Talk:500 euro note

The Crime Section

There is something that bothers me about this section. It is said that "Spain in particular, although not initially authorised to issue five hundred euro notes". This is quoted from source 3 (a NY Times article). However, it can be seen here (http://www.ecb.int/press/pr/date/2001/html/pr011005.en.html) at the ECB site, that Spain was to produce 15.4 million 500 euro notes in 2001, which probably counts as "initially". I have, after a quick google search, only found the NY Times article and a few verbatim copies of it claiming Spain was not authorized. So I cannot help but wonder: Is it true, or not? 131.155.108.55 (talk) 11:59, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

There is little too much "guilt by association" in the crime section. "€500 are used by organanised crime, therefore €500 notes are bad". I am sure they would use €100 and €200 notes if €500 were cancelled.--BIL (talk) 10:08, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Also the part about them being called "bin Ladens" seems wrong. I have never heard them being called this and it seems like they were perhaps only once nicknamed by the media for a short period of time. The relevance of the whole paragraph is questionable. What is the relevance of bin Laden having a 500 EUR banknote sewed into his clothing at the time of his death? That belongs into a different article. --78.166.214.177 (talk) 06:32, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

21th century??? Come on. It's 21st — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.234.56.57 (talk) 07:43, 27 October 2011 (UTC)  Done – Plarem ^{(User talk contribs)} 09:31, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:500 euro note/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Vibhijain (talk · contribs) 15:49, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Will review it in coming weeks. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 15:49, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I am declaring my assistance to the nominator in improving this artcle; I will keep a close eye on the page and the GA Nomination. P.S.: Hi Vibhijain!!! – Plarem ^{(User talk contribs)} 18:57, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Me too also I will try to do it. --Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 14:28, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
	1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Section 5 needs a copy-edit.  Done Need some work removing copyright violations. ([1])  Done Why is there space between punctuation marks and references?  Done Why is "As of August 2011" in brackets? (in section 4)  Done
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	References 15-21 should be in one, as in 100 euro note.  Done Photos are needed for improvement. ??? Please say in what way... They are NOT needed for improvement, Katarighe...
	2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Article has many misplace citations, for example, re.1 o not support the statement "the five hundred euro note shows modern architecture (between the 20th and 21st century)". Please fix all such cases.  Done
	2c. it contains no original research.
	3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
	6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	File:Nota 500 euros.jpg not correctly marked for copyright  Done
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	No alt for File:Nota 500 euros.jpg Alt is not needed for GA Article Pictures. See WT:WIAGA#Picture question.
	7. Overall assessment.	Congrats! Article passed.

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:500 euro note/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   "The changeover period during which the former currencies' notes and coins were exchanged for those of the euro lasted about two months, until 28 February 2002." should include the start date which was 1 January 2002  Done

   "Their aim is to record is to ascertain details about its spread and to generate statistics and rankings for various notes." needs to be reworked.  Done

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Reference #9 is a dead link. Has been dead since 2012-07-01.  Done

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Comment

 Done – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 12:36, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Environment

The whole environment section smacks of ECB propaganda, as the only quoted source is an article from the ECB's website, without any third party source to back up its claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.123.165.83 (talk) 13:17, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Swiss franc

I think it would make a lot of sense to mention that the Swiss franc has a thousand franc note. So the 500 euro note is not even the biggest note in Europe, either in worth (1000 fr ~= 833 euro I think) or denomination. However, just having a quick look, I can't think how to integrate it into the article. It's also a lot easier to get and use 1000 fr notes, than 500 euro notes. People in Switzerland buy cars with cash for example, which I think would raise an eyebrow in many parts of the EU. **** you, you ******* ****. (talk) 08:34, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 500 euro note. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110607234444/http://www.unmikonline.org/regulations/admdirect/1999/089%20Final%20%20ADE%201999-02.htm to http://www.unmikonline.org/regulations/admdirect/1999/089%20Final%20%20ADE%201999-02.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130911232930/http://ec.europa.eu:80/economy_finance/focuson/focuson9120_en.htm to http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/focuson/focuson9120_en.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070926234241/http://www.dnb.nl/dnb/home?lang=en&id=tcm:47-150696-64 to http://www.dnb.nl/dnb/home?lang=en&id=tcm:47-150696-64

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:58, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

History section

I think that this article has too long a history section which is mostly general history of the euro and not specific to the €500 note. --Money money tickle parsnip (talk) 08:35, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Q: future plans? end of life?

Howard from NYC (talk) 01:24, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

anyone have a clue where to find out planning for 500 euro note? alternatively, if it is no longer being printed, when is approximate ending of its usage?

after all, worn banknotes are taken out of circulation, inventoried and pulped; in USA, our dollar banknotes circulate for about 8 to 15 years (lower denomination getting handled more and thus worn out sooner) before being deemed too worn;