see, "Chinese yuan" or "yuan" is the most common English name for the currency. Disambiguation is not a big problem, like all other disambiguation issues, they are easily taken care of by putting italised text at the top of the article or even making a disambig page. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 04:12, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

On that point (of combining every single currency article on the Chinese wikipedia), the Chinese yuan article currently says "The yuan ... is, in the Chinese language, the base unit of a currency. For example, the US dollar is Meiyuan (美元)." which seems to imply that "yuan" can be used in Chinese to translate any currency unit.

That's not true though - in the Chinese language, the "yuan" is used for precisely two types of currency: 1. those Chinese currencies where the unit is "Yuan" - e.g. RMB Yuan, and 2. those (Chinese or non-Chinese) currencies where the unit is "Dollar" - e.g. US/Canadian/Chinese Dollar (and, via reverse causation, New Taiwan Dollar).

Other currency units, such as the Vietnamese dong or the Pound stirling, are not called "Yuan" - in these two cases, the units are 盾 (though it should properly be "銅") and 镑 respectively in Chinese. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 05:07, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:RMB100&1.PNG

Image:RMB100&1.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:44, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

A long overdue tidy

I've tidied up this article, separating the two distinct currencies to make things a bit clearer. I've removed all the improvement tags. I hope they have been satisfied.
Dove1950 21:52, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

You failed to mention something small, namely you moved the article's name. Maork (talk) 21:45, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Continuing vandalism

Rather than enter into a discussion over the proper name for this article, a second person, Maork, has used HongQiGong's trick of editing Chinese renminbi and then changing it back to stop further moves. Such behaviour demeans this user and I look forward to them remedying it. In the mean time, perhaps they might like to explain themselves. Given that this was done at the same time as HongQiGong was active, I can't help wondering if we have a sockpuppet at work here. Prove me wrong and I shan't take it any further.
Dove1950 (talk) 21:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

You said you discussed this on WP Numismatics. Where exactly? As far I know you discussed it with some members here as to which title should be used in late September and early November (see above). You decided to come back around a month later hoping everyone's gone home to do a sneaky page move without mentioning it here. Maork (talk) 21:48, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

There's clearly no concensus to move this article to Chinese renminbi. Please stop. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 06:58, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Move to Chinese renminbi

There is clear consensus at Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Style that currency article titles should start with the adjectival country name. There is no case for this article to form an exception. We now have a couple of weeks to thrash this out, so I suggest that Maork and HongQiGong (assuming they are two distinct individuals) start giving reasons for not applying the agreed standard, rather than using underhand methods to block it.
Dove1950 (talk) 15:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose - Per WP:COMMONNAME. "Renminbi" is a much more common name than "Chinese renminbi", which actually is hardly ever used. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose Use Common names! I detest working groups of people who form committees and then dictate terms to other articles on name and presentation. The common names convention over-rides anything they came up with anyways. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
• Oppose Exactly what Hong and Schmucky said. I don't care if there is consensus at Wikipedia:WikiProject Small Breakfast Buns to rename Buckingham Palace as Butter Croissant. Each article is edited according to the consensus of its editors, and the editors on this page have clearly and emphatically and consistently rejected a move to Chinese renminbi. You can't just come along and start a move war every two months, especially when you have no good reason for it. There is no obligation on Maork and HongQiGong or anyone else to supply new arguments, since they (and we) have put forth the relevant arguments ad nauseum in previous discussions, discussions where you (those advocating "Chinese renminbi", a neologism) have simply abandoned. A "wikiproject consensus" is not privileged over the opinions of other editors. The opinions of Wikiproject members who never edit this article, especially, are privileged below that of regular editors. Furthermore, if you are going to talk Wikiprojects, then this article belongs to a number of projects. I am quite confident that we can establish a "consensus" against the move in any of the other Wikiprojects. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 21:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Well let's not go down the path of whose opinions are more "privileged". We are all equal here, even if an editor has never edited this article. Concensus at WikiProject Numismatics would have been perfectly fine if there weren't obvious objections here at the article Talk page. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 21:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Thank you for that correction. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 21:46, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose: It's already standardized with Chinese yuan (unit). This is just the name of the currency. Renminbi is the official name and common name. It's even in bold as the second word in the article. Refer to Pound sterling. Hang on, funny that. I've just seen that you brought up the very same issue over there --> see talk page. Why aren't you - Dove1950 - pursuing it over there still?? Or do you just like jumping around whenever you like after having failed to convince anyone. Lop.dong (talk) 22:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - For the record, my stance will stay as Oppose until I specifically state otherwise. So please do not suddenly come back to the article a month later, move the article, and then claim that there was concensus to do so. I can only assume this is true of the other editors as well. I don't mind if you keep bringing up new discussions for moving this article, provided you have some new arguments. Just don't move the article without concensus. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:15, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

• Support - I didn't realise that being busy for a few weeks in real life was such a sin in Wikipedia. The level of abuse is becoming a little shrill now, so I hope you can all calm down. I am still looking to move Pound sterling and have taken up the matter again as a result of your reminder. Thank you. Back to this article and the reasons why it should be moved. This is an encyclopaedia and it therefore needs to be a consistent record of the subjects (note the plural) being written about. As a consequence, it does matter that the currency articles are named consistently. No one is claiming that Chinese renminbi is an official name. The currency is Chinese and is called the renminbi, hence the proposed title. Having said that, the phrase Chinese renminbi does turn up (see [6]) when introducing the currency when it is not obvious that the country being discussed is China. That is precisely the scenario we always have with an article title in Wikipedia. Hence my support for this move.
  Dove1950 (talk) 20:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I can't speak for anybody else, but it's not the fact that you didn't visit this article that I object to. It's the fact that there was obviously no concensus on this Talk page and yet you insisted on unilaterally moving this article. Just please start a new discussion and gain concensus first next time you want to move the article. Anyway, I don't think there's any official guideline that says that "consistent record of the subjects" should override WP:COMMONNAME. That's why I disagree with your reasoning and the article rename. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 21:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I apologise if anything offended you, but really - it is a little exasperating to come back every couple of weeks to find that someone has moved the article again without seeking consensus and has ignored the previous discussion wholesale. I'm sorry, but you just can't keep on throwing the dart at the board in the hope that one day it will stick. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 21:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
    • I make changes where they are appropriate. That includes moving articles. This is perfectly normal in Wikipedia. If others insist on reverting, that, unfortunately, is also normal. If we don't like this to and fro, we don't edit Wikipedia. Sometimes a discussion peters out without reaching a conclusion. Repeating a change can stimulate the debate to resume, as has occurred here. Also, I'm not claiming that consistency automatically overrides a particular style guide, rather that it has virtues of its own which deserve taking seriously. Perhaps it should override WP:COMMONNAME but that's another matter.
      Dove1950 (talk) 23:07, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
      • Just please get concensus next time before you move the article. It's a simple concept. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 02:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
      • Moving without consensus and then starting a new move proposal is not "reinvigorating" the discussion, especially when you haven't actually produced any new arguments. Remember, you sought the move in the first place. You put forward some arguments which have not convinced other editors. You need to make an effort to build consensus before moving again. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 15:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
• Support per Dove, he's summarised my take on the issue very well. —Nightstallion 02:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose. I can't agree more with the editors above who oppose on the basis of common name. enochlau (talk) 15:39, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Oppose That fact that Reminbi is the common name, official name, and there are no other renminbi means there's no reason to move. Mostlyharmless

• Oppose move pretty much per above editors. Of course we need a country included in the name in many cases, such as United States dollar, because there are other countries using the same currency name (Australian dollar etc.). Even the (now out-of-use, but meh) Deutsche Mark needs one since "mark" has many meanings. But "renminbi" does not have other major meanings. It's just not needed. As a side note, I generally dislike the idea of WikiProjects imposing a style on articles, rather than the specific editors of said article. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 21:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose move All the same reasons as those who have opposed. Zap 00:19, 22 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zappa711 (talk • contribs)

discussion

I'm afraid the commonest name is yuan, since that appears on all the currency, whereas renminbi doesn't. Clearly we can't use that name, hence our use of the term renminbi. The discussion here is not about what is the commonest name but about what is the best name for an encyclopedia. That's why making this article's title clearer and consistent with the other currency articles' titles is being put forward.
Dove1950 (talk) 23:29, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

"Most common", not "commonest".

Renminbi is not yuan. Yuan is a unit. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)

"Most common" and "commonest" are synonyms. I would have hoped that a Wikipedia editor would have known that. The point is that claiming the correct name for this article is just renminbi based on this being the common name doesn't work, since the commonest name is yuan, which is not the correct name.
Dove1950 (talk) 15:03, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

The most common name of the currency is renminbi. The most common name for the currency unit is yuan. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)

And more importantly, "Chinese yuan" is not as common as either "renminbi" or "yuan". If "yuan" is determined to be the better name for the article and we need to disambiguate, then the better name would be "Yuan (Chinese currency)" Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 18:17, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

The point I'm making is that simly using "common name" to decide this issue is redundant. The commonest name is yuan, since this is what's written on the currency, not renminbi. The reason for using "Chinese renminibi" is that its the clearest name.
Dove1950 (talk) 20:33, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

The name "Yuan (Chinese currency)" is just as clear, and it complies with the policy of using the most common name for article name. Besides, just because "yuan" is printed on the currency, does not mean it actually is the most common name. So far, evidence seems to point to "renminbi" as the most common name. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 21:56, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

There have been a number of suggestions along this line, i.e. "Currency name (Country's currency)". It does nothing to address the concept of the common name, since no one goes around saying that the currency of Poland is the "Złoty (Polish currency)" but it is a way of ensuring clarity for the title. However, Polish złoty is much easier to link to, which is why it was adopted as the standard. The same applies to Chinese renminbi. Just to clarify one other point, the fact that yuan is printed on the currency makes it the most commonly used name.
Dove1950 (talk) 12:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Err... no one "goes around" saying that the currency of China is "Chinese renminbi" either. It's either "renminbi" or "Chinese yuan" or just "yuan". So the name "Chinese renminbi" certainly does not address common usage. I don't see what's so unclear about the name "renminbi". If readers want to know what it is, they read the article, like what they would do with basically all articles whose names they do not recognise. We shouldn't ignore the rule of using common names - and "Chinese yuan" is not printed on the currency. "Yuan" is. But at any rate, just because "yuan" is printed on the bills, that doesn't necessarily mean it is the most common name in the English language. The point you keep ignoring is that "renminbi" is the name of the currency while "yuan" is the name of the unit. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 06:34, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

(unindent) Yuan is the name of a unit. Renminbi is the name of the currency. You are still failing to make this distinction between the currency and its units.

By your standard "the fact that yuan is printed on the currency makes it the most common" the United States dollar article should be renamed to United States cent. There are more pennies inscribed with "One Cent" in circulation than dollars. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)

Even if you want to move, I don't like the target at Chinese renminbi for the reason that there's no other renminbi, i.e. no confusion. - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 09:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh well, there ain't another dalasi, cedi, kip bla bla bla. I support the move. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 09:02, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

• Support - EVERY other currency article on wikipedia is named with the country first, then the name of the currency. There is no reason to keep the article as the current name. And if you people for some reason decide to keep it, then i suggest that you move the hundreds of other currency article to the "right" page.Grk1011 (talk) 00:52, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

That's a non-reason to move, as the conversation above has said many times. If the maintainers of the other currency articles wish to change the titles of their articles, that is up to them, not an external committee. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)

You say there is no reason to keep the article as the current name - there are plenty of reasons, as laid out above, most prominently the common names policy. It's a bit high handed of you to simply dismiss it. The crux of the issue comes down to whether consistency should trump common names - and in the opinion of many editors, it should not. Just because Panthera crassidens and any number of species articles are at their binomial names, that doesn't mean that the Lion should be at Panthera leo. Common names is a policy, consistency is merely a desirable attribute. The latter cannot yield to the former.

The campaign to move things like the Renminbi and the Pound stirling to a country-currency format is driven by a search for logical order that is not appropriate to an encyclopaedia. An encyclopaedia is a reader-orientated search tool, not a logical database. We list things in order of what they are subjectively "known as", not what they should be called according to some logical rules laid out by one group of editors in isolation from the rest. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 02:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

"The campaign to move things like the Renminbi and the Pound stirling to a country-currency format is driven by a search for logical order that is not appropriate to an encyclopaedia." That's the most ludicrous statement yet in this discussion. A logical order is totally appropriate for an encyclopaedia. Wikipedia may be easier to navigate than a book but that doesn't mean it should be disorganized.
Dove1950 (talk) 16:33, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the little spat over "commonest" and "most common", a simple Google search reveals:

Commonest: 1,280,000 hits on Google

Most common: 60,100,000 hits on Google

So "most common" is definitely in the majority, more than 50:1. Still, while "commonest" may be progressing along the same trajectory as the dodo, but it's not there yet! So even though "most common" is the "commonest" usage, trying to make out that commonest is incorrect is unjustified.

There is a strong tendency in English polysyllabic adjectives to move away from "-est" and towards "most". In 100 years' time, Schmucky may be quite right. But not yet....

Note: A quick Google search reveals that the UK ratio is 184,000 to 592,000, which is better than 4:1, so maybe there is regional variation.

Bathrobe (talk) 05:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Moving toward closure?

This discussion has been open for over a month, and I simply don't see a consensus for this move, and would tend to think there's a rough consensus to keep. As an involved party, I obviously won't close this discussion, but it seems to me that we should consider it over. I would also like to see this article unprotected and have that ugly template removed. Does anyone object to requesting unprotection? Perhaps more importantly, will we all agree not to move war if it is unprotected? Heimstern Läufer (talk) 03:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with the notion that this discussion is at an end. Some truly appalling excuses have been put forward for not complying with the accepted standard. To suggest that logical naming for a group of articles is wrong simply diminishes Wikipedia as an encyclopaedia. Furthermore, new editors are joining this debate and there is therefore no need to rush into an entirely inappropriate decision.
Dove1950 (talk) 21:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Accepted standard? Apparently not, given that the editors of the article seem not to accept it. Furthermore, I'm not seeing new editors joining the debate, and certainly not adding anything new. Regardless of anything else, this move protection needs to end. Can we all agree not to move war if it's unprotected? There's always room for further discussion after we unprotect it. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 22:18, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

As a side note, Dove1950, your tendency to dismiss your opponents' reasoning is not going to help you win any discussions. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 22:21, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I count 8 "no" votes and 3 "yes". I believe it is a consensus against moving. Even if it isn't, it is at least the absence of a consensus for moving. And I agree with Heimstern: Dove1950, if you want to establish consensus by convincing other editors, dismissing their arguments as "appalling" isn't the way to do it, nor is starting a move war every couple of months.

As for the comment about "logic" - you are either not reading my whole post or deliberately mis-interpreting it. To summarise, my point was that Wikipedia is organised by knowledge, in the sense of what the ordinary reader is most likely to know something as, not hard and fast rules of logic. That is why we have the "Common names" policy and it is why Lion is where it is and not at Panthera leo. You might like to have a look at fuzzy logic for how this works in general in any design process. It seems your only argument is "consistency" - but consistency is not a Wikipedia policy, whereas "common names" is. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 00:58, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

The article has recently been unprotected. This doesn't necessarily mean the discussion's over, as there's always room for now. I simply ask that we all refrain from move warring, and we'll all be fine. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 02:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

This is a mistake. It is an attempt to reduce Wikipedia to a free for all. This article is part of a large group, the vast majority of which comply with a simple and logical nomenclature. As has been discussed, there is no single common name for this currency, rather two, yuan and renminbi. That only one of these is correct does not mean that your precious "common name" concept can be unthinkingly applied. As it happens, I'm not trying to convince those who've already indicated their unwillingness to accept the standard agreed to by the project that this article is a part of. Instead, I'm highlighting the ludicrous nature of your arguments for others.
Dove1950 (talk) 21:47, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

You're alienating those you disagree with all the more with each comment of yours. Wikipedia runs on consensus, whether you like it or not. Also, please don't forget that Wikiprojects do not own articles. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 21:51, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

By your own argument, eight people now "own this article" since their opinions alone have determined its title. You alienate yourself by your disrespect for the numismatic project, which is trying to make Wikipedia a more useful resource.
Dove1950 (talk) 21:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

The numismatic project does not have a higher ranking than other editors of an article. Even if your words represent the numismatic project, it is still the opinion of an ordinary editor. As to who "owns" this article - nobody does, but eight editors would be more entitled to "own" it than three, don't you think?

You have been blinded by what you see as the logical brilliance of your own rule, not realising that it is flawed - even logically - because it has not been developed with all the different situations that it might apply to in mind. As has been pointed out many times, over and over, "Renminbi" in your preferred title "Chinese renminbi" is not equivalent to the "dollar" in "US dollar". One is a currency name, the other both a name and a unit. Their usages differ, and you cannot apply your rule to a case that produces an absurd result (the absurd result being a neologism), however "consistent" it may be to you. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 00:59, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

If you're not willing to accept the results here, seek a wider audience. Perhaps an RfC or mediation. "Disrespect for the numismatic project"? That's absurd. Disagreeing with editors over content is not disrespecting them. If what you meant was that I was disrespecting the project's norms: Wikiproject standards are not binding. Even the Manual of Style is not binding (it says on the page "Editors are advised to follow it, but it should be approached with common sense and the occasional exception"), and it, unlike a Wikiproject guideline, is generally approved by the community and large and not by a small group of editors. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 22:09, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

There is no difference between renminbi and dollar in this context. Just because the word dollar fulfils two rolls whilst renminbi only fulfils one does not change the fact that both are the names of a currency. Therefore, any guideline for currency names should apply. As to the issue of a neologism, you will find that "Chinese renminbi" is not one, since it is used by such media outlets as the BBC. Given the number of participants in the numismatic project, being steamrollered by eight editors is hardly a reasonable situation. The carefully discussed decision to adopt this standard has been completely ignored. That's what's disrespectful. Unless you haven't realised, there is a hierarchy of commitment to Wikipedia, with far greater commitment displayed by those who cooperate in these projects. To simply dismiss their work is not going to improve Wikipedia one jot.
Dove1950 (talk) 16:18, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Telling us about how much greater your "commitment" is compared to other editors is not going to convince the other editors of your view. Wikipedia works by consensus, and that is something that you just have to accept. Coming into an article, saying "me and these other guys decided on this rule and you gotta accept it coz we're more committed than you" does not work, especially when you steadfastly refuse to listen to problems with your rule that others consistently point towards. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 22:59, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

BBC does use "renminbi" only, [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]. Zap 21:35, 26 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zappa711 (talk • contribs)

Once again I want to point out, WP:COMMONNAME applies here, a policy that Dove1950 just wants to defenestrate. The common name is "Renminbi", not "Chinese renminbi". Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 06:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Consensus is not arrived at by having a vote. It's arrived at by all involved agreeing. The eight people who have taken control of this article are demonstrating a lack of commitment to producing a well organized encyclopaedia. Instead, they cling to the idea that, by force of numbers, they can ride rough-shod over an agreed standard. Repeatedly claiming that there is only one common name for this currency seems to be the only real argument any of you have. The fact that this argument is clearly incorrect simply can't penetrate, can it? I never claimed that the BBC didn't use renminbi, only that it does use "Chinese renminbi". See [12] and [13].
Dove1950 (talk) 23:31, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

One mention does not make it the most common usage. In the spirit of progress, are you willing to set out exactly your arguments for moving this article, addressing the concern about the "common names" policy that other editors have raised? Remember "Me and some other guys agreed on this other page to impose a rule across all articles" is not a good argument against enforcing a policy such as "common names". --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 06:50, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I tend to disagree with the Procrustean approach that "the country name MUST be added to the name of the currency". You don't have to standardise things that way. "Renminbi" means "people's currency"; it's the currency of China. The problem with "Chinese Renminbi" is that it's not normally used. So it's different from, say, "Singapore dollar" or "Hong Kong dollar". "Singapore dollar" and "Hong Kong dollar" are both commonly used expressions, and they are used because of the need to disambiguate. "Chinese renminbi" is not generally used because there's no need to disambiguate. The only reason that the BBC might use "Chinese RMB" is as a shorthand way of telling people who don't know that "the Renminbi is the currency of China". (A bit like saying "US President Bush", just in order to let people know that Bush is the president of the US, as opposed to, say, Iraq). The way Wikipedia's set up, you can have redirects from "Chinese yuan" and "Chinese renminbi" that will land you at "Renminbi".

Incidentally, there has also been discussion going on at New Taiwan dollar about moving it to Taiwanese yuan, or some other name that nobody uses. I support the use of "New Taiwan dollar" because that's what it's known as in English. The idea of moving it to "Taiwanese yuan" seems to be based on the same grounds as the current campaign to move "Renminbi" to "Chinese Renminbi" or "Pound Sterling" to "British pound". That is, a desire to unify currency names as COUNTRY NAME + CURRENCY NAME. Tidy though it may look, this is at odds with common usage, and it's hard to see why it should be done that way. As I said, redirects can take care of any problems.

Bathrobe (talk) 03:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

The root of all the problems seems to be the style page on Numismatics [14], which is being used as the basis of a campaign to whip all currency names "into line". However, that style page seems to have been written by a small number of people and makes some quite arbitrary decisions, decisions that are affecting the community of Wikipedians dealing in Chinese issues -- decisions on which we have never been consulted.

One of the principles that seems to guide the Numismatics style page is that of "overriding the English name" in favour of the local name. That sounds fine in principle, and might be valid for Norwegian crowns (which should be 'korunna' under this rule), but becomes more and more ridiculous as you move into parts of the world where there are established English-language conventions that are followed by everyone, even the locals.

A good example of this approach can be found at the article on the Maltese lira. The fact that, as a Maltese user points out at the talk page, Maltese themselves continue to refer to the currency as the "Maltese pound" is brushed aside, and the only mention made of the local usage is this: "In English, the Maltese currency was sometimes referred to as the pound." ("Was" because the government changed the name. The fact that locals don't follow the government name seems to be irrelevant.)

In this connection, our friend User Dove1950 is an advocate of the simplistic rule that "you should follow the name that's written on the note". That's why he's pushing to move "New Taiwan dollar" to "Taiwanese yuan", even though in English it's normal usage to call it the dollar. (And even locals don't call it the yuan, they use words like 块).

There is, however, quite some resistance to the Numismatics Style Guide, which can be seen on the talk page :[15]. I suggest that rather than skirmish here, Wikipedians interested in this page should scoot over to the Numismatics project. A quick look at Dove1950's talk page might also be interesting. This comment is especially illuminating: "As I'm sure you're aware, the Chinese renminbi / renminbi debate rumbles on. It could really benefit from your insight. Some of the comments beggar belief and I could frankly do with some assistance if you can spare the time. Once we've got that article sorted, we can return to the Taiwanese question."

Bathrobe (talk) 05:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Currency naming guidelines change proposal survey

For the information of editors of this page, there is now a discussion on currency naming guidelines here. Since this directly impacts on the debate at this page, you may be interested in registering your opinion on the two proposals that have been tabled. Thanks.

Bathrobe (talk) 05:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Just checking: You mean "tabled" in the UK English sense? Heimstern Läufer (talk) 06:12, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Has a different meaning in American English? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 06:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's bizarre. In US English, "tabled" and "shelved" are synonymous, meaning to put an idea away. It's never made sense to me, and I've completely avoided it ever since I found out it means the opposite in UK English. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 06:29, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Looking at this, yes, clearly we mean the UK sense. Got it. Well, this will clarify it for any unsuspecting Americans who show up. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 06:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Oops, the American meaning didn't even occur to me, even though I'm familiar with it.

Bathrobe (talk) 06:37, 5 February 2008 (UTC)