Change name of the Ethiopian Birr or at least modify it? [Risolto]

For the Ethiopian Birr we now have:

Dollars as the value from 1944 - 1976

And Birr from 1976 - date

Both with the same Birr as their currency name. I ask why? And propose we change it to something like

With Brunei, as showed belove and make the currency of Ethiopia from 1944-1976 be both Birr and Dollar and after 1976 it should be named only Birr in the currency name.

And for the values I think it makes more sense then. Although I would prefer calling it Birr in the value field.

Then in the notes' names we change them from eg. "1 Dollar" to “1 Birr / 1 Dollar” when they are notes from 1944-1976

Hope that makes sense :)

You're right that what we have isn't ideal. However, I'd rather have a single currency for the whole period with the name and description:

Birr (1944-date)

100 Santim = 1 Birr (Dollar in English until 1976)

The titles for the individual notes would then be in “Birr / Dollar(s)” until 1976 and the values all given in Birr. I think this is better, since there was no currency reform in 1976, just a change in the foreign name used on the notes.

We have a single currency for Brunei  with two names. However, the titles only use ringgit with a single exception.

I updated dates and codes based on this source https://globalfinancialdata.com/ethiopia

You can transfer items in the ETD currency

Why couldn't we wait and see if a consensus could be reached? ISO 4217 codes weren't introduced until 1978, so GFD has made up “ETD”. As I said earlier, there was no currency reform in 1976, simply a change in the foreign name used on the notes.

It's no wonder Numista is losing referees, given the tendency the admins have to jump in and make changes without properly consulting the membership. I know you have a long list of things to do on the site but rushing in doesn't always generate a good result. We now have a fictitious currency that will have to be changed back at some stage.

ceh2019

It's no wonder Numista is losing referees, given the tendency the admins have to jump in and make changes without properly consulting the membership. 

I do not know if I “jump” on anything but I see you never miss an opportunity to bash my work. 

What is honestly the purpose of the link you shared in your answer? Is it meant to make me feel bad? To make me look bad? Both? Has Poland any remote link with Ethiopia currencies?

ISO 4217 codes weren't introduced until 1978, so GFD has made up “ETD”. As I said earlier, there was no currency reform in 1976, simply a change in the foreign name used on the notes.

I found the 1976 change of currency in many sources online, including from National Bank of Ethiopia.

1976 seems also an obvious pivot when you look at coins section.

So, maybe the OP and myself are wrong, and if we are I'll fix it very quickly for sure. But your only argument is backed by nothing I found. Please share your sources instead of sharing only your bitterness.

I know you have a long list of things to do on the site but rushing in doesn't always generate a good result. 

Rushing or not rushing is not an issue, only matter sources and consistency.

Every day, I fix thousands of issues on Numista: missing rulers or issuers, duplicate entries, missing mints or marks, tons of change requests of all nature, etc etc etc

I do all that silently indeed; I do not expect congratulations every day, but neither do I expect constant attacks and judgements completely out of the topic.

All I'm asking is that, when faced with two members suggesting different things, you pause and allow the discussion to continue. If you'd presented your source, the error could have been highlighted before you made the changes.

ceh2019

All I'm asking is that, when faced with two members suggesting different things, you pause and allow the discussion to continue. If you'd presented your source, the error could have been highlighted before you made the changes.

It's not my way of handling all requests I tackle on the forum to put first all sources that I could find on a topic, then wait I don't know how much time before doing anything. This approach you describe may appear wise but it would, from my perspective, simply make impossible to process the huge volume of incoming requests we receive every week. It would also increase by a lot the already heavy mental load on the Admins, as we do not have any way to “snooze” a topic.

What matters is info I find myself or people are sharing on the forum. I do not apply changes when I don't find sources convincing me a change is needed. You seem to suggest I apply changes without any research; A little bit of trust would help here

And again: as soon as I answered a topic, I subscribe to the answers, even when I mark it as finished; And I read EVERY notification I receive, so if at some point anyone find a new element contradicting what was changed (or not changed), I can always fix very easily. It's what we call iterative approach.

OK, so we have two alternative views. Yours is an iterative approach, mine a consensual one. Both can work. My argument for the latter is that it avoids a lot of upset when members see changes appear out of nowhere. Now I know you favour the former, I will adapt my responses to your changes.

In this particular case, kindly revisit your decision to split the Ethiopian Birr in 1976, based on the information I have provided, in particular the fact that “ETD” does not exist as an ISO 4217 code.

ceh2019

OK, so we have two alternative views. Yours is an iterative approach, mine a consensual one. Both can work. My argument for the latter is that it avoids a lot of upset when members see changes appear out of nowhere. Now I know you favour the former, I will adapt my responses to your changes.

In this particular case, kindly revisit your decision to split the Ethiopian Birr in 1976, based on the information I have provided, in particular the fact that “ETD” does not exist as an ISO 4217 code.

Why I dont think this argument is decisive:

- We currently have a total of 242 currencies in the database existing prior 1978 and nevertheless having an ISO 4217 code; 

- change of name is a reason of separating; especially as both coins and banknotes show this difference.

Point 1: How many of those currencies still existed in 1978 when ISO 4217 was created?

Point 2: The name didn't change. It was birr both before and after 1976. It was the translation that changed.

ceh2019

Point 1: How many of those currencies still existed in 1978 when ISO 4217 was created?

Point 2: The name didn't change. It was birr both before and after 1976. It was the translation that changed.

- A lot less indeed, but I cannot filter on end date so I cant count

- same case than Swaziland/eSwatini, no? Also we see the $ symbol on coins pre 1976, isnt it something?

To understand where your challenge comes from, I tried to find the sources stating there was no monetary reform in 1976 but a simple translation update. 

Beyond wikipedia (no source on it), i found only this: 

They seem quite assertive with same statement as yours. But when you actually read the book they source, its somehow not whats written:

Here, an actual monetary reform if 1976 in mentionned, and they differentiate both currencies clearly in the list (Howard M. Berlin. "World Monetary Units: An Historical Dictionary, Country by Country," Pages 56-57. McFarland & Company, Inc., 2006.)

Its precisely why I asked for your sources all along (and I'm still waiting)

My sources are the coins and notes, all of which are denominated in birr (ብር). It's very easy to think that there was a monetary reform if you don't read the Amharic inscriptions.

ceh2019

My sources are the coins and notes, all of which are denominated in birr (ብር). It's very easy to think that there was a monetary reform if you don't read the Amharic inscriptions.

OK so even when I take time to put very precise references with screenshots, your only answer is kind of “this author is silly, he didn't read the coins”… Well…

The fact “dollar” and “birr” in word form is written the same in amharic does not remove the fact dollar was what was written on both banknotes and coins (with the $ symbol here: “E$5” = 5 Ethiopian dollars)

Thanks to Xavier ^^
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GOVPUB-T63_100-309333a95082aed28833c4e3f3f8c5b3/pdf/GOVPUB-T63_100-309333a95082aed28833c4e3f3f8c5b3.pdf

And he also helped me finding again the National Bank of Ethiopia source I was mentionning upper in the thread: https://nbe.gov.et/about-national-bank-of-ethiopia/
 

However, monetary and banking proclamation No. 99 of 1976 came into force on September 1976 to shape the Bank’s role adoring to the socialist economic principle that the country adopted. Hen e the Bank was allowed to participate actively in national planning, specifically financial planning, in cooperation with the concerned state organs. The Bank’s supervisory area was also increased to include other financial institutions such as insurance institutions, credit cooperatives and investment-oriented banks. Moreover the proclamation introduced the new Ethiopian currency called ‘birr’ in place of the former Ethiopia Dollar that eased to be legal tender thereafter.

I'm afraid the text from the NBE is so full of typos and propaganda that one has to wonder where it really came from. The statement is clearly contradicted by the coins and banknotes. The word birr (ብር) is on both, before and after 1976. No one is claiming dollar or $ weren't there before 1976. That's why I suggested the currency description include the notice “Dollar in English until 1976”. The change was in the translation of the name, not the name itself. I know the current administration of Numista is biased against non-European languages, so we may just have to wait until the volume of calls for change becomes too great and Xavier reverses course on this matter, just as he recently did on issuer names. In the mean time, I shall set about putting the Amharic inscriptions on the coins and notes to make things as clear as possible.

ceh2019

I'm afraid the text from the NBE is so full of typos and propaganda that one has to wonder where it really came from. 

We're lucky to have another sources in addition with it, then ^^ 
And if you think official website of NBE is hosting dubious contents, feel free to warn them maybe.

The statement is clearly contradicted by the coins and banknotes. The word birr (ብር) is on both, before and after 1976. No one is claiming dollar or $ weren't there before 1976. 

You're so graceful to admit that before 1976 they were Ethiopian dollars, duly named and symbolized as it. The fact the english word Dollar is birr (ብር) in amharic changes nothing to the fact they were not dollars anymore after 1976, Sept. 21st.

On the very banknotes it's written “አንድ ፡ የኢትዮጵያ ፡ ብር ፡”: would we need to specify “Ethiopian” if we were talking about the same Birr than the one after 1976?

That's why I suggested the currency description include the notice “Dollar in English until 1976”. 

When currencies change, we create new currencies; we don't include different names as comment in the notice. After 1976 they are Birr, not Ethiopian dollars anymore, whatever the translation of Dollar in amharic is. I really don't get your point here.

The change was in the translation of the name, not the name itself. 

This personal opinion of yours is the opposite of what the serious sources we took the time to screenshot for you are stating. At which moment do you actually read and take into account the elements people are sharing with you in threads like this?

I know the current administration of Numista is biased against non-European languages

This is actually a defaming declaration, an attack ad hominem backed by nothing; please remove.

so we may just have to wait until the volume of calls for change becomes too great and Xavier reverses course on this matter

Sure, as soon as you'll not be a single user stating opinions like if they were facts without any source, we'll be happy to revisit ^^

As before, you use the term “opinion” when confronted with facts you don't want to acknowledge. The linguistic bias is clear in the current guidelines, so there is nothing to retract. Your statement “The fact the english word Dollar is birr (ብር) in amharic” further demonstrates this. Birr means silver and it's use predates the appearance of dollar on Ethiopian notes by fifty years. Dollar was the translation of Birr, not the other way round. Do you really think the Ethiopians named their currency the dollar and then, as an afterthought, chose a name in their own language to be the translation?

You now seem to be claiming that because one note has “Ethiopian Birr” and another just “Birr” that a new currency was created. Would you claim that a new currency was created in the DDR in 1964 because the word Deutsche was omitted or that Mexico underwent a currency reform when they dropped the word “nuevo” in 1994?

I've made a start on the inscriptions but it will take a while. Once they're done, I hope the situation will become clear for all.

Well, since no one else has given their opinion here, I'll give it myself. After reading the entire Topic, I see the division proposed by the OP and adopted by Numista as appropriate. The only sources that have been provided support it. I repeat, this is just one more opinion (just as valid, I hope, as that of those who comment here).

I hope and want that, after giving my humble opinion, I will not be attacked personally or an attempt will be made to discredit what I have commented here (something common lately in Numista). It is, as I have already said, one more opinion.

As I have already said in other posts, this is Numista, a Numismatics website. Our life does not depend on how things are done here, let's not take everything as a personal battle. It is simple advice with as much positive character as possible. The three users who have posted here (Jamtrup, Ceh2019 and Compendium) are among the most active people and who contribute the most to Numista without a doubt. Let's all go in the same direction so that all this works as well as possible. 😉

I hope you won't take this as a personal attack if I disagree with you, since it isn't meant as one. I'm arguing the case for the use of the real name for this currency. I beg to differ when you say that the only sources support the change that has been implemented. As I have pointed out, the coins and notes clearly show that the name was the birr before and after 1976. This can't be ignored. However, given the poor coverage of Amharic inscriptions and translations on Numista, I am now in the middle to adding these, to make the real name of the currency clear throughout.

I'd love to travel in the same direction with all other users but we mustn't allow ourselves to be dragged towards a less accurate, more biased catalogue. We have a chance with Numista to create something that doesn't currently exist, namely a truly international catalogue free of any linguistic bias. We're actually a lot closer to that goal than any print catalogue. Let's continue in that direction. We've largely solved the problem with deleted issuers. This language barrier is, for me, the last important hurdle.

A number of other significant contributors have left the site recently. I feel sure the level of abuse from the admins must have played a role in that. I'm persisting because I see light at the end of the tunnel. Maybe it is an oncoming train. We'll see.

Hello ceh2019, I do not take this response as a personal attack at all, on the contrary, I think it is good that you can argue and try to get things done correctly in your way of understanding them. If we don't get into personal territory, defending what you think is logical is fair...and necessary to make a better website.

In fact, you and I have agreed on important issues such as the issuers (recently it has been modified in a very satisfactory way in my opinion) and the names of the currencies in their original languages ​​(I think it is also being studied a formula/solution to this issue).

Yes, there is one thing that upsets me: talking about people who are upset or who have left a certain role in Numista. I dislike it because that belittles those of us who are still here, fighting every day to make a better website. The people who have left, those I know, have done an impressive job, but there are many of us who are also doing it and who have the same value as those who are no longer here. For example, you, I know you have had problems, but you are still here, fighting to make a better website. That says a lot and well about you, in my humble opinion.

I'm the referee for Ethiopia and I'm shocked to see that this whole contention has occurred during the last week without me being aware of it. Interestingly, a few weeks ago, I had a conversation with Xavier about a similar thing happening with Swaziland/eSwatini. I wonder why we can't include (perhaps automatically) the referees for a country when a discussion like this happens. At present, we are effectively being penalised for having day jobs that keep us busy during the week.

My opinions on this conversation, for what they are worth, are as follows:

I don't like the split because I also think this was just a change of currency name. Effectively, an old set of coins and notes was withdrawn and a new one replaced it. I feel it is a mistake to keep dividing entities (like issuers and currencies) in Numista for nitpicky reasons.

I also feel that we should wait for consensus before making changes like this. It should  be something that takes much longer than a week from when it first came up and there should be some sort of minimum agreement (involving referees for the country, and a forum discussion) before we unilaterally impose changes. The fact that there are “primary sources” is not really relevant because primary sources need to be scrutinised properly. I don't feel like any of the primary sources here, diplomatic as they may be, can really motivate making this change. But, let me be very clear, I'm simply giving my opinion and do not wish to argue this point.

What puts me beyond caring is the attitude I'm sensing from catalogue administrators. What makes me not want to be a referee is well illustrated here - an aggressive attitude right out of the starting blocks. It really just leaves me with a knot in my stomach to see how difficult it is to express even a mild contrary opinion around here. I'm not blaming Compendium personally, but it is something that came up in my chat with Xavier. For my comfort, our catalogue admins are too reactive, both in terms of imposing changes, and in terms of how they respond to other users. This has created a toxic environment.

There is something very specific I want to address in what oynbcn said, again without making it personal. I'm shocked and disappointed by your suggestion that people who stay on to “fight” for a decent catalogue are, somehow, better people than those to chose to leave. Those people who leave are also fighting, making the biggest statement they can to try and preserve the integrity and the catalogue accuracy of Numista. Nobody resigns in protest because they are lazy, they resign because they are passionate about their work and can't watch it being destroyed. We should talk about them. We must talk about them, because they are saying something important.

The fact that you are “fighting” to make a better Web site is exactly the problem. What nonsense is that? Why should this be a fight? This is our hobby. The fact that there is any kind of fight at all is a very serious problem, and there is no glory in it.

And furthermore, I shall have no further part in it. I, too, am out.

Andrew, I apologize for all of that, I surely should have pointed you to this thread, and as a matter of fact we decided between all Admins last week that, from now on, we would never take actions about issuers without having explicitly discussed with referees first.

To reassure you, such change about currencies are very easily done; To revert the cut would take me about 30 seconds; It does not excuse the fact I did not DMed you first, but it can help understand why I probably felt more “free” to do it, as any error from me on this topic would be easily fixable…

I really regret the toxic environment you describe, and take my full responsibility in it; Whatever the fact we keep or not the cut between Ethiopian Dollars and Birr, I hope you'll agree to reconsider your decision :-)

Compendium

Andrew, I apologize for all of that, I surely should have pointed you to this thread, and as a matter of fact we decided between all Admins last week that, from now on, we would never take actions about issuers without having explicitly discussed with referees first.

 

To reassure you, such change about currencies are very easily done; To revert the cut would take me about 30 seconds; It does not excuse the fact I did not DMed you first, but it can help understand why I probably felt more “free” to do it, as any error from me on this topic would be easily fixable…

 

I really regret the toxic environment you describe, and take my full responsibility in it; Whatever the fact we keep or not the cut between Ethiopian Dollars and Birr, I hope you'll agree to reconsider your decision :-)

I'm sorry, man, but I've already tendered my resignation to Xavier. I'm done, and it isn't because of you personally. There is a long running pattern of real unpleasantness emerging in these discussions and I want to get away from arguing these points and back to just enjoying my coins.

Thank you for your thoughtful message and your kind words. I wish you everything of the best and will continue to enjoy and admire Numista as a regular user.