Talk:Deutsche Mark

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of the WikiProject Numismatics, which is an attempt to facilitate the categorization and creation of accurate and formal Numismatism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join and see a list of open tasks to help with.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Contents

[edit] Comment

The picture of the 20 Mark bill (added by Quadell) is not a Deutsche Mark note.The DM was only issued by the Bundesbank after WW2. The picture shows German money from WW2, ie. Reichsmark. Lschulz 12:17, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I cut the following bit from the spelling note:

"because in German you cannot put an adjective and a noun together"

That's nonsense. Just think about words like "Grünspan" (verdigris). Grün is an adjective (green) and Span is a noun (chip/swarf/splinter). -- Ashmodai 17:23, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mark or mark?

Is the name properly capitalized as "Deutsche Mark" or can this article be moved to the currency-name standard of "Deutsche mark"?

AlbertR 19:36, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Either "Deutsche Mark" (correct in German) or "German mark" (correct in English). Definitely not "Deutsche mark". ナイトスタリオンㇳ–ㇰ 20:53, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
Ahhh, now I see. For the record, I prefer "German mark". AlbertR 21:02, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
Since this is the English wikipedia, so do I. (Notwithstanding my native language. ;)) ナイトスタリオンㇳ–ㇰ 21:48, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
I always thought currencies were generally capitalized as proper names, but a quick look through our various currency articles seems to indicate I've been wrong all my life :P . Anyway, I agree it should be either Deutsche Mark or German mark, although I have no special preference for any of the two versions -- Ferkelparade π 13:32, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
It ought to be added that, descriptively, deutschmark (no space, lower case) was in common use in the news media as the English-language term for the currency: see [1]. This appalled some Germans and was deprecated by a few prescriptive English reference works. While it may have been "cod German" by origin, it evolved into a phenomenon of educated English usage. 80.171.183.49 13:03, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
Deutschmark was in common usage amongst English speaking people (or UK residents at least), but it is pretty incorrect. I think a redirect would be valid, but it's not an official name for the currency in any way. It did appear in Monty Python's money song tho ("the deutschmark's getting dearer" or something along those lines). Ashmodai 12:22, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
As I know, Deutschmark was known and used in the US long before Monty Python's. It came up by the time of change from Reichsmark to Deutsche Mark. I will look for more details. --Grabert 02:50, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
What about Rentenmark and Reichmark? How should we write them?
  • Rentenmark
  • rentenmark
  • pension mark
  • something else?
The spelling is getting out of control. Let's have a consistent style, and I will volunteer to clean up. --Chochopk 05:32, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
I say "rentenmark", unless "pension mark" was in use in English. —Nightstallion (?) 10:32, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Not as standard usage, which is "rentenmark"

I'm proposing changing all mark to Mark. More detail on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numismatics#German unit --Chochopk 22:59, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

If nobody responds, I will just do it. --Chochopk 12:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Afaik, "pension mark" is wrong as in "rentenmark" the word "Rente" does not refer to "pension". Otherwise you (all you English-speaking people) should stick to your rules ("Deutsche mark", that is) as we Germans capitalize your pounds and dollars according to our rules aswell. --A native German

Next thing coming to my mind: What about the plural? Is it "Deutsche marks" or "Deutsche mark"? (In German, the latter one is correct - there is no plural form) --see above
Mark, of course. —Nightstallion (?) 11:19, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I was told by a native German speaker that using a different plural form has different connotations - that apparently, one form is related in some way to Communism. However, I cannot remember whether it was a modified form (i.e. "Marke"/"Marks") that connoted this - which I suspect it was - or otherwise. I will not make any alterations myself, but was wondering if anyone has any knowledge of this (whether it is a fallacy, or a common stereotype). Lordrsb 14:23, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

First: ALL German Nouns are capitalized–no matter what. Second: It's pluralized in the English version but not the German (2 Deutsche Mark = 2 German Marks) but it should be noted that they'd typically just say "2 Mark" just as we don't usually say "2 US Dollars" unless there's ambiguity.·:RedAugust 12:34, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

The following discussion is an archived debate 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 debate was Not moved: No consensus, common English form, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Style does not specifically apply. —Centrxtalk • 03:12, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Page move: German mark → German Mark

[edit] Support

  • Support See Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Style, see my argument at Talk:Slovak koruna. --Chochopk 01:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Support IF the same capitalization be applied to other currencies, e.g. the American dollar.--Húsönd 14:07, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Support but only if the policy is restricted to German and any other languages where nouns are capitalized. To be frank, the text is what really matters as there will always be a redirect from the various possible combinations of capitalization.
    Dove1950 10:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Support per Dove1950; might as well be completely consistent. —Nightstallion (?) 10:32, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Oppose

  • Strongly oppose; against Wikipedia policy on capitalization. Use English Septentrionalis 00:47, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose per [2] --KPbIC 01:08, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Strongly oppose; this is english WP. To use german cap rules here is wrong. BTW, what would you do with languages that have not lower or upper case? Create middle case latin letters for them? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 14:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose: this is the English language wikipedia and we use English here. Thumbelina 17:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Abstain

  • Frankly, I'm not quite sure on this. I'm quite adamant about using English demonyms and local names (in Latin transliteration, if necessary), but unsure as to whether the local name used should also bring its own capitalisation rules with it...Nightstallion (?) 15:38, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
    Made up my mind, changed to suppport. —Nightstallion (?) 10:32, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

[edit] conversion rate to reichsmark

I challenge the conversion ration to reichsmark written in the article (100 Reichsmark = 4.75 Deutsche Mark), germannotes.com, which looks like a well done website states "Each person received 40 Deutsche Mark and was able to exchange Reichsmark for Deutsche Mark at a fixed rate of 10 to 1". And an article by Global Financial Data says "The western Allies introduced the Deutsche Mark (DEM) on June 20, 1948, allowing conversion at 1 Deutsche Mark equal to 10 Reichsmark, though with limits on the rights of conversion. The black market rate was around 1000 Reichsmark to the Deutschemark." And Global Financial Data currency histories table listed it as "1 DEM = 10 DER", although I personally question the accuracy of Global Financial Data as well. --Chochopk 06:39, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Bond Conversion of 600RM to 50 DM] German information on the conversion The 60 DM was the maximum limit at a conversion rate of 1RM = 1DM. The exchange seems very complex, and depended on who was exchanging the money.In english Ok u are right, so please change it la. Enlil Ninlil 09:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Does anyone know?

You may have seen those sales pitches, selling the new Iraqi Dinar notes. Many of these promotions claim that speculators were able to buy up severely devalued Deutschmarks (and Yen) right after WW2, subsequently earning sizable profits as the defeated Axis powers stabilized and their currencies appreciated. Is this true or false? Rearden Metal 07:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

This is certainly false - there was no Deutschmark right after WW2. The currency of Germany was the Reichsmark through WW2 and until 1948. Buying up Reichsmark would have been of no use since it indeed was worthless after WW2, but it never recovered. Instead it was abandoned and the new Deutsche Mark was issued in 1948, but there was no free market to exchange it into Deutsche Mark at any profitable rate. Every citizen could exchange a small amount of Reichsmark at a good rate (to get them through the time until their next payday arrived), but the remaining amount of Reichsmark was practically worthless. Anything else would have dragged the new D-Mark down into hyperinflation instantly, ridiculing the whole exercise. So, to conclude, no, as as far as the Deutsche Mark is concerned, this is almost certainly a fraudulent claim. I don't know about the Yen, but frankly, I wouldn't expect any more truth to those claims concerning post-WW2 yen. 84.148.115.173 02:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pfennig markings

The Pfennig coins bear a letter between the oak sprigs on the reverse side. Does anyone know what these letters represent. I have identified "D", "F", and "G" so far. 168.103.228.69 19:01, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

These letters indicate where the coin was minted - according to this, D indicates Munich, F Stuttgart, G Karlsruhe and J Hamburg. The letters were present on all German coins from the pre-Euro period, not just on the Pfennings (and a quick glance in my wallet confirms that the same letters still appear on German Euro coins, presumably indicating the same mints) -- Ferkelparade π 21:44, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
A is for Berlin, B for Vienna during WW2 and M for another place, but I forget where is eastern germany. Enlil Ninlil 02:22, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
I have a Großchen (10 Pfennig) from 1875 and it has two small "H"s under both claws of the Prussian Eagle, what mint is that? If I can get a picture on my computer I will post it. I have the picture posted below with the "H"s highlighted where they are on the coin --JonnyLightning 22:37, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Image:Großchen.jpg
It's “Groschen”, by the way. Großchen would mean something like “little big one”, but would certainly not make anybody think of money. :-) — Mütze 14:56, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Euro changeover

One sentence in the beginning of the text states:

"The Deutsche Mark ceased to be legal tender immediately upon the introduction of the euro — in contrast to the other eurozone nations, where the euro and legacy currency circulated side by side for up to two months."

OK, so all DEM banknotes and coins became invalid on 1999-01-01.

However, the next sentence states:

"However, DM coins and banknotes continued to be accepted as valid forms of payment in Germany up until 28 February 2002."

OK, so all DEM banknotes and coins became invalid on 2002-02-28.

Can anyone check the correctness of these statements? It would be impossible to use the euro banknotes and coins already in 1999 (because they weren't printed or minted at that time), so I suppose it's the second one that's correct? (58.188.97.134 14:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC))

Well, in my understanding neither of these statements are completely correct. On 01-Jan-2002 the euro banknotes and coins were introduced. Until 28-Feb-2002 both the old German Mark banknotes and coins, as well the new euro ones, were legal tender. All goods could be bought by any combination of currencies, and the seller was obliged to accept both currencies during these two months. After 28-Feb-2002 the German Mark did not exactly became invalid, but ceased to be legal tender. The Bundesbank will exchange old German Mark denominations (banknotes and coins) into euros for indefinite future, so the German Mark banknotes and coins are not invalid. However, the acceptance of German Marks is up to the seller's decision. If he's willing to accept the burden of exchanging at the Bundesbank, customers might be able to buy something for old German Marks even now. In fact, several companies did some marketing actions ("we still accept your old German marks"), to benefit from people still in procession of German Marks. I do understand, that there are still billions (!) of German Marks out in the world, that haven't been exchanged as of now, 5 years after to introduction of euro banknotes and coins. - So, just my two cents. Cheers, MikeZ 19:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Sorry, but again - Proposed move to "German Mark" (with capitalizaton)

Sorry, I just came aware of the survey conducted in August 2006, about this very some proposal. As I do have one new, but I really think quite significant argument, I'm going forward to propose the move to "German Mark" again.

The point is, that I did come across quite a lot of different articles in English Wikipedia that apply the same capitalization to other topics as well. Most prominent examples that I'm aware of are "British Empire" and "United States", and none would say this has anything to do with German spelling :-). So in fact, the capitalization should be applied, because it can be correct in English, it definitely is correct in German, and we should apply the same capitalization rule to all articles consistently. Additionally, the title should match the predominant usage within the article.

So, I'm ready for your arguments. Cheers, MikeZ 12:44, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:200-DEM-REV-162x67.jpg

Image:200-DEM-REV-162x67.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 23:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:200-DEM-OBV-162x67.jpg

Image:200-DEM-OBV-162x67.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 23:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:20-DEM-REV-138x68.jpg

Image:20-DEM-REV-138x68.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 23:42, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:20-DEM-OBV-138x68.jpg

Image:20-DEM-OBV-138x68.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 23:43, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:1000-DEM-REV-178x83.jpg

Image:1000-DEM-REV-178x83.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 01:21, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:1000-DEM-OBV-178x83.jpg

Image:1000-DEM-OBV-178x83.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 01:22, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:100-DEM-REV-154x74.jpg

Image:100-DEM-REV-154x74.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 01:23, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:100-DEM-OBV-154x74.jpg

Image:100-DEM-OBV-154x74.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 01:23, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:10-DEM-REV-130x65.jpg

Image:10-DEM-REV-130x65.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 01:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:10-DEM-OBV-130x65.jpg

Image:10-DEM-OBV-130x65.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 01:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:500-DEM-REV-170x80.jpg

Image:500-DEM-REV-170x80.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 04:57, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:500-DEM-OBV-170x80.jpg

Image:500-DEM-OBV-170x80.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 04:57, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:50-DEM-REV-146x71.jpg

Image:50-DEM-REV-146x71.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 04:58, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:50-DEM-OBV-146x71.jpg

Image:50-DEM-OBV-146x71.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 04:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:5-DEM-REV-122x62.jpg

Image:5-DEM-REV-122x62.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 05:00, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:5-DEM-OBV-122x62.jpg

Image:5-DEM-OBV-122x62.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 05:01, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pfennig Plural

i was taught that "Pfennige" refers to a number of 1-pfennig-coins, whereas "Pfennig" would be the correct plural to talk about a pfennig amount. i think you have pretty much the same thing with pennies and pence in the UK. any second opinion on that?

XMCHx 00:53, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

That's a strange aspect of the German language, money is mostly given in singular form, even when the number is larger than one, f.e. "Das kostet 23 Pfennig." ("This costs 23 pfennigs.") The term "Pfennige" isn't wrong, but it is considered unusual in that meaning. If the number is undefined, "Pfennige" would be the correct form: "Das wird dich einige Pfennige kosten." ("This will cost you some pfennigs.") --32X 08:03, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
To give an historical perspective, before the unification of Germany in 1871, some states used Pfennige as the plural form on their coins.
Dove1950 14:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Move to Deutsche Mark

I'm not entirely opposed but this should have been discussed here first as the name doesn't quite follow the standard set by Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Style. It's an awkward one, as the style would give us German Deutsche Mark which looks silly once you know that Deutsche means German. Any one got any comments?
Dove1950 (talk) 15:20, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Common sense should trump arbitrary style guidelines. When we have guidelines that give silly results, logical and reason should prevail. I think the original logic for having an article called French franc is that the French qualifier was added because there is more than one currency that uses "franc". In this case, there is no other currency officially named "Deutsche Mark", so adding the qualifier German is redundant. I've even noticed in most articles where it is referred to, the abbreviation "DM" or words "Deutsche Mark" are piped to "German mark" which is really redundant effort, calling it a Deutsche Mark in the article, then redirecting that to German mark article which then calls the currency Deutsche Mark again all through it. It isn't quite sensible. Additionally, having been involved in some other naming discussions about foreign things, it is generally agreed that the common usage in English should be the article title, and in English Deutsch Mark is much more commonly used than German mark, (a terribly non-specific title) especially due to the fact that more than one entity considered "Germany" has used at least four different currencies containing the word "Mark". pschemp | talk 19:53, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Common sense can also mean keeping to simple guidelines and thereby maintaining consistency. None-the-less, Deutsche Mark presents a possibly unique case study. The fly in the ointment as things currently stand is that there have been two distinct Deutche Mark, one in West Germany and later the reunited Germany, and one in East Germany. Even calling the article German Deutsche Mark doesn't solve that problem. Suggestions?
Dove1950 (talk) 20:21, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
  • While the East German currency was briefly also called Deutsche Mark, that wasn't how it was referred to commonly in English, even from the beginning. Since that article is at it's name in English, East German Mark, I think the difference is clear. When someone refers to DM, they mean West. East was always quantified. pschemp | talk 14:05, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
To compound the issue is the fact that it commonly got called Deutschmark in English Agathoclea (talk) 13:26, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm happy to discount Deutschmark as an aberation (though it should be mentioned in the text). Any more comments?
Dove1950 (talk) 23:25, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Can I request that this discussion be taken up once more? Editors have started linking to this new article title and, if we decide that Deutsche Mark is not acceptable, we'll have to change the links again.
Dove1950 (talk) 23:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I think the lack of outcry speaks for itself. pschemp | talk 14:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Move to German Deutsche Mark

I know it's "bold", but I've moved this article to German Deutsche Mark as this is the proper name according to the standard adopted by Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics. Let's see if there's any more discussion now. If you want reasons beyond complying to the standard, then one is that not everyone will know that Deutsche means German.
Dove1950 (talk) 15:55, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Bold but wrong. Please don't move it again. Relying on people to be ignorant is not exactly the best reason I've ever heard for an article name....in fact it's a bit offensive considering that English speakers aren't isolated in the world. I'm sorry but this is a place where common sense trumps arbitrary standards. Deutsche Mark *is* the most commonly used name in English period, and is only used to refer to the Western and later reunified currency. East German mark was always referred to in English with the East qualifier and there never was any confusion. You can see in the history of this page that the person who undid your move agrees with that. We should strive for simplicity and clarity on this encyclopedia and when abitrary guidlines get in the way, exceptions are made, especially when they advise such silliness as the equivalent of "German German Mark". pschemp | talk 14:09, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
At least you're not being so dismissive any more. You're right that Deutsche Mark was a commonly used name for this currency, although Mark was probably as common if not more common in spoken English and German. No matter, Deutsche Mark was the official name and that trumps common. However, we should not assume that Deutsche is immediately understood as meaning German, nor should we assume that there is no good reason for sticking to a perfectly good standard (it's far from an "arbitrary guideline"). We should strive for accuracy and clarity. Both are served by German Deutsche Mark, hence my move. Just because you know what German Deutsche Mark can be translated as doesn't mean that others know that. Wikipedia must be clear to all, not a select minority. I'm not relying on people being ignorant, rather allowing for those who are, as any good encyclopaedia should. At the very least, I've added a note at the top to clearly indicate that this article does not cover all Deutsche Mark issues. That's needed whatever we call this article.
Dove1950 (talk) 17:46, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] First 2 DM coin

Simple question, did this circulate?
Dove1950 (talk) 15:20, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Simple answer, is yes. It was a regular issue despite the different portraits. Like the 25 U.S cents, 1 U.K pound. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 21:37, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
The reason I asked is that it is very rare today. Having lived in Germany, I know that it is a very expensive coin to purchase and one that is rarely seen at dealers. Hence, it has always struck me as unlikely that this coin circulated, at least not in the kinds of numbers as the 1 and 5 DM coins from the same period. My question had nothing to do with the change of design.
Dove1950 (talk) 15:23, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Check here http://sammler.com/muenzdb/index.html aparently there were 75.3 million issued from four mints. Could be because of desirability that it is rare.Enlil Ninlil (talk) 04:38, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
That's it! It states that, due to confusion with the 1DM, this coin was withdrawn in 1958. Thanks a lot. I've been wondering about this for more than 20 years!
Dove1950 (talk) 23:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] British Armed Forces Special Voucher (BAFSV)

British forces serving in Germany post war were issued with BAFSVs (pronounced "baffs"), instead of D-Marks. A quick web search confirms they were still in use in the early 1960s, and that they had denominations in D-Marks etc. They had been withdrawn by the late 1960s when I served there. I understand that their purpose was to prevent black market activities. Presumably the US and French forces in Germany also had such arrangements. Should these be mentioned in D-Mark article, with a link to a separate article about the BAFSVs etc? Can anyone help? I do not know enough to be able to contribute more than a stub article.GilesW (talk) 19:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)