Talk:Tables of historical exchange rates to the USD

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.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
Citation
This page was cited by Vanderbilt Law Review


TO DO

- Handle EUR in a user-friendly way
- All remaining countries

Pcb21 15:26 Apr 22, 2003 (UTC) 28.11.2006 If Data is from CIA they are liars! look at UK 2006 - range is between 0.58 and 0.511 dream on with your crazy ignorant data!

You muppet. Ever considered that might be the number of pounds to the dollar? try yahoo: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=GBPUSD=X&t=5y&l=on&z=m&q=l&c= values are between 1.75 and 1.95 - so USDGBP values must be between .58 and .511. Still got a problem with the data?

Contents

[edit] =USD is free falling

USD is free falling. Pretty hard to say "exchange rate of 2003", when it may differ by more than 15%. -grin 07:22 21 May 2003 (UTC)

15% seems like a fairly reasonable change for a bad year. What else are you going to use, the Zimbabwean Dollar? Please don't say gold - it doubled in 1980 and then halved over the next three years. Volatility like that would make the historic values useless.
Very true, I believe the current figures for 2002 and earlier are all start of year figures from CIA factbook. I will quote figures with a date from now on.

No reason not to do it more frequently than once per year (just change column headings) if energy permits though Pcb21 09:03 21 May 2003 (UTC)

Re: Hong Kong currency's fluctuations. Very limited, since the HK$ is pegged to the US$. olivier 05:11 14 Jul 2003 (UTC)




[edit] This article is quite poor!

Comments like this are taken more seriously if try to fix the article yourself.

The currencies are too numerous

The number of currencies around is hardly the fault of the article.

, and hard to draw any real conclusions.

I don't really follow this. It's a table of data.

The data does not go back far enough (20 or 30 years would be interesting)

The data was taken from the CIA for all years available. If more substantial data is available let me have it.
Good luck finding that data. The data from various sources doesn't even add up (UN, World Bank, etc.)
especially going back more than a few years. If someone could figure this out and get data going back to
1980 it would be quite a feat. I honestly don't think it will happen.

and the British pound is listed under F, rather than U for United Kingdom.

I have fixed this, you could've done the same.
PS. If you haven't already guessed, yes this data did take a very long time to get together.
Please sign your edits.
Pcb21| Pete 20:49, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I added a table of Argentine currencies monthly exchange rates from 1914 to 2004 on Economy of Argentina article. Alpertron 16:06, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Huh?

I stumbled across this page & was bewildered that it gives an exchange rate for the Eritrean Nafka against the dollar for 1986 -- several years before the Nafka existed! I looked thru the page history, in hope of learnign just what happened & if it can easily be fixed, but the years at the top of the table have been moved around & reassigned while the values in the fields have been left alone. This article's become a mess, & it badly needs cleaning up. -- llywrch 03:04, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] typo

There's a typo in the table. In the row with years, 1992 is typed between 1989 and 1991 - should probably be 1990 ;-)

Secondly, what does this table take into account? all adjusted for purchasing power parity and current prices or something else??

  • Just to add to the problems, pretty much all of the Codes for the Currencies lead to TLA disambiguation pages, or just simply all red links and lead nowhere. AndyZ 13:25, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Data is way off

Using this as a reference, the data on this table is way off. I first noticed that the data for the Philippines is actually for the years 1997-2003 instead of 2000-2006 (as the article's table indicates). Then I looked at a few other currencies and realized the years for all of the currencies is screwed up. Coffee 05:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Agreed, Data is poor

Just noting the exchange rate to Costa Rica as an example, the difference is more than 200 Colones.216.184.123.71 13:30, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Graph

I've removed that enormous graph because it's really inconsistent. The caption and the graph give different start dates, and the vertical axis appears to be the number of UK Pounds, Australian Dollars and 100's of Japanese Yen per US dollar, but the number of US Dollars per Euro. If someone has time to create a new one, can I also suggest that 800px is a tad big? Pfainuk 13:07, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Euro (Eurozone)

The Euro figures appear to be in Dollars per Euro rather than Euros per Dollar, except for 2006. All other currencies including the UK Pound appear to be in currency units per Dollar. Karl 13:38, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I now see the figures have been corrected and now show the fall of the dollar against the Euro that has occurred over the period Karl 10:37, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Sorry Karl, didn’t see you made a note about it on talk. --Van helsing 11:01, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pound Sterling (United Kingdom)

The recent figures for the Pound Sterling seem to be suspiciously high. I'd expect them to begin with 0.5 rather than 0.6 as shown. The present exchange rate is even below 0.5. I'll mark the suspect figures with a qustuion mark. Karl 10:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Done from [1], thanks for the catch. Just a note: you’re very welcome to correct these errors immediately; you don’t necessarily have to first mention them on this talkpage to get consent in changing them. --Van helsing 13:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't have a source at hand. which source did you use? Karl 12:01, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

The sources used in the article are mentioned at the bottom of the article page. If the source for a particular exchange rate is not available (which they actually should be, see WP:CITE), Googling often delivers something useful. In this case I used a PDF-file at http://fx.sauder.ubc.ca which was mentioned in the “See also” section of the article. --Van helsing 14:12, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Karl 12:24, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup

I removed the cleanup because I think the article is now OK in terms of Manual of Style.
On a side note I think was a horrible idea for an article. For as many different currencies there are and how much they can change over a year I think its somewhat misrepresentive to pick one date and peg that as the exchange rate for the entire year. If this were to ever be a good article someone would need to monitor and verify each rate listed. Barkeep Chat | $ 19:43, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yet another error, should the article be deleted?

Like other contributors, I found an error in the abbreviations of currency names. Perhaps this kind of huge (and boring :]) article is simply too hard to fact-check? If nobody is capable of doing a thorough fact checking perhaps it should just be deleted (or stripped to show only the 10 or so most common currencies) so as not to mislead the readers... Perhaps the title should also mention that these are exchange rates w.r.t the USD; it's not obvious at all when skipping to a random entry in the table. --Sgt. Salt (talk) 20:02, 19 February 2008 (UTC)