Talk:Enlargement of the eurozone
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject European Union, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to the European Union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
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. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Starting Points
I've added some starting points to this article - basically a short summary of the position of each country in the EU aside Sweden, Denmark and the UK (so far), based on the legacy currency articles and the "x euro coins" articles. A few of these - Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, Romania, Sweden, Denmark and the UK contain very little information relevant to their subjects (the coins that these countries will/would use on joining the euro) and far more information relevant to this one - as such most of these articles could have most or all of their material merged here. Pfainuk 18:52, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Big Bang
The term "Big Bang" used a few times in "Summary of Adoption Progess" tables is not explained anywhere. Big Bang Disambiguity page refers to Big Bang Scenario but is in red (no page is available). I assume it means an instant changeover - is this correct? Tiddy (talk) 02:29, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Big merge
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) 16:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Map
Andorra is listed as opting out of the Euro, but i thought they used the euro. Arthurian Legend (talk) 02:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- They are coloured purple on the map, not red, same status as Kosovo, Montenegro and A&D - not an opt out like UK and Den.- J Logan t: 17:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Didn't Malta technically join before Cyprus?
As Malta's timezone makes it have midnight before Cyprus. According to the front page Cyprus joined before Malta! Biofoundationsoflanguage (talk) 11:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- What do you mean, Malta is on CET where as Cyprus is on EET, EAST of Malta and one hour ahead. How would Malta be an hour ahead of Cyprus, they would have to be on Moscow time or something.- J Logan t: 17:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- Doesn't count. Time zone differences are never taken into account when making comparisons like this. Unless you want to say which actually used it first. Then clearly its Cyprus. But when they join AFAIK is always just written as a particular time in treaties and stuff, and then construed to be local time of the area in question. (i.e. treaty-wise they were both just 00:00 on 01/01/08 and they each used local time to implement it) - EstoyAquí(t • c • e) 00:06, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
In that case, you could also say that Greece and Finland joined one hour ahead of France and Germany, two hours ahead of the Republic of Ireland, three hours ahead of Portugal and several hours before some of France's DOM-TOMs, at least if you look at the time when euro cash was introduced. (212.247.11.156 (talk) 08:09, 17 March 2008 (UTC))
[edit] United Kingdom euro coins
The entire contents of the article United Kingdom euro coins was either contained here or entirely speculative in nature, until I removed the speculation. This article now seems rather pointless. Is there any objection if I redirect that article here? I suggest that comments be made at Talk:United Kingdom euro coins#Crystal Balls Pfainuk talk 23:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- Disagree. While I completely agree with you in removing the speculative facts of the article, I think that people should understand two things: England does not use the euro and why. The article definitely need some sorting, but considering how many pointers out there point to it, it should be kept. We have similar issues with Andorra, Sweden, Denmark, Kosovo. ... Etc. Miguel.mateo (talk) 23:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
What's the use of an article about United Kingdom euro coins? The article would go something like this:
The United Kingdom does not use the euro, and so no United Kingdom euro coins exist. Period.
This sounds a little too short for an article. Information about why the UK doesn't use the euro would go elsewhere. (212.247.11.156 (talk) 18:07, 5 May 2008 (UTC))
- Check the article and you will see that this question is no-sense ... there is a lot of more information there. Miguel.mateo (talk) 00:08, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] How far?
Following the addition of info on Croatia and Iceland, I thought I'd see if there was consensus on the question of how far this article should go in including non-members. I think it is obvious that we should include all countries in the EU that do not use the euro.
My inclination is to say that we should, on principle we should base our decision for non-eurozone states on whether concrete moves have been made to join the euro specifically rather than the EU in general. That is, if Croatia (for example) is currently planning its eurozone entry in public, then we can comment on it. If not, then we can't. Given that Croatia doesn't know when it will join the EU yet, I find the latter position rather more likely. The current addition on Croatia needs some sources to back it up, and I suspect original research (possibly in the form of original synthesis) in the conclusion that Croatia meets the convergence criteria. My point is that I see little benefit in including countries where there is concrete information on joining the EU generally, but none on the eurozone specifically.
OTOH there are sources demonstrating that Iceland was considering joining the euro despite not being a member of the EU (here, here here and in the list here). This was apparently ruled out in February but is worthy of mention I think.
Any thoughts? Pfainuk talk 22:48, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
- Iceland agree (they want the euro not the union). Croatia, it is interesting that they may join the Eurozone even before of some of the current members since they do meet the criteria. If properly sourced I will vote to keep it, just considering that they may join immediately after they join the union. But, it is also a big gray area, so either (keep it or delete it) is fine with me. Miguel.mateo (talk) 22:56, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree that the bit about Croatia should stay if it can be sourced. So right now I'm going to put a cite tag on the Croatian section and see what happens. The current reference for the figures is to Economy of Croatia, an article which doesn't mention eurozone membership - and Wikipedia is not a reliable source anyway so I will remove that reference. Pfainuk talk 22:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
