This article is within the scope of WikiProject Numismatics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of numismatics and currencies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NumismaticsWikipedia:WikiProject NumismaticsTemplate:WikiProject Numismaticsnumismatic articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dacia, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.DaciaWikipedia:WikiProject DaciaTemplate:WikiProject DaciaDacia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Romania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Romania-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RomaniaWikipedia:WikiProject RomaniaTemplate:WikiProject RomaniaRomania articles
This seems to be the only article of this type in the whole of Wikipedia. Starting from the title ("History of Romanian coins", when the only coin specifically Romanian is the Leu), and going through the content (ancient greek drachmas being called Romanian), this is nothing but WP:OR, and it only serves a certain not much appreciated line of thought which flourished in Ceausescu's Romania: Protochronism. Does anyone think this is salvageable... if yes, present your arguments below.Anonimu (talk) 02:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's a history of coinage that was used in the territory of today's Romania. Maybe the title is not the best, but I think it's a valid subject. Other similar articles are Coins of Ireland, Indian coinage and History of Canadian currency, which go to the eras before the modern states of Ireland, India and Canada.
Why would it be Protochronism? Did you at least read the article beforehand? bogdan (talk) 03:12, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The title surely gives that impression (especially the part saying "Romanian" as opposed to a more neutral "in Romania"). A name change and some inline references are needed to bring it to standards.Anonimu (talk) 03:25, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
