Talk:Australian dollar
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Australian dollar article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
Archives (Index) |
This page is archived by ClueBot III.
|
Inclusion of "dollarydoos"
editThe last time anyone has mentioned this on the talk page was in 2015, 8 years ago, so I think it's worth me asking again: should "dollarydoo" be mentioned as a colloquial, jocular term for the Australian dollar in this article? I know it might seem like a jokey suggestion just for the hell of it, but I think that it could have some genuine encyclopedic merit. Most of the reliable sources I can find talking about the actual use of the term are articles covering a clearly facetious change.org petition to change the official name, but if the quotations section on the current Wiktionary entry for "dollarydoo" is any indication, there is genuine colloquial usage of the term in Australian sources. Does anyone have any particular stance on its inclusion? Ithinkiplaygames (talk) 18:12, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hmmm. I don't think so. Five examples over nearly twenty years doesn't indicate frequent use to me. Sadly, buck is probably more common. (Both buck and dollarydoo are American inventions. That pushes me away too.) HiLo48 (talk) 02:27, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
Inclusion of Image
editHi all,
I was thinking about including an image in the main infobox. Does anyone have any high-quality public domain Wikimedia images of Australian banknotes?
pluck (talk • contribs) 09:02, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- Are the images at Banknotes of the Australian dollar useful to you? HiLo48 (talk) 09:32, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- Are these banknote images not copyright, as is the case in most countries of the world? See WP:COPYVIO. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:25, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- They are copyright, but there is a sound non-free use rationale. Vgbyp (talk) 08:07, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- Ok, I was misled by the first one on the list, the paper $1 note, which is not at the reduced scale of all the rest. That one is almost certainly illegal so if anyone here wants to make sure it doesn't disappear, they had best make a scaled down version of it pdq. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:49, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- How does that work? How can the size on a screen make a difference? HiLo48 (talk) 22:12, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- First, WP:FAIRUSE in a nutshell says that the image should be no more than it absolutely needs to be – a part of the original, a much reduced size, whatever. Second, what makes Governments touchy about images of banknotes is forgery – not full-on North Korean $100 million worth of perfect forgeries but enough to con a little old lady. Of course polymer notes with windows has made that a lot more difficult nowadays. Anyway, back to your question: the $1 note is 1,534 × 763 (403 KB) whereas the polymer $100 is just 494 × 201 (26 KB), how it looks on screen is not really relevant.
- But the good news is that you are not likely to getting a dawn raid any time soon, because the Reserve Bank of Australia gives you some latitude. See https://web.archive.org/web/20110312003240/https://www.rba.gov.au/banknotes/legal-framework/reproduction.html , which says "In the case of electronic images other than images referred to in condition 3 below, when viewed at 100 per cent of the image size, the reproductions must be less than three quarters the length and width of the genuine banknote they reproduce; and have a resolution not exceeding 72dpi." The $100 polymer image complies but the paper $1 is not compliant, so somebody should fix it. For Bank of England notes, the punishment is transportation to the colonies . --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 00:18, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- The hi-res images of the paper series are allowed because they were designed before 1 May 1969 and thus are in the public domain. Note that there are no images for the new polymer notes, refer to the big red box at the top of the Commons category page for Banknotes of Australia. If you want to try uploading images of the copyrighted polymer series, they will have to go on Wikipedia, not Commons, with an attempt at a non-free use rationale, probably {{Non-free use rationale currency}}, and will need to be resized to ≤ 100,000 pixels (presumably why the $100 image is approx. 500 x 200 pixels). — Jon (talk) 02:21, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- See also for example File:Australian 100 dollar note Obverse Fourth Series.jpeg which has the appropriate fair-use template and small size (approx. 500 x 200 pixels). Similar images are found in the Wikipedia category Banknotes of Australia. — Jon (talk) 02:36, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- How does that work? How can the size on a screen make a difference? HiLo48 (talk) 22:12, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- Ok, I was misled by the first one on the list, the paper $1 note, which is not at the reduced scale of all the rest. That one is almost certainly illegal so if anyone here wants to make sure it doesn't disappear, they had best make a scaled down version of it pdq. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:49, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- They are copyright, but there is a sound non-free use rationale. Vgbyp (talk) 08:07, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- Are these banknote images not copyright, as is the case in most countries of the world? See WP:COPYVIO. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:25, 5 December 2023 (UTC)