Category talk:Currency

Category:Units of measure
Should Category:Units of measure be a second parent to Category:Currency? Or do we want to keep that category solely for units of measure of physical quantities? I'm inclined to add the second parent as currency certainly is used in English the same as if it were a unit of measure. However, if we do, we may want to either add a second parent to Category:Units of measure to go with its single parent of Category:Physics, switch the parent to Category:Sciences, or add another category, say Category:Units of physical measure that would take the current members of Category:Units of measure and its current parent while making Category:Units of measure a top-level topical category.

My own preference is to add Category:Units of measure as a parent of Category:Currency and change its parentage to something broader, but I'd like input before making the change. — Carolina wren discussió 21:36, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I would avoid making Category:Units of measure a parent of Category:Currency.
 * While I see certain analogy between units of measure and currencies, I do not think that currencies are really units of measure. I suppose that a unit of currency could be taken as a unit of measure of economic worth or market price of an object. But the market price of a class of objects is a quantity that is constantly changing in a ragged manner, and the action of measuring of that worth by purchasing the item gives different results at different places, because of varying transaction costs and differences in the place-specific supply and demand curves. There are, I admit, also physical quantities that are constantly changing, such as the room temperature, so the raggedness of change is not probably the key difference. While conversion rates between units of measure such as inch and meter are constant, the conversion rates between currencies change in time. There is something non-objective about prices. It's like, if all the humans disappeared, there would still be physical quantities, although there would be no one to measure them, while if all the humans disappeared, the market worth would disappear with them. Anyway, perhaps someone else can give a better account, one that explains how units of measure differ from currencies. --Dan Polansky 17:41, 12 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Outcome: completed without adding any parents. No one seconded the proposal, and the proposal was not realized, so the proposal can be considered rejected. --Dan Polansky 09:56, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

RFM discussion: January 2018–May 2020
I never noticed before, two separate categories for the same thing. I think a merger is in order, personally I prefer Category:Currencies. DonnanZ (talk) 21:20, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * This was discussed before. They aren't for the same thing, one is topical and the other is a set. —Rua (mew) 21:25, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Maybe the latter should be a subcat of the former? --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 21:27, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Can you explain that? DonnanZ (talk) 21:29, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * One is for terms related to currency, one is for terms referring to currencies. —Rua (mew) 21:31, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * In that case each category should have a guide to what should go in it. I don't see anything at present. DonnanZ (talk) 21:36, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I see it in Category:en:Currency and Category:en:Currencies. —Rua (mew) 21:39, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, I see it in the subcategories but not in the main categories. There would appear to be some confusion by editors between the two, like in Category:sv:Currency and Category:sv:Currencies (only one entry). DonnanZ (talk) 21:56, 22 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Not merged, they serve different functions. Whether this is ideal and whether topic vs set/list categories overall need clearer names remains to be resolved. - -sche (discuss) 17:30, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

RFM discussion: February–July 2021

 * See Category talk:Currencies.