Talk:History of the euro

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Big merge[edit]

Please, join the discussion on the articles merging on the Euro talk page. Don't write anything here to avoid writing the same in different places. Thanks.--Dima1 (talk) 16:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aftermath[edit]

I had dual currency receipts with totals in Euros & Greek drachmas and Euros & Spanish pesetas in 2007, but haven't put this in the article, as I am not sure if they are a legal requirement in France, but just an option in Greece and Spain
Arjayay (talk) 15:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't put it in, but I went to a supermarket there a year or so ago, and it still did print the franc equivalent at the bottom of the receipt.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Partial merge into this article from Maltese euro coins, as per discussion[edit]

Some information in the article Maltese euro coins does not follow the topic or subject of the article. As per discussion on the talk page there, the sections Design Selection Process, Euro Changeover and Adoption, Euro Centres in Malta and Gozo and parts of Collector Coins will be integrated into this article to further elaborate on the subject of euro introduction. Since Malta is one of three recent EMU members which are not represented as part of this article's topic, the integration will provide an update. Cheers. The € • T/C 08:23, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if Design Selection Process can accuratly be a part of this article. Any suggestions as to where that section can go? Cheers. The € • T/C 08:23, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be a good idea to integrate the Euro Changeover and Adoption into this article, I do think that Design Selection Process is still a relevant part of the Maltese euro coins article however if there is a more suited article I wouldn't object. I would suggest that for Euro Centres in Malta and Gozo the availability of information centers should be mentioned in this article and give a link to a list that contains the list of locations.Kevin hipwell (talk) 09:43, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you merge it here, I will be trying to cut it back considerably. We did not go into the nuts and bolts, and we're not listing the (I think it is) 53 regional banks where you can exchange DM for euro. We're not going to need the Euro information centres, for example. If you want to keep all the info, I suggest its own article, say Introduction of the Euro in Malta, with a summary section here and a main article to that article.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wehwalt, as Kevin hipwell mentioned above, the idea is to include a reference to the fact that there were centers, not list them and then provide an outside link to a full list. Cheers. The € • T/C 19:34, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inclined to leave "Design selection process" in the Maltese euro coins article... at least until we can find a better home for it. Cheers. The € • T/C 19:34, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just do your best not to overwhelm the article. The Malta situation should only be a small part of it.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:39, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what 'overwhelm' would constitute, but the Slovenian, Cypriot and Maltese adoption of the euro are integral parts of this topic, since they have become a part of the EMU. This is the first step in improving the article to include details of those country's introduction of the euro, so to speak. Cheers. The € • T/C 21:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just gone ahead with completing the integration of information from Maltese euro coins into this article. Cheers. The € • T/C 21:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, what has been done in this article and in the Maltese euro coins article, makes now a lot of sense. I do believe the new user that contributed all this information in the Maltese article came up with a lot of valid and recent information, worth a lot, it may be worth to search for the same information for the other countries. Also the "Design selection process", again to my opinion, makes a lot of sense to be kept there. I wish we have the same information for the other countries (I have tried) but unfortunately, the designs of the coins that never made it are copyrighted material, and cannot be simply displayed here.
I would suggest separating out the Maltese (and other expansion material) from the story of what happened in the initial introduction. As it stands now, we're reading about what happened in December 2001, we jerk ahead to December 2007, back to January 2002, back to January 2008. It reads a little disjointed. I suggest we complete the story of the initial introduction, have a section for Malta, then talk about Slovenia and Cyprus. If we do get info on the other countries, it will make things even more disjointed, do you see what I mean?--Wehwalt (talk) 11:15, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Wehwalt I agree the expansion should not really be 'mixed' with the initial introduction.
It should come after it as a new section with the objective to become its own article.Kevin hipwell (talk) 18:56, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've done it. I deleted duplicate info on the wooden box sets, and also deleted the Cypriot and Slovene info as it is really part of Enlargement of the eurozone. If you can find info on how things were done in Slovenia or Cyprus, by all means include it. Do we have info on the exchangability of the Maltese Pound?--Wehwalt (talk) 21:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it was best to remove Cypriot and Slovene because they belong to this article even though the information is available on Enlargement of the eurozone.Kevin hipwell (talk) 21:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, put it back then. I'd suggest after the Malta info.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:38, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wehwalt I added the info you wanted on the Slovene, I also put back the info for Cypriot.
I placed this info before Malta to get chronological order.
I agree that the Malta info is a little overwhelming for the size of this article and that some of that info could be more appropriately fitted elsewhere, for example the information on the first Maltese Euro Set could be fitted in an article that contains information on all euro sets, However I have not found such articles (I hope to create the euro sets article at some point) so I think that the info is best suited for this article until a better fit is found.Kevin hipwell (talk) 22:17, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It will do for now. I'd like to see the info on the sets eventually moved. The article really doesn't deal with the numismatic aspects of the euro transition, except where it touches on the ministate issues.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everything is going as planned- it is going to be spun into another article eventually. Thanks for cleaning up the copy edits I made originally- it was done hastily and without alot of forethought- other than I wanted to get the information off Maltese euro coins article. Cheers. The € • T/C 02:46, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Macro[edit]

The article reads "For macro-economic theory, see below." but there's no macro section. Has it been moved somewhere else? I don't know where this macro has gone, so I don't want to fix it myself. Thanks 81.107.209.45 (talk) 02:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Transition in germany[edit]

I'm pretty sure DM was legal tender for the first two months of 2002. At least all shops would take it, but only give you change in euro. The article is unclear on that. 91.66.153.232 (talk) 21:11, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Legally, it wasn't. And I went to Germany in January 2002 and had to exchange my money. Perhaps some shops were more liberal, after all, the money wasn't becoming valueless. But they didn't have to take it.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:40, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Jacques Santer and Yves-Thibault de Silguy presenting the euro.jpg[edit]

The image Image:Jacques Santer and Yves-Thibault de Silguy presenting the euro.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:39, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposing merge of Euro day[edit]

Do I even need to make an argument for this? - J.Logan`t: 11:42, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a practical matter, just delete the other article. Call it a merge if you like, but the only thing it has which is useful here it that very nice image.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:24, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nice image? Lord, if I lived in Frankfurt I'd so go at that hideous thing with a sledgehammer. Its a visual monstrosity that destroys any illusion of style, sophistication or maturity surrounding the euro. It looks like it was designed by a primary school teacher and hence makes the euro look like a play ground joke. But my personal grudges aside, there was some useful info down there but I think it is all covered by other articles. The dates are pointless and the collectors sets are far from notable. I would have suggested a delete but then we have to go through the WP bureaucracy - easier to replace it with a redirect.- J.Logan`t: 17:49, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All it was, was a list of dates of accession to the euro. All that's in this article. Incidently, I'm not sure that's still up in Frankfurt. I was at the Bundesbank office in Frankfurt and the ECB office is across the plaza and I don't remember seeing it. Perhaps I overlooked it or just don't remember. And if the monstrosity is still there, well, Germans have been known to go for that kind of thing--Wehwalt (talk) 18:08, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah, I was thinking of this article - I was debating about having a hack at this but I don't have the energy. But am I the only one who thinks that the bottom section of this article is not only in a dire state of disrepair but also totally useless? Might just be the mood I'm in today. As for Welthauptstadt, well even that had better taste. Soooo glad that's not there if has indeed vanished. With luck, the new ECB building will be a tad more tasteful, something serious yet stylish you know? Like a cross between a Zurich banker and a Milan fashion designer. Off track now, work is done.- J.Logan`t: 19:34, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I must say, although I agree with the merge, that the information in the the euro-day article was very easy to see, while in this article you have to surf through the text to find the adoption dates. Would it be possible to add one more collumn to the ERM II table "adoption date"? That will solve my problem ... Regards, Miguel.mateo (talk) 20:25, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What? 1 January, 1 January, 1 January.....- J.Logan`t: 22:23, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, I am talking about the year, it might sound obvios for all of us right now, but it is not obvious for people not familiar with the topic, it will not be obvious when the other members start joining. BTW, we could eliminate the "1 January" portion, but we may see adoption in other date soon. Try to understand: if I want to see when did Greece adopt the euro, what do I have to do to find that information? Miguel.mateo (talk) 23:12, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I think you just did it (or was it there before and I did not see it?). Miguel.mateo (talk) 23:18, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion[edit]

What do people think of expanding this article out to become a full History of the euro? We just need to add the data before, such as European Monetary Institute and older discussions (if anyone has some good texts on the early history, it would be useful) and to elaborate the enlargement data to include information such as fights over ECB independence and strengthening of the euro group.- J.Logan`t: 08:48, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know that in such an article, the focus on 1/1/2002 would be appropriate.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:40, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would support this move and expansion. I proposed something similar in 2007. Eurozone may remain an separate article, but Enlargement of the Eurozone should be merged into History of the euro, I think. The elements of Enlargement of the Eurozone relating to future enlargement should perhaps be moved to a new article called Future enlargement of the Eurozone. - SSJ ☎ 14:23, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Was this the megamerger that got panned?--Wehwalt (talk) 15:07, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
1/1/2002 isn't an awfully big issue. We defiantly need more pre-2002 history. If it is a separate article, there might be too much of a disconnect and repetition of background. In my view, the eurozone enlargement article would retain a decent historical section, though it would forward to here for detail. I for one am not proposing a megamerger, more a megaexpansion.- J.Logan`t: 15:29, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've drafted out something here based on a few basic media reports and the Economic and Monetary Union of the European Union (this I think would have its content merged and I'll rewrite what's left to something more relevant). It needs lots of work and elaboration from decent sources but as an idea of what we'll be looking at?- J.Logan`t: 17:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Looks OK. Maybe we could spin off the late 2000s expansions into a separate article. Those entered this one over my objection and with promises to take them out later, which has not occurred.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:07, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They are an odd inclusion here, however they would be integral to the general history of the euro. Without them it would just be development and introduction of the euro which, while an improvement, is stopping short of the finish line. However I do sympathise and suggest that the door to a spin off be kept open in the event the enlargements detail grows too big for the article. At present, it is just four countries - hardly a stand alone article.- J.Logan`t: 16:54, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I guess so. Hopefully it will be cleaned up by someone.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:07, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay then, as there are no further objections I'll put in my current draft then and move the page. Lets see how it goes.- J.Logan`t: 18:23, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Background section[edit]

Jlogan, you asked in your deletion "how is that relevant to the euro?" from the relaunch section. I ask you in turn, how can it be NOT not relevant to the history of the euro that the single most important European currency that founded the euro had to be bribed/blackmailed in 1989/1990 into joining? --Stor stark7 Speak 17:35, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to Kremlin records that became public in 2009, the governments of both the U.K. and France opposed the German reunification that occurred in 1990, following the collapse of East Germany in 1999.[1] The U.K. government also asked the Soviet leader Gorbachev to do what he could to stop it,[1] and a representative of French President François Mitterrand reportedly told an aide to Gorbachev that "France by no means wants German reunification, although it realises that in the end it is inevitable."[1]
In October 2009, France released its archives from 1989-90 relating to the process of German reunification.[2] It was revealed that President Mitterand agreed to German unification in exchange for a commitment from German Chancellor Kohl to the European Economic and Monetary Union.[2] This Franco-German political trade led to the statement in February 1990 by the UK Prime minister that "The problems will not be overcome by strengthening the EC. Germany’s ambitions would then become the dominant and active factor,".
  1. ^ a b c "Thatcher told Gorbachev Britain did not want German reunification". Michael Binyon. Times. September 11, 2009. Retrieved 2009-11-08.
  2. ^ a b Ben Knight (2009-11-08). "Germany's neighbors try to redeem their 1989 negativity". Deutsche Welle. Retrieved 2009-11-09.

2010 speculative attack on the euro[edit]

What's this I hear about a speculative attack on the euro? From what I can gather, during the recession there has been a concerted effort by the Americans and British to bring down the single currency (which is being resisted by the eurozone, and apparently China). I feel something about this should be included. - Anxietycello (talk) 18:34, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline of Euro adoption[edit]

Hi, I would like to propose a "Timeline of Euro adoption" article alongside this "History of the Euro" as we have for various other articles on "transitional subjects", f.e. "Binary prefixes" and "Timeline of binary prefixes". What I envision to be included in the timeline are not only the "official" dates, but also a growing record of smaller related events, effects and innovations (including interesting dead-ends) in technology and society prior and after the adoption. To give you an idea, things that come to my mind right now are the development of special signs and symbols for the Euro, the revision of character sets and keyboard layouts, the adoption in operating systems and devices, strange outgrows like "€uro" or "teuro" etc. I think such a list could be quite interesting to study not only by us today, but also by historians in the future. While I could contribute on several such events, it would be out of scope in the present form of the article, that's why I am proposing the creation of such a timeline. Once the important official events would be listed there (probably to be started by someone who has a good overview on the subject), the larger community (including myself) could start to collect and fill in all those smaller events mentioned in other articles or elsewhere. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 14:21, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Like many graphics on this page, the information for image attribution is sub-optimal (e.g., does not include a creator), lacks accessibility content, and fails to fully specify the dataset. This is a shame, because I'd like to attribute the graphic to the creator. It would also be nice for the data to be stored somewhere accessible that allowed for easy updating. Cerberus (talk) 21:01, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on History of the euro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:22, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:31, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on History of the euro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:42, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:02, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Work in Progress Timeline of Emergence Euro[edit]

I'd like to integrate the following timeline that reflect how euro was introduced over time since beginning as a unit of account. 

 7.2. From the dollar to the euro: successive units of account 

 1) 1951-58: the ECSC adopted the unit of account used by the European Payments Union, namely the US dollar. 
 2) 1958-60: The ECSC budget was expressed in a ‘gold parity’ unit of account which corresponded to a given weight of fi ne gold (0.88867088 grams) in accordance with the Bretton Woods > Agreements. 
 3) 1961 onwards: Use of this ‘gold parity’ unit of account was extended to the EEC and Euratom. Following the crisis in the international monetary system in the early 1970s, all reference to gold was dropped, and so this unit of account was no longer of any use and the search started for a replacement. 
 4) 1977/78-80: A unit of account based on a ‘basket’ of different Community currencies was introduced; this was the European unit of account THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES GOVERNING THE COMMUNITY BUDGET 199 (EUA) which, it was hoped, would be unaffected by external monetary fl uctuations and therefore more stable. 
 5) 1981-98: The ecu was applied to the general budget; it was based on the same basket as the EUA but, unlike its predecessor, was subject to regular revision of the amounts. 
 6) 1999 onwards: The euro became the single currency of the new economic and monetary union and was applied to the EU’s general budget.

Text from EU Public Finance by © European Communities 2008. Copyright licensing: "Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged."

Xinbenlv (talk) 22:28, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Exchange rate goes back to 1958?[edit]

A web site named Trading Economics has a graph of the euro / dollar exchange rate (see tradingeconomics dot com/euro-area/currency).

If you click "All" below the graph to see all available data, it goes back to Jan 1, 1958.

If the euro did not exist until 1999, this seems impossible. Please improve the article by explaining how is this possible. Is Trading Economics just making up most of that data? 67.214.11.97 (talk) 05:31, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_the_euro&oldid=1202733800"