Talk:Decimalisation

British decimalisation

See Talk:Decimal Day for comments on merging content from various pages regarding British decimalisation -- OwenBlacker 21:53, Jun 2, 2004 (UTC)

I think you are to a winner. See that talk page for details. Pcb21| Pete 22:11, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Phrases

Rephrase: "has been undergone by all countries except..." isn't right. New countries, and some older ones I'd imagine, have always been decimalized. BenFrantzDale 08:02, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Old wording: "This process has been undergone by all countries except Mauritania and Madagascar." New wording: "All countries that have previously had non-decimal currencies have decimalized, except for Mauritania and Madagascar." How's that? Kairos 11:42, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Also, am I the only one who's a little bummed out about currency decimalization in general? It's helpful to travelers and the like, certainly, but I think all those shillings and sixpences and what-not have a character that's currently lacking in the current coins. Kairos 11:44, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, besides which, 12's are so much more convenient in terms of division. What's a third of a dollar? 33.333333 cents. What's a third of a pre-decimalization Pound? 6s 8d, an exact amount. Nik42 07:14, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

and what do you need a third of a dollar for? It doesn't help much, while it makes calculating way harder (because we still calculate in a decimal system and not a 20, 12 or 240 system). -- 80.156.42.129 11:58, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

"3 for $1" is a fairly common sale price for small items. In practice, it gets rounded up to 34¢, and nobody really cares about being cheated out of 2⁄3¢. But it may have been a bigger deal back when a cent was worth something. DanBishop (talk) 00:11, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Page move 2005

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved

This section is for votes and comments on the proposed move to Decimalisation.

• Oppose. The original author used the American English spelling, and there's no reason to override that choice. JamesMLane 09:41, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• This isn't the place to discuss the requested move, that's Wikipedia:Requested moves, but in any case support -- the original version of the article exclusively discussed the decimalisation of the British currency, and the original anon editor was wrong to spell it with a "z" - the process was always spelt with an "s", I remember because I lived through it. Moreover, the article always spelled it "decimalisation" except in the article name until Violetriga went through it yesterday changing everything to the American spelling. -- Arwel 14:40, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
  • This is the correct place to discuss it actually. I changed it all over to match the current article title after Fibonacci changed it before making this proposal. violet/riga (t) 14:46, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
    • I notice Fibonacci changed the one occurrence of the "z" spelling to "s"; you changed it back, together with 5 other occurrences of the "s" spelling, which was clearly the preferred version as the article developed. -- Arwel 15:28, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
      • I brought it in line with the title, as it should be. The article maintained the z spelling for a long time after the original author started the article. While I prefer the word "Decimilisation" I think it's inappropriate to change it. violet/riga (t) 12:07, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. I think this is a clear-cut decision based on original author choice – there were many edits that retained that original spelling. violet/riga (t) 14:46, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Shouldn't even need to be discussed - the main focus of the article is the decimalisation of the British currency, and they spell it with an s. Proto 11:59, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
  • That appears to be "Decimal Day" actually. violet/riga (t) 12:07, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
  • If the only reason to retain the incorrect spelling is because the original author spelled it incorrectly, then it should be changed. All contributions will be edited mercilessly and all that. Proto 13:47, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
    • But your justification for changing seems to be that it is that it is mainly about British currency, and that's just not true. violet/riga (t) 14:08, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
• Support - SoM 18:25, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
• Support hmm... Neutral no.... Support- The main origional contributer used the ised spelling and the article mainly concerns a British subject. But the main thing is to kept the spelling consistent through the article--Clawed 05:31, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Votes after the decision was made

• Oppose. Stick with original spelling. Jonathunder 21:41, 2005 May 26 (UTC)

Comments

Arguments for keeping it here:

• The article was originally created with this title and this spelling.
• The article is not exclusively about the decimalisation (yes, I spell it that way myself) of a country that uses the S spelling.
• "The United States was the first to introduce a decimal currency" implies that it was the first to undergo the process, and they will have spelt it this way.

Arguments for moving it to decimalisation:

• The majority of the expansion used the S spelling. This was mainly done by Seglea who rewrote and massively extended the article [1].
• The article originally focused on just the UK decimalisation and it should have used the S spelling.

Interestingly there are currently 20 main namespace links to each version of the spelling. I'm going to withdraw my objection and abstain, primarily because of the first argument for moving as shown above. violet/riga (t) 14:08, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

It is actually less than that because some of the articles that used the decimalization spelling should have been spelt decimalisation, and I have changed most of them where appropriate.--Clawed 06:10, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. violet/riga (t) 19:34, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

How did this even become a debate? 'ize' endings have always been acceptable in in all english speaking countries. 'ize' is not an Americanism except in the sense that they have not adopted the 'ise' ending at all.Zebulin (talk) 10:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Medium-sized coverage of UK case

I've removed the following section, which i assume has nothing missing from Decimal Day to here:

==Decimalisation in the United Kingdom==

main article: see Decimalisation Day

The switch from pounds shillings and pence to decimal currency started with the introduction of the 5p and 10p coins in 1968, although an earlier experiment resulted in the introduction of the Florin coin denominated at "one tenth of a pound" in 1849. The new coins were the same size and value as the old 1 shilling and 2 shilling coins respectively, and served to introduce the new decimal currency smoothly. The new 50p coin was introduced in 1969.

Decimalisation was completed on 15 February 1971 with the introduction of ½p, 1p, and 2p coins. The 20p coin came out in 1982, and the £1 coin in 1983. The old sixpence continued to circulate, valued at 2½p, but ceased to be legal tender in 1980.

The changeover period was originally scheduled to last a year, but the old currency stopped being used in about half that time. The old shilling and two shilling coins remained in circulation long after decimalisation, much to the confusion of visitors. They were finally withdrawn after new, smaller 5p and 10p coins were issued in 1990 and 1992.

Three levels of discussion of the same topic is confusing and seems unnecessary; if it is serving some purpose that can't be done better by putting additional emphasis on the "main article" in the short, chronological, graph and perhaps other places like the Euro-related one, let's hear about them.
--Jerzy•t 20:13, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

RUSSIA

Why does it say that United States was the first to introduce decimal currency? Russia introduced a decimal currency (1 Ruble = 100 kopecks) under Peter the Great 1700-1721. Please correct.Yarilo2

Corrected.Yarilo2

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was no move. No consensus exists to move this page at this time. PeterSymonds (talk) 01:36, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

---

Decimalisation → Decimal currency — The proposed name is more commonly used than Decimalisation . --Ewawer (talk) 09:53, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

• Prove it. Knepflerle (talk) 00:07, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

• • Do a google search on each and see what results you get. I get far wider breadth of material with decimal currency than decimalisationEwawer (talk) 07:30, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

• • • "Do a google search on each and see what results you get" - that's not a particularly definitive or accurate test - it's not restricted to reliable sources, and it's unclear how to measure "breadth" or what you mean by it. As move proposer it's up to you to present the argument to convince the community! I'm not sure why there shouldn't be two articles anyway, one at each title - one is a process, the other is the result (and of course you can have a decimal currency without going through decimalisation if you start with one in the first place). Knepflerle (talk) 19:35, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

• Rename to Conversion to a decimalized curency ; because there are other kinds of decimalization, like for units of measurement (ie. Metric conversion is also called decimalization), share fractionalization, etc. 76.66.197.250 (talk) 07:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
  • "Metric conversion is also called decimalization" - really? Knepflerle (talk) 11:44, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
    • Yes really, in conversion from non-decimal measures to a decimalized system, metrication is sometimes referred to as decimalization, (thought it also refers to the decimalized inch use in place of fractional inch' systems) [2] 76.66.194.154 (talk) 07:09, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

• The term Decimalisation was used by the British to brand their conversion to a decimal currency. I do not believe the term has been used in any other context. It can definitely not be used for many of the adoptions - eg the Russian adoption, nor the US one. What is the adoption of the euro to be called? Ewawer (talk) 06:29, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

So where do I find a "Decimal currency" article now?

I want to find a Decimal currency article, but was incorrectly redirected to Decimalisation, which universally means something else. I am not looking for decimalisation (my first hand experience in 1971 was enough of that for me). I want to read about currencies (such as the US dollar or the Euro) that were never decimalised, but were already decimal upon first introduction. For a meta-question example:

Why are currencies such as the US dollar or the Euro usually called decimal currency systems (divided up into smaller units of 1/10), when they seem to be centimal systems (divided up into smaller units of 1/100)?

That meta-question has nothing to do with conversion from an earlier non-decimal form (which is what decimalisation means), and everything to do with what decimal currency means. These are my two actual questions:

1. Where might I find a Decimal currency article now that Decimalisation has got its own page (as in changing a system from non-decimal to decimal or apparently centimal)?
2. Can someone please undo the obviously incorrect redirection that results from seeking an article about Decimal currency in general to this article about the singular event called Decimalisation?

With thanks, from ChrisJBenson (talk) 04:49, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

This article is missing something…

What this article doesn't explain is why decimalisation took place at all. Why did we start off with fractional/factorisational currencies, and then switch to decimal ones? Presently, this article doesn't even touch that subject. I'm fairly certain I know the answer, but I'm not sure, and someone who is an expert would do well to add this information to the article. RGloucester — ☎ 00:02, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Article contradicts itself on first decimal currency

The article claims this:

The Chinese Yuan is widely considered to be the first to use decimal currency[when?].[2]

But it also claims this:

Russia converted to a decimal currency under Tsar Peter the Great in 1704, with the ruble being equal to 100 kopeks, thus making the Russian ruble the world's first decimal currency.[3]

The pages for Ruble and Yuan also both claim they were the first. Which one is correct?

212.39.32.51 (talk) 11:26, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

I unironically wonder if decimal system is native to China, given how Chinese calendar uses 5*12 cycle. 2A00:1370:81A2:1F8E:7948:7478:689A:BE61 (talk) 08:00, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

UK not a country that has introduced the metric system. Really?

The lede states "...the metric system, which has been adopted by almost all countries (with the prominent exceptions of the United States, and, to a lesser extent, the United Kingdom)." However, the UK is now entirely metric with the exception of the mile for long distances and the pint pulled in a pub. All weights are in kilograms and grams, heights and lengths are in metres and millimetres, volumes are in litres. The law requires goods to be sold using the metric system and only the metric system is taught in schools. So the statement is utterly misleading and inaccurate. The caveat "to a lesser extent" is unclear and still gives the impression that the UK is a non-metric country which it isn't. I've tried to correct it but been reverted, so flagging it up here. Bermicourt (talk) 08:03, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

No, the UK has still only partially adopted the metric system, and then only for certain 'official' purposes, and only in a half-hearted way. There are no plans to extend that adoption, and indeed since Brexit the opposite could happen. Imperial is still mandated on road signs (miles, mph, yards, feet and inches); for the sale of some liquids (pints); and on mandatory motor vehicle fuel consumption notices (miles per gallon). Horse racing uses miles and furlongs, the railway industry uses miles and chains. Imperial is still the common system where regulations do not apply, and is still officially available to be used in most regulated situations - I can buy 4 ounces of sweets, a pound of apples, a stone of potatoes, 5 yards of cloth, etc. In fact, outside of officially regulated use, imperial measures are still generally the norm - 2-inch paint brushes; 50-inch TVs; 1-pound hammer, half-inch chisel; 12-inch rule; the list goes on. Feet and inches are used for people's heights; stones and pounds for their weights; pounds and ounces for the weight of their babies; acres for their land areas; square-feet for their room areas; miles, furlongs, chains, yards, feet, inches and inches for lengths; inches still appear on rulers and tape measures. And since Brexit, and as a result of public opinion, there is now an ongoing government consultation looking at whether to reinstate the status of imperial measures where that status was weakened previously. Opinion polls have always shown a preference for imperial units, even in the age bands that would have been taught metric units at school, and, in recognition of its still widespread use, school curricula were updated to mandate the inclusion of imperial units. -- DeFacto (talk). 09:01, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Two my kopecks: when you use "ouncez", you can't tell whether "Troy ounce" or some other ounce is used. Same goes to tons, which are either long tons, short tons, 1016kg nautical tons or 1000 kg tonnes (in layman terms, "metric tons"). The same goes to miles: regular mile is 1609m, but nautical mile is 1852m, while obsolete Russian mile is, suddenly, 7 vyorsts, e.g. over 7km. 2A00:1370:81A2:1F8E:7948:7478:689A:BE61 (talk) 07:56, 24 February 2023 (UTC)