text:
MediaWiki talk:Watchdetails

Pointless poll?
You ran an extremely high-profile poll which gathered hundreds of votes and now that it's over and the results are in no-one has a clue what to do next? This was all just an enormous waste of time? Couldn't you have agreed on how to interpret the poll before launching it? Haukur 13:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

annoying reminders
It seems like this template is being used more and more frequently for less and less important purposes. Okay, so today you want me to choose a strong password. I can see why this is on admins' minds after reading AN/I, but I can see no need at all to annoy every registered user with it. Why not just put a reminder or two on the Village Pump and in the Signpost? There are lots of good ways to get a message to Wikipedians, and there ought to be few reasons urgent enough to cry this loudly for their attention (and risk them learning to ignore this screaming, and making the site that much less usable, and overwhelming useful information like the watchlist, which need I remind you is non-admins' key tool for preventing vandalism, with sheer noise).

So: I want to ask, politely, for a policy or at least a firmer etiquette on use of this header. May I suggest that admins who update this watchlist header use a some restraint, please, and be sure that the message is urgent and needs every Wikipedian's immediate attention. And why not include a link to this discussion page, which is almost impossible to find, so that users can easily respond to the message? -- Rbellin|Talk 03:14, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Why? Because we really want every Wikipedian to see this, regardless of whether they are sysops or not. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 03:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * What's so annoying about this? You can dismiss it, it's just a little text, if this is something that annoys you, that's a personal problem. For the sake of the site, having this up for a few days so everyone can see it does absolutely no harm to anybody. John Reaves (talk) 05:43, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * If you don't see the need for my request, that's fine -- but both of these comments seem non-responsive to my concerns. Why does it matter that every registered user have a strong password?  Where was this message discussed beforehand, and where can interested users go to discuss it now?  The header message answers none of these questions, and bristly defensiveness doesn't really help me understand why anyone thought it was a good idea to do this. (And I believe that the incredibly obscure location of this Talk page is the only reason more users haven't commented on their annoyance with the message, but in any case there's no need for the ad hominem.)  -- Rbellin|Talk 13:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Why should any account be subject to hijacking? It's best not to lose any contributors, not just admins.  You haven;t answered my question, what's so annoying about a sentence of text above you watchlist?  Why is your annoyance, or anybody's, not worth the security of this site?  If it still bothers you that much , don't worry, it should be down by tomorrow. John Reaves (talk) 19:14, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Rbellin, I can understand your opinion and empathize with your request. However, I would like to point out the purpose of using either the sitenotice and this watchdetail is to disseminate information on a wide basis; because of the recent security lapses, it seems like a message regarding account security (which is critical for every account, not just sysop accounts) is appropriate. The message will also be removed within a day or two; a recent edit requested that the message remain for another day - a total of three days seems reasonable. That being said, there are multiple ways that we (the developers and other people who know their MediaWiki code) have taken to make it less obtrustive. You have the "dismiss" button now - one click, and the message should disappear for the remainder of the time that it's up. Watchdetails is also being used instead of SiteNotice to target specifically editors, and not all readers. Is there any suggestion you have to improve this? Also, regarding your suggestion of adding a link to this talk page: the problem I foresee with that is people would complain that link would be too much, expanding the watchdetails to a greater length. However, I'm open to your ideas as always - what do you suggest we do to the current message? Many thanks for your understanding. Flcelloguy (A note? ) 23:52, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The dismiss button doesn't exist for everyone. Could this perhaps have a css class? And would it be too much to add a "(t)" to the end of the message, linking to this page? It's pretty difficult to find. Gimmetrow 00:12, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I've gone ahead and added the link to the talk page per your suggestion - I just added it to the end, which I hope is the most logical location. Regarding the CSS - I'm afraid I can't answer that, not being too familiar with coding there. You can manually remove the message using your monobook, though; there's a div class already that allows you to just remove this specific message. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note? ) 00:35, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The dismiss button on the watchdetails (unlike with the sitenotice) is not built into MediaWiki, nor was it developed by the devs--rather, it's just a js hack. If you have js disabled, the "dismiss" button will not appear, nor will you be able to make the notice disappear, other than editing your Monobook.css (or whichever the relevant one for you is) to add . AmiDaniel (talk) 00:45, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification - I had an inkling somewhere that the dismiss buttom was only a hack implemented in local (not MediaWiki) code. Flcelloguy (A note? ) 00:48, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Gee, just when I go to test it, the text is gone. Gimmetrow 01:07, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Link to this talk page
I've no interest in this talk page. I don't want a link to this talk page. But if there must be one, for whatever reason, could it please say talk instead of a very ambiguous t. – Tivedshambo (talk) 01:19, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * When there is no message, there is no need for a talk page link. Like now. Gimmetrow 01:32, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Who am I? Where's Buttercup?  What is this "(t)" link???  How come I've never seen it before?  What is the "MediaWiki talk:" namespace?  Is that the talk page for a "Special:" page?  Somebody please fill me in or point me in the right direction... M OXFYRE  ( contrib ) 01:38, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Another editor asked for a link to the talk page above, and I suggested it too, but when there are no "annoying reminders" on the watchlist there is no need for any link. Gimmetrow 01:44, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

 * I see it's gone again at the moment. But can I make a couple of suggestions:
 * When a new message is used, create a new talk sub-page and link directly to that so that each message can be discussed individually
 * Put the link to the sub-page within the tag, so that those of us who have the css hack don't have to see unnecessary links. Thanks.
 * – Tivedshambo (talk) 04:26, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Watchlist message request
editprotected Please put, around the latest message. Thanks. – Tivedshambo (talk) 04:52, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅ AmiDaniel (talk) 05:39, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom
Are the elections going to be on this message, like last year?  Majorly  (talk) 23:32, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Dismiss button
I just clicked it. How does one undo that, to make it come back? Logging in and out didn't help. Will it come back when the Watchlist message next updates? Lawrence Cohen 19:09, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Did you try clearing your casche? John Reaves 21:01, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Straw poll on Flagged Revs
Is now closed. Please remove it from people's watchlists. Jonathan321 (talk) 20:43, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

title: MediaWiki talk:Watchdetails


text:
Diversity Immigrant Visa

[[File:US immigration FE.png|thumb|350px|New immigrants to the United States (2018–2022), in family and employment categories, by country of birth [[File:US immigration DV.png|thumb|350px|New immigrants to the United States (2018–2022), in diversity category, by country of birth

The Diversity Immigrant Visa program, also known as the green card lottery, is a United States government lottery program for receiving a United States Permanent Resident Card. The Immigration Act of 1990 established the current and permanent Diversity Visa (DV) program.

The lottery is administered by the Department of State and conducted under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). It makes available 55,000 immigrant visas annually and aims to diversify the immigrant population in the United States, by selecting applicants from countries with low numbers of immigrants in the previous five years. More than 11 million people apply for the lottery each year, which means that fewer than 1 in 200 applicants are accepted.

Many deceptive agencies charge fees from applicants or falsely claim to increase their winning chances, but in fact the only way to apply for the lottery is to complete the entry form on the Department of State website, free of charge. Applicants are chosen randomly, and only those selected in the lottery must pay a fee to continue the process.

Attempts have been made to end the program since 2005.

Legislative and administrative history
Starting in 1986, the United States established several temporary immigrant visa programs outside of the usual immigration preferences (family members or by employment). The first program was NP-5, run from 1987 to 1989, where a limited number of visas was issued on a first-come, first-served basis. The second program was OP-1, run through a lottery from 1989 to 1991 and available for natives of countries with low levels of recent immigration to the United States. The third program, AA-1, from 1992 to 1994, was available for natives from a select group of countries that had been "adversely affected" by earlier immigration laws. Intentionally and in practice, people from Ireland and Northern Ireland benefited disproportionately from these programs. They were also known as the Donnelly, Berman and Morrison visas, respectively, after the sponsoring congressmen. The Government of Ireland has actively supported the various lottery bills and similar legislation since their inception.

The Donnelly visa benefited "several thousand Irish" (almost 4,000) and the Berman visa had some 500 Irish beneficiaries. Under the three-year Morrison program (1992–94), by far the largest in size, those born in Ireland or Northern Ireland received a set-aside of 40% of all diversity visas, for a total of 48,000 set aside visas out of 120,000. Natives or citizens of Poland, via the sheer volume of applicants, received the second largest number of visas. The United Kingdom came in a distant third with some 6,000 visas in the Morrison program.

The Immigration Act of 1990 was passed with bipartisan support and signed by President George H. W. Bush. The legislation established the current and permanent Diversity Visa (DV) program, where 55,000 immigrant visas are available in an annual lottery. The lottery aims to diversify the immigrant population in the United States, by selecting applicants mostly from countries with low numbers of immigrants to the United States in the previous five years. From fiscal years 1999 to 2020, 5,000 of the visas from the DV program were reserved for use by the NACARA program, so the number of immigrant visas available in the lottery was reduced to 50,000.

The first DV lottery, for fiscal year 1995, was named DV-1. For fiscal years 1996 to 1999, the name was in the format DV-YY, where YY was the last two digits of the year. Since fiscal year 2000 the lotteries have been named in the format DV-YYYY, with the full year number. The year in the name refers to the fiscal year when the immigrant visas will be given, which starts in October of the previous calendar year, and the entry period for the lottery occurs almost a year earlier. Therefore, there is a two-year difference between the lottery name and its entry period. For example, for DV-2017 (fiscal year starting in October 2016), the entry period was in 2015.

Initially, the DV lottery was administered entirely by mail, and only winners were notified. The entry form moved to an online system starting in DV-2005, but still only winners were notified, by mail. Starting in DV-2010, all applicants are able to verify online whether they were selected. Notification of winners also by mail continued until DV-2011, but since DV-2012 it is done exclusively online.

In 2011, a computer error caused a non-random selection of lottery applicants, leading the Department of State to cancel the initial result. About 22,000 applicants had already been notified and were disappointed to find that their selection was canceled. The Department of State later ran a new selection after correcting the error.

Criticism and repeal efforts
Criticism of the program has focused on instances of fraud, racism and the random nature of the lottery, as well as criminal or terrorist actions perpetrated by certain lottery winners.

In 2002, Hesham Mohamed Hadayet, an Egyptian immigrant who maintained residency in United States through his wife's diversity visa, killed two people and injured four others at Los Angeles International Airport before being shot to death by an El Al security guard. This led to criticism of the lottery as a security threat.

Several attempts have been made to eliminate the lottery. In December 2005, the United States House of Representatives voted 273–148 to add an amendment to the border enforcement bill H.R. 4437 abolishing the DV. Opponents of the lottery said it was susceptible to fraud and was a way for terrorists to enter the country. The Senate never passed the bill. In March 2007, Congressman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) introduced, which would eliminate the Diversity Visa program. In June 2007, the U.S. House passed to eliminate funding for the program, and the Senate did likewise in September.

However, the final version of this bill with amendments, signed into law on December 26, 2007, did not include the removal of funds for the program. Although H.R. 2764 was an appropriation bill and could only cut funds for the lottery during one fiscal year, this was the first time that both the House and the Senate passed a bill to halt the Diversity Visa program.

Rep. Goodlatte reintroduced his Security and Fairness Enhancement for America Act (formerly H.R. 1430, now ) on May 7, 2009. The bill would have amended the Immigration and Nationality Act to eliminate the diversity immigrant program completely, but did not pass. Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX) introduced the Save America Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2009 on January 7, 2009. The bill would have doubled the number of diversity visas available to 110,000 yearly. This bill did not pass. A comprehensive analysis of DV lottery issues was prepared in 2011 by Congressional Research Service.

In 2013, the so-called "Gang of Eight" - a bi-partisan group of eight United States Senators - introduced a bill that would have comprehensively reformed the immigration system. The bill would have repealed the Diversity Immigrant Visa program. The legislation passed the Senate, but was defeated in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives amid Republican opposition.

In 2017, Sayfullo Habibullaevich Saipov, who had immigrated from Uzbekistan on a diversity visa in 2010, killed eight and injured eleven when he drove his truck down a bike path in Lower Manhattan. In response, President Donald Trump, who had earlier called for a return to a "merit-based" immigration system, called for an end to the program. Following Trump's call to end the program, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, indicated that diversity visa lottery recipients lack thorough vetting, something Politifact rated as false, noting that all recipients of the visa undergo background checks, security screenings, and interviews by consular officers before arrival in the U.S.

Requirements
To enter the lottery, applicants must have been born in an eligible country, with two exceptions: the applicant may claim the spouse's country of birth instead if desired, or a parent's country of birth if neither parent was born in the applicant's country of birth and did not legally reside there when the applicant was born. The applicant's country of residence or nationality is irrelevant to the lottery.

If selected in the lottery, to qualify for the immigrant visa, applicants must have completed at least a high school education or at least two years of work experience in an occupation which requires at least two other years of training or experience. They must also satisfy general requirements applicable to all immigrants, mainly related to health, criminal background and means of support.

Each year, the Department of State publishes new instructions for applicants.

Geographical distribution
[[File:DV eligible countries.svg|thumb|400px|Regions and eligible countries for the Diversity Visa lottery

The visas are distributed among six regions: Africa, Asia, Europe (Turkey, Cyprus and all countries in the former Soviet Union are allocated to Europe, even though some of them are geographically entirely in Asia), Latin America (Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean and South America), North America (consisting only of Canada and the Bahamas), and Oceania.

Dependent territories are treated as part of their respective sovereign countries, and disputed territories are allocated as recognized by the United States. For example, Bermuda is treated as part of the United Kingdom under Europe, the Gaza Strip is considered part of Egypt under Africa, and the West Bank is considered part of Jordan under Asia. However, there are some exceptions: Northern Ireland and Taiwan are treated as separate countries, and Macau is considered part of Portugal under Europe (even after its sovereignty returned to China in 1999).

Each region that sent more than one sixth of the total number of immigrants to the United States in the previous five years is considered a "high-admission region" (currently Latin America and Asia), and each region that sent less than one sixth is a "low-admission region" (currently North America, Europe, Africa and Oceania). The proportion of diversity visas given to the low-admission group is set as the proportion of recent immigrants from the high-admission group (currently about 80%), and vice versa. Among regions of the same group, the diversity visas are allocated proportionally to their population, excluding ineligible countries (those that sent more than 50,000 immigrants in the previous five years).

Within each region, the visas are not allocated among individual countries. All applicants from the same region are selected randomly as a whole, for the number of visas allocated for that region, but with the limitation that no single country may receive more than 7% of the total diversity visas (3,850).

Although only 55,000 diversity visas are available each year, the lottery selects about 100,000 applicants. The reason for the larger selection is to ensure that all 55,000 diversity visas are eventually given each year, as some applicants are expected to fail general immigration requirements or may decide to withdraw and not to continue the process. As a result, some lottery winners who have received notifications might not obtain visas.

It is also possible that some visas remain available after all initially selected applicants are reviewed. In this case, additional applicants are selected later. For this reason, applicants who were not initially selected in the lottery should keep checking their status online periodically, until the end of the respective fiscal year.

Ineligible countries
Those born in any territory that has sent more than 50,000 immigrants to the United States in the previous five years are not eligible to receive a diversity visa. For DV-2025 (the most recent lottery, with entry period in 2023), natives of the following nations are ineligible: Bangladesh, Brazil, Canada, China (mainland and Hong Kong), Colombia, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, India, Jamaica, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, South Korea, Venezuela, and Vietnam.

Exemptions
The term 50,000 "immigrants" refers only to people who immigrated via family and employment categories, and does not include other categories such as refugees, asylum seekers, or previous diversity immigrants. For this reason, Cuba, Guatemala, Afghanistan and Ukraine were not on the ineligible list as of 2023, despite sending over 50,000 immigrants in the previous five years.

Changes
The first program was in fiscal year 1995, and the following 12 countries were ineligible from the start: Canada, China (mainland), Dominican Republic, El Salvador, India, Jamaica, Mexico, Philippines, South Korea, Taiwan, United Kingdom and its dependent territories (except Northern Ireland and Hong Kong), and Vietnam. Since then, Bangladesh, Brazil, Colombia, Haiti, Honduras, Nigeria, Pakistan and Venezuela have been added to the ineligible list and are currently on it, Taiwan and the United Kingdom have been removed from it, and Ecuador, Guatemala, Peru, Poland and Russia have been on and off the ineligible list, reflecting shifting levels of immigration from these countries.

Macau was ineligible as part of China only for DV-2002, whose entry period (October 2000) was after the transfer of sovereignty of Macau from Portugal to China (December 1999) but before enactment of the Macau Policy Act (December 2000), which specified that U.S. law would treat Macau as it did before the transfer. Hong Kong was considered as a separate country for the lottery and eligible from the start, but became ineligible as part of China from DV-2022.

Statistics
[[File:DV applicants.png|thumb|400px|Applicants (including dependents) to the Diversity Visa lottery (for most recent eligible year with available data), as a percentage of each country's population

Deceptive agencies
There is no charge to enter the Diversity Visa lottery, and the only way to do so is by completing and sending the electronic form available at the U.S. Department of State website during the registration period. However, there are numerous companies and websites that charge a fee in order to complete the form for the applicant. The Department of State and the Federal Trade Commission have warned that some of these businesses falsely claim to increase someone's chances of winning the lottery, or that they are affiliated with the U.S. government.

There have also been numerous cases of fraudulent emails and letters which falsely claim to have been sent by the Department of State and that the recipient has been granted a permanent resident card. These messages prompt the recipients to transfer a "visa processing fee" as a prerequisite for obtaining a "guaranteed" green card. The messages are sometimes sent to people who never participated in the lottery and can look trustworthy as they contain the recipient's exact name and contact details and what appears to be a legal notice.

The Department of State has issued a warning against the scammers. It notes that any email claiming the recipient to be a winner of the lottery is fake because the Department has never notified and will not notify winners by email. The Department has urged recipients of such messages to notify the Internet Crime Complaint Center about the scam.

The office of inspector general has identified multiple problems with DV lottery in several countries, including Ukraine, Ghana, Albania in embassy inspection reports.

According to testimony from Stephen A. Edson before the House Judiciary Committee, "in Bangladesh, for example, one agent is reported to have enrolled an entire phone book so that he could then either extort money from winning applicants who had never entered the program to begin with or sell their winning slots to others."

Economic
Labor economists and others have credited the Diversity Visa program for providing economic benefits to the United States and enhancing the competitiveness of the U.S. labor force.

Research by Lewis and several other economists shows that diverse and low-skilled immigrants lift the wages of native-born workers, as those immigrants are less substitutable to native-born workers.

Charles Kenny, an economist at the Center for Global Development, noted that research by Harvard economist Alberto Alesina found that countries with a higher share of foreign-born populations tended to have more innovation and higher incomes.

Security
In 2004, the State Department's deputy inspector general warned that there were security risks to granting visas to winners from countries with ties to terrorism. A 2007 Government Accountability Office report however found no evidence that recipients of diversity visas posed a threat.

According to PolitiFact, "there is at least one documented example of an individual who migrated through the diversity visa system and was later arrested on terrorism-related charges. But it is unclear that the diversity lottery has historically been used as a strategic entry point for terrorists."

The uncle of Akayed Ullah, the man who set off a bomb on a New York City Subway platform in 2017, won a diversity lottery, which enabled him to bring his nephew to the United States under the family reunification provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965.

Experts on immigration note that the chances of winning the lottery are low and those who do win the lottery still have to undergo background checks and vetting, which makes the diversity lottery program a poor choice for immigrants considering launching terrorist attacks in the United States.

According to the Cato Institute, immigrants from the countries with the highest percentage of diversity visas have vastly lower incarceration rates than native-born Americans.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Diversity Immigrant Visa


text:
Talk:Dollar coin (United States)

Heading just to put this under the TOC
It appears that the coin might replace the $1 bill almost completely that soon the $1 bill might get out of circulation. As a result of this combined with the fact that Alexander Hamilton is no longer as well-remembered as he was back in 1928, the year that follows whatever year this happens (I believe it might be sometime around 2020) might be a time to change the portraits on the bills as follows:

The $2 bill changes from Thomas Jefferson to George Washington

The $5 bill changes from Abraham Lincoln to Thomas Jefferson

The $10 bill changes from Alexander Hamilton to Abraham Lincoln

The $20, $50, and $100 bills, however, will not change portraits.

What are your votes??

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.32.84.47 (talk) 17:38, 26 February 2004 (UTC)

 * Washington on the dollar coin and the $5 bill (thus, keeping the pattern of Washington on the highest generally circulating coin and the smallest generally circulating bill). Lincoln bumped up to the $10 and the quarter (dropping the penny), Hamilton bumped up to the $20 (or Lincoln bumped up to the $20, Hamilton staying on the $10).  The $50 and $100 stay the same.  Another idea - Washington on the $20 bill, Lincoln on the $1 coin, again, killing the penny Nik42 06:27, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Oh, and while we're at it, let's add a $500 bill. And make our bills prettier Nik42 06:29, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * I think it's quite a demotion for Washington to go from the one-dollar bill to the two-dollar bill. --Bkell 18:31, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Surely being on a higher denomination (curculating) bill is more desirable? otherwise why not put old George on the cent coin MrWeeble 23:16, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Why would anyone want to put George Washington on the cent coin?? He is already on the quarter coin and it is silly for there to be 2 coins with the same portrait. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.245.115.143 (talk) 01:59, 28 February 2004 (UTC)

 * MrWeeble, no one in the United States ever uses two-dollar bills. They are considered rarities. --Bkell 21:17, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * I use the two-dollar bill, they also aren't rarities, evidenced by the printing figures if you would look at this article: United States two-dollar bill.-MBK004 14:37, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

 * Get rid of the $2 bill, and switch to a $2 coin, similar to the Toonie. And put MLK on it. -Traal 09:02, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

 * My vote is that they kill the Sacajawea dollar. I hate coins so much. -Branddobbe 09:18, Mar 5, 2004 (UTC)

 * Branddobbe, please don't say such a naughty thing. Please say instead, "I don't like coins because..." with a detailed explanation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.245.111.173 (talk) 21:21, 5 March 2004 (UTC)

 * Would you rather use bills for everything, even cents? Nik42 06:17, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I like how Brasil has it. R$1 and R$2 bills, as well as a R$1 coin. I absolutly hate the british/euro system of 5 being the lowest bill.Jamesinclair 06:40, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Law enforcement (DEA, FBI, IRS, etc.) won't allow the creation of any more portable form of cash, Nik42; it makes it too easy to carry. If your business is legitimate, they argue, you don't need big bills: just use cards, checks, etc. that leave nice paper trails. -- Orange Mike 04:57, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Seeing how this argument is so unencyclopedic, why don't you guys take it elsewhere? There's a forum for two dollar bills at, or you could go to the Wheres George Forums. BirdValiant 18:23, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

True or false??
True or false: The next kind of dollar coin after Sacagawea will enter circulation in 2005. 66.245.7.175 20:07, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
 * What I'm hearing indicates something to that effect. A nice rotating design to sucker in the coin collectors, the only market dollar coins seem to have right now.  Why can't they just stop printing the bills? --Alexwcovington 16:32, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
 * See Save the Greenback. There are entrenched special interests against getting rid of the dollar bill.   — Nathanlarson32767  (Talk) 03:21, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * You mean, all of U.S. currency should be just coins?? 66.245.107.192 23:57, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I could go for that! :-)  Though, I seriously doubt it'd ever happen.  Nor did it seem to me that Alexcovington was suggesting that, just for the $1 (which is a rather low denomination to have a bill for, IMHO - especially when you consider that, with the exception of the fractional currency of the Civil War era, the $1 has consistently been our smallest bill, despite significant inflation) Nik42 06:17, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I can't find it
I want to check for a look to the Presidential act of 2004 that talks about a proposed plan for future dollar coins. 66.32.246.73 01:40, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Fiscal impact
I wasn't sure where the best place in the article would be for fiscal impact info, but it seems like an important thing to mention, since that was a major rationale for reintroducing the coin. — Nathanlarson32767 | (Talk) 07:30, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Trade dollars
We need a section on Trade dollars. Though no longer legal tender (I think -- need to double-check my history there) they are a significant element of U.S. coinage history and definitely deserve a mention on this page. Because they saw fairly little American circulation, they've largely been forgotten by collectors. —chris.lawson (talk) 00:20, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Section Headers
Please leave the format of the section headers in the form:

 * Coin series (date begun–date discontinued)

It's this way in every single other U.S. coin article because that's the accepted numismatic convention, and consistency in this regard is important.

Thanks.—chris.lawson (talk) 23:06, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Where should be place the debate about phasing out the paper dollar and replacing it with the dollar coin? This issue is important. 24.54.208.177 01:38, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

1996/1997 silver dollar coins??
I have a couple of supposed silver dollar coins, one has 1996 and the other has 1997 on them. But according to this article, none were minted between 1981 and 1999. What gives? --69.234.185.170 20:07, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Are they Silver Eagles? I guess you can say they are technically coins since they have a denomination and you could spend them for a dollar if the unreal happened and Silver dropped below the face value, but they are more like certified buillion tokens. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 23:08, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * They are actual, real US coins, legal tender for $1. However...as we all know, they're worth quite a bit more than $1, and one would be throwing away money to spend them for $1. It'd be kinda cool to see someone's reaction, though. ;) Timber72 05:04, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Historical Dollar stats
Since the dollar coin has changed in size and composition so much during its history, I think it would be interesting for each older dollar to have its size, weight, and metal composition listed.

Also, does anyone know why the Mogan and Peace dollar had more silver per face value than the halves, quarters, and dimes of the same period (which were all the same as each other)?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.107.63.226 (talk) 18:51, 2 June 2005 (UTC)

Intro
The intro definitely needs rephrasing, but to make "silver dollar" the bold phrase in the first sentence is definitely not how to do it (since this article is "United States dollar coin", not "Silver dollar"). I have my own ideas, but I'd like to see some suggestions here from others before I taint anyone's opinion with my own. ;) --chris.lawson 01:46, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Sloppy of me, I was redirected from Silver dollar and wasn't thinking. The second paragraph does follow the manual of style, though, in that it says "Sub-Foo is a thing of type Foo, class Foo2."  The current first pararaph doesn't do that.  Happy to do some back and forth on the main page until we get one we like, or do you prefer do do it here? -  brenneman (t) (c)  02:15, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Also in the intro, there's the weasely, "purists insist", which is a weasely way to insinuate that they're wrong, by labeling them "purists" (not supported by any cited evidence), and that they "inist", a classic weasel word from the field of tabloid yellow journalism. Deleted, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.68.134.1 (talk) 15:36, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Presidential Dollar Coin Program
The next coins after Sacagawea will enter circulation in 2007. Sacagawea will continue to be minted. All Susan B. Anthony dollar coins and any older (if left) will be removed from circulation. Because the bill is now law, you legally can't get a dollar bill at any place that gets a penny of federal money from 2007 onward throughout the program. though I do not want to venture outside the topic, I'm going to discussion a little. The Feds have pretty much decided to get rid of the $2 bill and half dollar. These ideas are not very popular, but virtual reality. However, the idea of removing the penny and dollar bill is very popular. The dollar bill is dead man walking with this bill. It is gone. The penny will probably be gone after 2009 because the bill says that the penny has to be redesigned after 2009 IF it is to be minted at all. So the penny is gone too. BTW, the portraits won't be moved. This is in order to avoid another Reagan discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.136.181.156 (talk) 06:00, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

 * (a) No dollar coins will be removed from circulation as a result of the Presidential $1 Coin Act of 2005.
 * (b) No one will be prohibited by the Act from dispensing dollar bills. The Act requires entities receiving federal money to be able to receive and dispense dollar coins by January 1, 2008, and to display that they have that capability.  This explicitly includes vending machines.  But requiring them to accept and dispense coins does not prohibit them from accepting and dispensing bills.
 * (c) Nothing in the Act mentions the $2 bill or the fifty-cent coin.
 * (d) The Act does not call into question the minting of the penny after 2009. The Act gives direction as to the design of the penny after 2009.
 * Jwolfe 06:02, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Sacagaweas in casinos?
I've never seen a dollar slot machine that uses Sacagaweas (or Susan B. Anthonys or old-school dollar coins, for that matter) - all the casinos I've ever been to seem to use large, heavy gold-colored tokens (see casino token) instead.

However, casinos are the only place I've ever seen half-dollars in circulation, both for the slots and to payoff blackjacks on $5 tables (instead of using $2.50 tokens). Lordsutch 05:50, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

More pictures needed?
Does anyone agree that it would be useful to have more pictures in this article? A great many different dollar coins are mentioned, and some of them have links to articles about those coins, but only a few have pictures on this page. I think this article needs more pictures. Perhaps if some were copied from the other articles? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ONUnicorn (talk • contribs) 22:00, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I see someone has added some pictures. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ONUnicorn (talk • contribs) 14:40, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Infobox
Is there anyway we can edit the infobox to be more informative about the general denomination of the Dollar than being strictly exclusive to the Sackie??--293.xx.xxx.xx 22:54, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, I just think the infobox needs more info about dollars besides the new ones, at least include the other current dollar, the Sacagawea. -YB3 (talk • contribs) 05:56, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Sacagawea dollar has an infobox itself. But I'm guessing that you'd like to see the infobox on this page shows information about both coins. Perhaps I get work something out with the template. But I need input from you. What exactly would you like to see in the box (and we should make a general style guide for coins that have multiple designs that circulate concurrently, like the 50 State Quarters or 2 German mark). --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 01:54, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Dollar coins in vending machines and parking meters
In the past week I've found that the dollar coin is accepted in parking meters (Atlanta) and in a soda vending machine distributing Coca-Cola products in the ground floor of my building. I think that it's worth including a sentence stating that vending machines and parking meters now accept the dollar coin, since many people seem to think that the coin cannot be used. I tried to amend the entry yesterday but I see that it's been deleted, presumably by the person at Wikipedia that is responsible for maintaining this article.

Thank goodness the parking meter accepted the dollar coin last week, because I certainly couldn't have put paper money in the meter, and I didn't have enough smaller coins to pay for more than 5 - 10 minutes. Try it yourself and see if it works for you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.140.191.128 (talk) 20:23, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

 * While there may indeed be some parking meters and vending machines that accept dollar coins, any claim implying that many or most of them accept the coins -- which is precisely what your edit stated -- absolutely needs a citation from a reliable source. Once you (or anyone else) can provide that, I'll be happy to have it returned to the article.--chris.lawson 21:38, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

 * If a veteran wikipedian writes down what he/she observes from there he/she lives, does that count? --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 05:08, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Merely because one metropolitan area in the US has converted some (or even most) of its vending machines to accept dollar coins doesn't mean that the dollar coin is generally accepted in the US. Furthermore, that sure sounds like original research to me. I'd prefer to see a citation of an external source on this.--chris.lawson 07:07, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I have seen many vending machines that accept Sacajawea dollar coins. They always have a sticker next to the coin/bill slot that says it accepts them. These are food/beverage vending machines, not just ticket or stamp machines. I think it is at least worth noting that some vending machines do accept them, and not just dispense them. PhorkPhace 03:18, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Does anybody really claim that most machines don't take them nowadays? In Milwaukee and other cities I visit, at least 80% of machines that sell anything for over 25 cents take them. (The only exception is coin laundries, which are on a quarters-only system.) -- Orange Mike 14:26, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

While living in NYC in 1994, I fed a $20 bill into a Jersey Transit ticket machine at Penn Stn. It gave me nine Susan B. Anthony coins for change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.244.239.129 (talk) 23:46, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Paper supplier rumor
Anybody ever hear the allegation that the real reason we haven't already dumped the $1 bill and printed large quantities of $2s instead, is that a paper supplier in Edward Kennedy's home district was the U.S. Mint's supplier for $1 bills only? -- Orange Mike 04:55, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * All the notes are printed on the same paper from the same supplier. I forget where they are tho.   Jo  e  I  04:59, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * If the paper supplier has been lobbying, then they would print more $2. I think it's because of the irrational psychology of the American public wanting to keep the dollar bill. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 08:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

the death of ford
can we change "The program will run until at least 2016 with the coin commemorating Ronald Reagan, but may continue longer depending on the longevity of the currently living former presidents, and potentially even the longevity of the current president or presidents yet to be elected." to account for President Ford's death?--Rocketrye12 17:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It's not necessary. Ford served before Reagan, so the sentence is still accurate as written. Jwolfe 04:57, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Which coin to show
In an attempt to avoid a revert war, I'd like to discuss here which coin should be shown on the page. There will be more presidential coins produced, but more Sacagawea coins will be produced than any one presidential design. With the 1/3 requirement, at least 2 out of every 6 coins produced each year will be Sacagawea, while approximately 1 out of every 6 coins produced will be one of the four presidential designs. Seems to me that for this reason we should maintain the Sacagawea coin as the representative coin for the page. Jwolfe 21:11, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

 * This is being discusses at Talk:United States dollar --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 21:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Presidental coins - only dead presidents
The reason why only dead presidents (and only those dead for at least two years) will be featured on the new Presidental coin series is due to an existing federal law that creates this restriction. However, I could not find the actual text of the law. As such, I've simply placed a "citation needed" reference. If anyone has a link to the actual law, please cite it. Thanks. --CPAScott 22:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It appears the change has been made. Thanks.  --CPAScott 16:10, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Glad to help. -- Orange Mike 16:27, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

My interpretation is that the series cannot honor President Reagan because President Carter is still living, and the series ends as soon as it cannot continue in order of succession. Am I incorrect? Currently the main page and the summary on this page reflect different information. Jeffbarnett513 (talk) 16:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)jeffbarnett513
 * There's nothing I can find on the U.S. Mint website addressing this issue. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that somebody's quietly working on Carter, GHWBush, and Clinton designs, just in case. -- Orange Mike  |   Talk  18:35, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * (n)(8) specifies, "The issuance of coins under this subsection shall terminate when each President has been so honored, subject to paragraph (2)(E), and may not be resumed except by an Act of Congress", and (n)(2)(E) says "No coin issued under this subsection may bear the image of a living former or current President, or of any deceased former President during the 2-year period following the date of the death of that President." This means that if Jimmy Carter is still alive in mid-2014, then the program will end with Gerald Ford in mid-2016.  However, if Carter dies before then, then the program will continue until at least the end of 2016 with Ronald Reagan (or later, if one or more consecutive presidents have died by the end of 2014).
 * So it's not necessarily due to "an existing law"; rather, it's part of the $1 Presidential Coin law. (This doesn't exclude the possibility of there also being an existing law saying the same thing, of course.) --ΨΦorg (talk) 00:54, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * (n)(4)(A) states, "In general.— The designs for the $1 coins issued during each year of the period referred to in paragraph (1) shall be emblematic of 4 Presidents until each President has been so honored, subject to paragraph (2)(E)." The concept of skipping a President is not excluded by the language.  Further, the law does not explicitly declare the coins will cease when a non-eligible President's turn is reached.  It can easily be argued that the law requires skipping living Presidents so that each eligible President (subject to paragraph (2)(E)) is honored.  The way the article is currently written allows for either interpretation, so perhaps no changes to the article itself are necessary. --Sg199 (talk) 18:24, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Recognition In the U.S.
Should it also be noted that it seems as though many people do not see dollar coins as real currency in the US? I went to a driving range, which cost 4 dollars for a bucket of balls. My mom gave me dollar coins (she had just gone to the post office which always gives them out) to use to pay. Keep in mind that I was 13 and the person at the cash register was somewhere around 25. I gave him the four coins and he said "This is not enough money for even a small bucket. You need 3 more dollars for a medium bucket." At this point, I was struggling not to laugh. Apparently, he had never seen or even HEARD of a Susan B. Anthony dollar. I had to show him the part where it says one dollar, and then even worse, I had to explain that it was not a collectors item but true currency. Has anybody else had similar experiences? PhorkPhace 03:18, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Absolutely. I went to deposit 25 Susan B. Anthony dollars. The teller counted them 4 by 4. I reminded him that they're dollar coins so there was no trouble there. But I don't blame him. The SBA dollar is indeed too similar to the quarter. This problem is alleviated now.

 * See also . --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 08:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

false statement removed (re: tarnish on Sacs/Prexibux)
Hi all,

I've removed this sentence:

 This was corrected in 2007, when Sacagawea dollars started receiving the same treatments to prevent tarnish that were applied to the presidential dollar coins (see below).

I've done some reading into this and wrote two coin people. One was Mike Wallace, the owner of United States Small Size Dollar Coins and Related Items, a site about the SBA, Sac, and Prexibux. I asked him about the claim. He wrote back:

A friend of mine spoke to a dealer that claims that he can tell the difference between a pre-2007 Sac$ blank and a Presidential Dollar blank because a different rinse was used. ''But I suspect he was saying that because he was trying to sell a golden dollar blank described as a Pres$ for several hundred dollars,,,,,,,,,, as opposed to a Sac$ blank that sells for about $100. Other than this I haven't heard anything about a different rinse being used, but I wouldn't be surprised.''

I also wrote to Al Herbert, a member of the ANA Board of Governors. He wrote back:

The only they could change the tarnish would be to change the coin alloy in some way and I haven't seen anything that would confirm a change.

On the basis of these things, I've removed the clause. If anyone has info to the contrary, feel free to reinsert it. - Thanks, Hoshie 06:16, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Should American Silver Eagles be on this page somewhere?
American Silver Eagle ? I don't know enough about coins to include it. --Rajah 04:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * inserted it in its chronological place; anybody want to put in the picture, too? -- Orange Mike 14:32, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

No. They are bullion coins, not circulating coins, and as such, should be included on a bullion page. 71.136.185.225 04:03, 14 October 2007 (UTC) Timber72

 * They are, nonetheless, legal tender. Why exclude them? -- Orange Mike 14:59, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

 * because they are not circulating US coinage. They are "$1" in name ONLY. The US gov't could have as easily called them "$2", or "$5" (as the Canadians did with the maple leaf.) Timber72 09:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fixing Morgan, Peace, and GSA sections
I am cleaning up and fixing errors in the Morgan, Peace, and GSA sections...quit reverting. Thank you. 71.136.185.225 04:04, 14 October 2007 (UTC) Timber72
 * Your edits removed content without an explanation and therefore looked suspicious. In the future, please consider placing Template:Inuse on the page to keep this from happening again.-MBK004 03:50, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

They looked "suspicious", because you are too quick to assume that edits are "suspicious". There's no reason to assume someone would want to vandalize a page on US Silver Dollars. If you had just waited to see what my edits WERE, you would have seen that they fixed erroneous information, fixed my own edits, and expanded on certain sections.

Previous edits were ALSO by me, and used (I assume) the same static IP.

However, I will use the "Inuse" template from now on so people don't run screaming to the conclusion that a page is being vandalised, instead of being FIXED. I thought that was the PURPOSE of Wikipedia, so that ACCURATE editing can be done by ANYBODY, without intrusion by well meaning, but quick to rush to judgement "editors." Thanks.

71.136.185.225 04:03, 14 October 2007 (UTC) Timber72

Early Dollar Coins
The final two paragraphs of the section "Early Dollar Coins" are pure nonsense. I dont know where this fud and cruft comes from. Its nonsense to imagine that the lower value US coins would be exchanged 1-1 in the caribbian, unless the Caribbian government declared the US dollar to be accepted at that rate. I am away from my resource texts at the moment, so I can not suggest a concrete reason why the author would belive this to be the case, but I will come back and add to this later.

The final paragraph is essentially rubbish stemming from a complete misunderstanding of the reason for Greshams law, and when it actually fails. Greshams law fails when legal tender laws do not enforce a nominal value of coinage. IN absence of legal tender laws, coinage will circulate based on market value, rather than assigned value. Legal tender laws are a way to assign value to (sort of fiatize) a specie currency.

A partial correction - which is not perfect but is a thousand times more accurate than what exists in the page - follows:

Once a government sets a fixed value for specie coin, if the fixed trade value of the coin is significantly below its precious metal value, it is simply melted and sold for more as bullion.

The issue is really about how governments screw up the funcion of specie currency by assigning an arbitrary nominal value to the coin. Once this is done to a specie currency, if the value of the metal itself varies - as it does - an increase of the value of the metal above the nominal specie value causes the coins to be melted for the metal since it is worth more as bullion.

Conversely, if the value of the precious metal drops compared to the nominal value of the coin that holds it, what actually happens is that usually it causes the government to print a whole lot more of the coins, since it is a revenue making exercise. If the coins have a further market actually bringing money into the country by exchange with caribbian coins of higher metal content, then that is a good thing for the US, but a bad thing for the Caribbian. It would be up to the Caribbian government to stop it to prevent the drain of their currency by lower value coin.

Sorry, ths has gone on longer than I intended, but I dont have time to edit it down. I will review this later. Octothorn. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.45.156 (talk) 08:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Mint marks???
There was no mention of mint marks for the Eisenhower, Susan B Anthony, or Sacagawea dollars, and only the location on the president coins. What mints made and are making these coins for circulation? 70.187.75.72 (talk) 18:52, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Broadly speaking, Philadelphia and Denver struck circulation coinage for all four types of dollars, while San Francisco minted coins for the collector market. San Francisco also minted business strikes of the Susan B. Anthony dollar in 1979 and 1980. Nibios (talk) 15:33, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:SacDollar.jpeg
The image Image:SacDollar.jpeg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --01:15, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

2009 Update needed
A lot needs to be done to update the page. I have given a starter section on the Native American coins, but the rest of the article needs to follow since those are the "new" Sacagawea dollars. We need to update the reverse picture, move the old picture somewhere else and put the "future" tenses to past or present tense. Basically, it needs a rewrite. --Triadian (talk) 19:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Sacagawea Dollars?
Can someone add this coin and other current coins at the begining list? --Parker1297 (talk) 16:24, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Saving money?
I recently saw posters in the DC metro touting dollar coins as a way to save the U.S. money (expanded upon at http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/07/23/dollar_coins/). Should this be part of the article? Galatians 4:7 (talk) 11:50, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The article you linked to is from 2008. We'd need a more recent item than that. -- Orange Mike  |   Talk  15:23, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I have, however, added a bit about the pro- and anti-elimination organizations, both to this article and to the dollar bill article. -- Orange Mike  |   Talk  15:39, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

1935-1968
Was there no dollar coin minted in the US between the Peace dollar and the Eisenhower dollar?Masternachos (talk) 04:20, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Nope. -- Orange Mike  |   Talk  01:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Louis Braille Dollar
I have three Louis Braille dollars that were issued in 2009. Shouldn't these be mentioned here? (Why is there no Wikipedia articles about this coin?) Here are two articles about it at Coin Update: Louis Braille Commemorative Coins and Louis Braille Silver Dollar Sales Ending Today Note: I posted the image at right to three other Wikipedia articles already. Bien amicalement, Charvex (talk) 06:32, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Original Sacagawea dollar image
The image being used for the obverse of the 2000-2008 Sacagawea dollar is incorrect. They had the date on the obverse next to Sacagawea. -- Ibagli ( Talk ) 22:56, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Upside down?
I have a 2010 silver dollar in front of me. If set it so the obverse is the right way up, then the reverse is upside down, and vice versa. Is this normal? Circulated coins where I live in the UK have the obverse and the reverse in the same orientation. Zargulon (talk) 08:30, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is normal.-- Ibagli ( Talk ) 17:57, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you sure? In Europe this is a classic mark of a counterfeit coin? --2.25.67.169 (talk) 23:43, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Looking at the contents of my pocket, all of my coins appear to be contra-faced, so I do believe that this is indeed normal in the States. Goalbox (talk) 22:51, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

I have a 1971 JFK half dollar and a 1979 Susan B. one dollar. Both coins are contra faced. The JFK is much larger. The JFK has the Federal Seal, while the Susan B. has a perched eagle.220.244.239.129 (talk) 23:40, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Correct links?
Are the links under "Designs" correct? Both the "Liberty Head (Small Size) 1849–1854" and "Indian Head (Large Size) 1854–1889" link to a page titled "Gold dollar", and that coin shows three designs for the obverse, all showing Liberty. (Although one is claimed to be Liberty as an Indian princess.) Elsquared (talk) 03:36, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Metal prices
I noticed that some of the metal prices here are out of date. Is it even worth keeping them in here considering they change so often? Goalbox (talk) 09:15, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Dollar coin (United States). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061122074430/http://money.cnn.com/2006/11/20/news/dollar_coin.reut/index.htm to http://money.cnn.com/2006/11/20/news/dollar_coin.reut/index.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 17:00, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dollar coin (United States). 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/20120226191331/http://money.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&CONTENTID=6241&TEMPLATE=%2FCM%2FContentDisplay.cfm to http://money.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&CONTENTID=6241&TEMPLATE=%2FCM%2FContentDisplay.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:31, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

E PLURIBUS UNUM is 13 Letters and is Symbolic of 13 Original United States
The Latin motto - E PLURIBUS UNUM - is a very old saying and means 'out of many, one'. Why not put that on all US currency? Because that's only 12 letters and besides the Latin sounding scholarly, E PLURIBUS UNUM is 13 letters and like the 13 stripes on the United States Flag is symbolic of the 13 Original United States. 2601:580:109:6470:6C47:F5B6:F71F:E99D (talk) 23:30, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * This is not the right article to explain this. You might want to try the E Pluribus Unum article itself. - ZLEA T\C 00:07, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

1905 - 1920 hiatus?
Apparently no dollar coins were minted from 1905 - 1920. The article should explain why. This reader would like to know! 2601:281:CC80:5AE0:FC17:F524:E0AE:C441 (talk) 11:03, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * There weren't any minted in that period because the Treasury had all the silver dollars it needed. I'm not sure that's worthy of inclusion in the article. Almostfm (talk) 16:25, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:37, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * 1 Dollar (United States).jpg

Is this information false or misleading?
At the side in the box we read:
 * "United States

Value	1.00 U.S. dollar Mass	8.100 (2000–) g (0.260 troy oz) Diameter	26.5 mm (1.043 in) Thickness	2.00 mm (0.079 in) Edge	Plain with incised inscriptions Composition	Copper with manganese brass clad (copper 88.5%, zinc 6%, manganese 3.5%, nickel 2%) Years of minting	1794–present[1]"

Was the coin described in the first 7 lines minted from 1794 to present??? (FairNPOV (talk) 18:30, 13 May 2021 (UTC)) Blocked sock. Butler Blog  (talk) 17:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you find potentially false or misleading. Yes, the US Mint struck the first dollar coin in 1794 and production continues to this day, there's nothing false or misleading about it. -  ZLEA  T \ C 19:46, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

 * Would that box be improved either by prefacing the descriptions with what specific dollar coin is being described or by including a series describing the quite different dollar coins which have been minted or by giving a range, like X mm to Y mm? Do they all have the same mass, diameter & thickness?  Are not silver eagle dollars in being minted?(FairNPOV (talk) 00:12, 19 May 2021 (UTC))  Blocked sock.   Butler Blog   (talk) 17:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

 * Given that there have been a dozen different designs, seven different compositions, and at least five different diameters, adding all that to the infobox would simply make it unwieldy. I think it's less confusing to leave it as it is-the article is going to mention the differences anyway-the infobox is (at least to me) supposed to give a basic thumbnail of the article, and it does that now. Almostfm (talk) 08:58, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I have to agree with the original poster. The infobox implies that ALL United States dollar coins ever minted have been that particular size. As this is not true, we are misleading the reader. This needs to be changed in some way. At least put in a "current size" note.--Khajidha (talk) 16:20, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Perhaps we should do what is done at Penny (United States coin). In that article's infobox we list only the current specs of the coin as well as how long they were since they were last changed. -  ZLEA  T \ C 16:55, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Even that infobox is misleading. The penny has not always been 19.05 mm (0.75 in) in diameter, as that infobox implies. Any note about size, composition, or design of a coin needs to be specific as to which mintings it is relevant to. --Khajidha (talk) 17:01, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree with FairNPOV and Khajidha on this. Specific information on the physical coins do not apply to a denomination as a whole, but are appropriately expressed on specific subarticles like Sacagawea dollar. CMD (talk) 17:10, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * But do you agree that the concept would make the infobox less misleading? - ZLEA  T \ C 17:33, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Considering that that's what I said to do before your reply, the answer is obviously yes. --Khajidha (talk) 17:39, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:10, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * 2018 American Innovation Dollar reverse.jpg
 * American Innovation Dollar obverse.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:40, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * 2021 Native American $1 Coin Reverse.png

Rarity
There are an estimated 100 million 1$ coins in circulation and in good condition can be rare 69.118.127.72 (talk) 03:11, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dollar coin (United States)


text:
Peterborough Petes

The Peterborough Petes are a junior ice hockey team in the Ontario Hockey League. The team has played at the Peterborough Memorial Centre in Peterborough, Ontario, Canada, since 1956, and is the oldest continuously operating team in the league.

History
The Petes were born on October 1, 1956, when the Kitchener Canucks relocated to Peterborough after the 1955–56 season. They also became a sponsored junior team for the Montreal Canadiens of the NHL. The Petes played their first game on November 4, 1956, and won their first game on November 8, 1956.

The Petes have won the OHL Championship ten times, which is the second-most in OHL history behind the Oshawa Generals who have 13 and the most in the postwar era. The franchise’s most recent OHL Championship was in 2023 with a six game victory over the London Knights. They won the Memorial Cup once, in 1979.

TPT Petes
The team was sponsored by Toronto-Peterborough Transport (TPT) from 1956 to 1966. Scotty Bowman was brought in to coach by the Montreal Canadiens organization from the Ottawa-Hull Canadiens junior team, and led the team to a second-place finish in 1959. Peterborough defeated the Barrie Flyers, Guelph Biltmore Mad Hatters and Toronto St. Michael's Majors in the playoffs to win their first OHA championship. Bowman and the TPT Petes went on to reach the Memorial Cup for the first time that year but fell to the Winnipeg Braves. The TPT Petes claimed their first Hamilton Spectator Trophy during the 1965-66 season, but were eliminated from the playoffs.

Roger Neilson era (1966–1976)
The team became known as the Peterborough Petes Hockey Club in 1966–67, which was also the beginning of Roger Neilson's tenure as coach. The Petes wore the TPT logo on their sweaters until 1974–75, when their colours were changed to maroon and white and a new "Petes" logo was adopted.

Neilson led his team to seven consecutive winning seasons from 1968 to 1975, also finishing first overall in 1970–71, winning the J. Ross Robertson Cup in 1972, and were runners-up in 1973 and 1974. In the 1972 Memorial Cup, the Petes lost a close 2–1 game in the finals to the Cornwall Royals.

Neilson left behind a winning legacy in Peterborough and set the standard for coaches to come. Neilson was the first coach to use videotape analysis as a teaching method, leading to the nickname "Captain Video," and also the first to use microphone headsets to communicate with his assistant coaches.

Neilson also pushed the envelope causing several rules to be rewritten. During one Petes game, his team was up one goal, but was down two men in a five on three situation for the last minute of the game. Realizing that more penalties could not be called under the existing rules, Neilson put too many men on the ice every ten seconds. The referees stopped the play and a faceoff was held relieving pressure on the defence. After this display the rule was changed so that a call for too many men on the ice in a 5 on 3 situation now leads to a penalty shot.

Neilson also discovered that if he put a defenceman in net instead of a goalie during a penalty shot, the defenceman could rush the attacker and greatly reduce the chances of a goal. Today the rule states that a team must use a goalie in net for a penalty shot, and that the goalie may not leave the crease until the attacking player touches the puck.

Neilson was promoted for the 1976–77 season, coaching the Dallas Black Hawks in the former Central Hockey League.

Three seasons, three titles
The Peterborough Petes won three consecutive OHL championships in 1978, 1979 and 1980. Gary Green coached the first two championships followed up by Mike Keenan in 1980. The Petes won the Hamilton Spectator Trophy two consecutive times in 1979 and 1980. Peterborough's success also continued into the Memorial Cup, reaching the championship game all three years, and winning the national junior title in 1979.

Many future NHL stars played for Petes in these three years. Those of note are: Keith Acton, Bob Atwell, Keith Crowder, Ken Ellacott, Doug Evans, Dave Fenyves, Tom Fergus, Larry Floyd, Mark Kirton, Rick LaFerriere, Steve Larmer, Larry Murphy, Mark Reeds, Stuart Smith, Steve Smith, Bill Gardner, Tim Trimper and Jim Wiemer.

Dick Todd era (1982–1993)
Dick Todd started with the Petes as a trainer in the 1970s and was with the team through their three Memorial Cups. As a coach he led the team to two more Memorial Cup tournaments—in 1989 in Saskatoon, and in 1993 in Sault Ste. Marie. During Todd's time as coach, the Petes won six division titles and had the best overall winning percentage in the OHL. Todd was awarded the Matt Leyden Trophy as OHL Coach of the Year in 1987–88.

Memorial Cup 1996
The Peterborough Petes celebrated their 40th anniversary in 1996. The Petes won the J. Ross Robertson Cup defeating the Guelph Storm in the finals, then and also played at home while hosting the Memorial Cup tournament in 1996. The club achieved a 100% sellout each tournament game, and lost in the final that year to the Granby Prédateurs.

50th anniversary
Todd returned as head coach of the Petes in 2004. Todd's second season back behind the Petes bench, was the 50th anniversary of the Peterborough Petes founding. They are the oldest continuously operating franchise in the Ontario Hockey League (the rival Oshawa Generals date to 1937 but were inactive from 1953 to 1962).

The Petes celebrated their 50th anniversary in grand style, winning the J. Ross Robertson Cup on May 11, 2006, in a four-game sweep of the London Knights. Peterborough travelled to Moncton, New Brunswick, to play in the 2006 Memorial Cup, losing the third place tiebreaker game to the Vancouver Giants. Todd retired for good a few weeks after the Petes returned from Moncton.

60th anniversary
The 2015–16 season marked the 60th in franchise history.

Rob Wilson era (2018–present)
Under Rob Wilson, the franchise has made three playoff appearances. In 2023, the franchise won its tenth OHL championship, defeating the London Knights, earning its tenth trip to the Memorial Cup.

Championships
Memorial Cup
 * 1959 Finalist vs. Winnipeg Braves
 * 1972 Finalist vs. Cornwall Royals
 * 1978 Finalist vs. New Westminster Bruins
 * 1979 Champions vs. Brandon Wheat Kings
 * 1980 Finalist vs. Cornwall Royals
 * 1989 3rd place in Saskatoon, SK
 * 1993 Finalist vs. S.S. Marie Greyhounds
 * 1996 Finalist vs. Granby Prédateurs
 * 2006 4th Place in Moncton, NB
 * 2023 3rd place in Kamloops, BC

George Richardson Memorial Trophy
 * 1959 Champions vs. Ottawa-Hull Canadiens

Hamilton Spectator Trophy First overall in the OHL regular season standings. Bobby Orr Trophy Eastern Conference Champions.
 * 1965–1966 58 points
 * 1970–1971 90 points
 * 1978–1979 95 points
 * 1979–1980 95 points
 * 1985–1986 92 points
 * 1991–1992 89 points
 * 1992–1993 97 points
 * 2005 Finalist vs. Ottawa 67's
 * 2006 Champions vs. Barrie Colts
 * 2017 Finalist vs. Mississauga Steelheads
 * 2023 Champions vs. North Bay Battalion

J. Ross Robertson Cup Ontario Hockey League Champions
 * 1959 Champions vs. St. Michael's Majors
 * 1972 Champions vs. Ottawa 67's
 * 1973 Finalist vs. Toronto Marlboros
 * 1974 Finalist vs. St. Catharines Black Hawks
 * 1978 Champions vs. Hamilton Fincups
 * 1979 Champions vs. Niagara Falls Flyers
 * 1980 Champions vs. Windsor Spitfires
 * 1985 Finalist vs. S.S. Marie Greyhounds
 * 1988 Finalist vs. Windsor Compuware Spitfires
 * 1989 Champions vs. Niagara Falls Thunder
 * 1993 Champions vs. S.S. Marie Greyhounds
 * 1996 Champions vs. Guelph Storm
 * 2006 Champions vs. London Knights
 * 2023 Champions vs. London Knights

Leyden Trophy First overall in the Eastern Division regular season standings.
 * 1978–79, 1979–80, 1984–85, 1985–86, 1987–88, 1988–89, 1991–92, 1992–93, 2004–05, 2005–06, 2016–17

Coaches
Three coaches of the Peterborough Petes are members of the Hockey Hall of Fame. Scotty Bowman won 9 Stanley Cups in his career, and lead the Petes to the Memorial Cup finals in 1959. Roger Neilson coached 1,000 regular season games in the NHL, and led the Petes to the 1972 Memorial Cup finals. Ted "Teeder" Kennedy played 14 years for the Toronto Maple Leafs.

Gary Green was awarded the Matt Leyden Trophy as OHL Coach of the Year in 1978–79, leading the Petes to their only Memorial Cup championship.

Dick Todd recorded 500 career victories faster than any other coach in Major Junior A hockey history, accomplishing the milestone in just 813 games. Todd was awarded the Matt Leyden Trophy as OHL Coach of the Year in 1987–88.

List of coaches with multiple seasons in parentheses.
 * 1956–57 — Calum MacKay
 * 1957–58 — Ted Kennedy
 * 1958–61 — Scotty Bowman (3)
 * 1961–62 — Neil Burke
 * 1962–65 — Frank Mario (3)
 * 1965–66 — Roger Bedard (2)
 * 1966–67 — R. Bedard & R. Neilson
 * 1967–76 — Roger Neilson (10)
 * 1976–77 — Garry Young
 * 1977–79 — Gary Green (2)
 * 1979–80 — Mike Keenan
 * 1980–81 — Dave Dryden (2)
 * 1981–82 — D. Dryden & D. Todd
 * 1982–93 — Dick Todd (14)
 * 1993–96 — Dave MacQueen (3)
 * 1996–97 — Brian Drumm (2)
 * 1997–98 — B. Drumm & Jeff Twohey
 * 1998–04 — Rick Allain (6)
 * 2004–05 — Dick Todd (14)
 * 2005–08 — Vince Malette (2)
 * 2008–10 — Ken McRae
 * 2010–12 — Mike Pelino (2+)
 * 2012–18 — Jody Hull (4+)
 * 2018 — Andrew Verner (interim)
 * 2018–present — Rob Wilson

Players
The Peterborough Petes have 152 alumni who have played in the National Hockey League. Eight Hockey Hall of Fame inductees played junior hockey for the Petes: Bob Gainey, Wayne Gretzky, Larry Murphy, Chris Pronger, and Steve Yzerman; and coaches Scotty Bowman and Roger Nielson.

The Petes have not retired any numbers, but they have banners hanging from the ceiling honouring past Petes including Bob Gainey, Steve Yzerman, Mickey Redmond, Larry Murphy, Dick Todd, Roger Neilson, Scotty Bowman and Colin Campbell.

Award winners
CHL Player of the Year
 * 1989–90 – Mike Ricci

CHL Defenceman of the Year
 * 1992–93 – Chris Pronger

CHL Top Draft Prospect Award
 * 2005–06 – Jordan Staal

CHL Rookie of the Year
 * 2009–10 – Matt Puempel

CHL Sportsman of the Year
 * 2019-20 – Nick Robertson

George Parsons Trophy Most Sportsmanlike at the Memorial Cup
 * 1978 – Mark Kirton
 * 1979 – Chris Halyk
 * 1993 – Jason Dawe
 * 1994 – Jeff Smith
 * 1996 – Mike Williams

Hap Emms Memorial Trophy Outstanding Goaltender at the Memorial Cup
 * 1978 – Ken Ellacott
 * 1980 – Rick LaFerriere

Stafford Smythe Memorial Trophy Memorial Cup MVP
 * 1996 – Cameron Mann

Red Tilson Trophy Most Outstanding Player
 * 1959–60 – Wayne Connelly
 * 1964–65 – Andre Lacroix
 * 1965–66 – Andre Lacroix
 * 1966–67 – Mickey Redmond
 * 1989–90 – Mike Ricci

Eddie Powers Memorial Trophy Scoring Champion
 * 1965–66 – Andre Lacroix

Jim Mahon Memorial Trophy Top scoring right winger
 * 1995–96 – Cameron Mann

Max Kaminsky Trophy Most Outstanding Defenceman
 * 1969–70 – Ron Plumb
 * 1973–74 – Jim Turkiewicz
 * 1978–79 – Greg Theberge
 * 1979–80 – Larry Murphy
 * 1985–86 – Terry Carkner
 * 1992–93 – Chris Pronger

Wayne Gretzky 99 Award OHL Playoffs MVP
 * 2005–06 – Daniel Ryder
 * 2022-23 - Michael Simpson

Emms Family Award Rookie of the Year
 * 1989–90 – Chris Longo
 * 2009–10 – Matt Puempel

Leo Lalonde Memorial Trophy Overage Player of the Year
 * 1996–97 – Zac Bierk

OHL Goaltender of the Year
 * 1996–97 – Zac Bierk

Dave Pinkney Trophy Lowest Team GAA
 * 1958–59 – Jacques Caron
 * 1962–63 – Chuck Goddard
 * 1969–70 – John Garrett
 * 1970–71 – John Garrett
 * 1974–75 – Greg Millen
 * 1979–80 – Rick LaFerriere & Terry Wright
 * 1985–86 – Kay Whitmore & Ron Tugnutt
 * 1987–88 – John Tanner & Todd Bojcun
 * 1988–89 – John Tanner & Todd Bojcun
 * 1992–93 – Chad Lang & Ryan Douglas

F. W. "Dinty" Moore Trophy Best Rookie GAA
 * 1977–78 – Ken Ellacott
 * 1981–82 – Shawn Kilroy
 * 1984–85 – Ron Tugnutt
 * 1987–88 – Todd Bojcun

Dan Snyder Memorial Trophy Humanitarian of the Year
 * 1993–94 – Brent Tully
 * 1996–97 – Mike Martone
 * 2004–05 – Jeff MacDougald
 * 2010–11 – Jack Walchessen
 * 2011–12 – Andrew D'Agostini

William Hanley Trophy Most Sportsmanlike Player
 * 1965–66 – Andre Lacroix
 * 1966–67 – Mickey Redmond
 * 1974–75 – Doug Jarvis
 * 1984–85 – Scott Tottle
 * 1989–90 – Mike Ricci
 * 2009–10 – Ryan Spooner
 * 2019-20 – Nicholas Robertson

Bobby Smith Trophy Scholastic Player of the Year
 * 1983–84 – Scott Tottle

Ivan Tennant Memorial Award Top Academic High School Player
 * 2010–11 – Andrew D'Agostini

NHL alumni
The Petes have graduated the most players to the NHL of all current OHL teams with a total of 248.

• Keith Acton

• Brad Aitken

• Jeff Allan

• Bob Attwell

• Scott Barney

• Owen Beck

• Bob Berry

• Zac Bierk

• Zach Bogosian

• Chris Breen

• Gerry Brisson

• Jeff Brubaker

• Randy Burridge

• Don Caley

• Colin Campbell

• Terry Carkner

• Matt Carkner

• Jacques Caron

• Tony Cassolato

• Declan Chisholm

• Wayne Connelly

• Keith Crowder

• Jassen Cullimore

• Paul Curtis

• Jason Dawe

• Denis DeJordy

• Semyon_Der-Arguchintsev

• Tie Domi

• Jamie Doornbosch

• Steve Downie

• John Druce

• Dave Duerden

• Dallas Eakins

• Ken Ellacott

• Bob Errey

• Doug Evans

• Kevin Evans

• Paul Evans

• Shawn Evans

• Tony Featherstone

• David Fenyves

• Tom Fergus

• Mark Flood

• Larry Floyd

• Corey Foster

• Kurtis Foster

• Mark Freer

• Bob Gainey

• Bill Gardner

• Scott Garland

• John Garrett

• Doug Gibson

• Dan Gloor

• Danny Grant

• Wayne Gretzky

• Doug Halward

• Chuck Hamilton

• Billy Harris

• Shawn Heins

• Andre Hidi

• Bill Huard

• Jody Hull

• Doug Jarvis

• Matt Johnson

• Joey Johnston

• Randy Johnston

• Stan Jonathan

• Jim Jones

• Jimmy Jones

• Patrick Kaleta

• Zack Kassian

• Pat Kavanagh

• Kris King

• Geordie Kinnear

• Mark Kirton

• Slater Koekkoek

• Evgeny Korolev

• Lukas Krajicek

• Arturs Kulda

• Andre Lacroix

• Rick LaFerriere

• Ron Lalonde

• Jamie Langenbrunner

• Steve Larmer

• Claude Larose

• Don Laurence

• Hank Lehvonen

• Steven Lorentz

• Steve Lyon

• Joey MacDonald

• Kevin MacDonald

• Calum MacKay

• Paul MacKinnon

• Rick MacLeish

• Cameron Mann

• Keith McCreary

• Paul McIntosh

• Scott McLellan

• Dale McTavish

• Mason McTavish

• Mike Meeker

• Anssi Melametsa

• Ryan Merkley

• Jim Mikol

• Greg Millen

• Garry Monahan

• Steve Montador

• Dave Morrison

• Larry Murphy

• Bob Murray

• Rob Murray

• Trevor Murphy

• Bob Neely

• Frank Nigro

• Danny O'Shea

• Brennan Othmann

• Dennis Patterson

• Jim Pavese

• Steve Peters

• Barclay Plager

• Bill Plager

• Ron Plumb

• Mike Posavad

• Chris Pronger

• Matt Puempel

• Alan Quine

• Craig Ramsay

• Jake Rathwell

• Liam Reddox

• Dick Redmond

• Mickey Redmond

• Mark Reeds

• Dave Reid

• Mike Ricci

• Ken Richardson

• Luke Richardson

• Nick Ritchie

• Bob Rivard

• Fern Rivard

• Jim Roberts

• Nicholas Robertson

• Dave Roche

• Peter Scamurra

• John Schella

• Andy Schliebener

• Glen Seabrooke

• Steve Seguin

• Jiri Sekac

• David Shand

• Bruce Shoebottom

• Derrick Smith

• Steve Smith

• Stu Smith

• Irv Spencer

• Ryan Spooner

• Eric Staal

• Jordan Staal

• Ron Stackhouse

• Greg Stewart

• Cory Stillman

• Ken Strong

• Peter Sullivan

• John Tanner

• Jamie Tardif

• Greg Theberge

• Leo Thiffault

• Shawn Thornton

• Tom Thurlby

• Tim Trimper

• Ron Tugnutt

• Rick Vasko

• Mike Veisor

• Austin Watson

• Bryan Watson

• Steve Webb

• Dylan Wells

• Kay Whitmore

• Jim Wiemer

• Jason Williams

• Dunc Wilson

• Keith Wright

• Bryan Young

• Steve Yzerman

Regular season
Legend: OL = Overtime loss, SL = Shootout loss

Playoffs

 * 1956–57 Out of playoffs.
 * 1957–58 Lost to Hamilton Tiger-Cubs 7 points to 3 in quarter-finals.
 * 1958–59 Defeated Barrie Flyers 8 points to 4 in quarter-finals. Defeated Guelph Biltmore Mad Hatters 8 points to 2 in semi-finals. Defeated Toronto St. Michael's Majors 9 points to 7 in finals. OHA CHAMPIONS Defeated Ottawa-Hull Canadiens in Richardson Trophy playoffs. Lost to Winnipeg Braves in Memorial Cup finals.
 * 1959–60 Defeated Barrie Flyers 8 points to 4 in quarter-finals. Lost to St. Catharines Teepees 9 points to 3 in semi-finals.
 * 1960–61 Lost to Hamilton Red Wings 8 points to 2 in quarter-finals.
 * 1961–62 Out of playoffs.
 * 1962–63 Lost to Montreal Junior Canadiens 9 points to 3 in quarter-finals.
 * 1963–64 Lost to Montreal Junior Canadiens 8 points to 2 in quarter-finals.
 * 1964–65 Defeated St. Catharines Black Hawks 8 points to 2 in quarter-finals. Lost to Toronto Marlboros 9 points to 7 in semi-finals.
 * 1965–66 Lost to Toronto Marlboros 8 points to 4 in quarter-finals.
 * 1966–67 Lost to Hamilton Red Wings 8 points to 4 in quarter-finals.
 * 1967–68 Lost to Niagara Falls Flyers 8 points to 2 in quarter-finals.
 * 1968–69 Defeated London Knights 8 points to 4 in quarter-finals. Lost to Montreal Junior Canadiens 8 points to 0 in semi-finals.
 * 1969–70 Lost to London Knights 8 points to 4 in quarter-finals.
 * 1970–71 Lost to Toronto Marlboros 8 points to 0 in quarter-finals.
 * 1971–72 Defeated St. Catharines Black Hawks 8 points to 2 in quarter-finals. Defeated Toronto Marlboros 8 points to 2 in semi-finals. Defeated Ottawa 67's 8 points to 0 in finals. OHA CHAMPIONS Lost in Memorial Cup final to Cornwall Royals.
 * 1972–73 Defeated Oshawa Generals 8 points to 0 in quarter-finals. Defeated London Knights 9 points to 5 in semi-finals. Lost to Toronto Marlboros 8 points to 6 in finals.
 * 1973–74 Defeated Ottawa 67's 9 points to 5 in quarter-finals. Defeated Kitchener Rangers 8 points to 4 in semi-finals. Lost to St. Catharines Black Hawks 9 points to 1 in finals.
 * 1974–75 Defeated Oshawa Generals 8 points to 2 in quarter-finals. Lost to Hamilton Fincups 8 points to 4 in semi-finals.
 * 1975–76 Out of playoffs.
 * 1976–77 Lost to S.S. Marie Greyhounds 3 games to 1 in first round.
 * 1977–78 Defeated Oshawa Generals 9 points to 3 in quarter-finals. Defeated Ottawa 67's 9 points to 7 in semi-finals. Defeated Hamilton Fincups 8 points to 6 in finals. OHL CHAMPIONS Finished Memorial Cup round-robin in first place, earned berth in finals. Lost to New Westminster Bruins 7–4 in the championship game.
 * 1978–79 Defeated Kingston Canadians 9 points to 5 in quarter-finals. Defeated Sudbury Wolves 8 points to 2 in semi-finals. Defeated Niagara Falls Flyers 8 points to 6 in finals. OHL CHAMPIONS Finished Memorial Cup round-robin in a three way tie, advancing to the finals on goals for/against. Defeated Brandon Wheat Kings 2–1 in OT in the championship game. MEMORIAL CUP CHAMPIONS
 * 1979–80 Defeated Sudbury Wolves 4 games to 3 in quarter-finals. Defeated Ottawa 67's 4 games to 0 in semi-finals. Defeated Windsor Spitfires 4 games to 0 in finals. OHL CHAMPIONS Finished Memorial Cup round-robin in first place, earned berth in finals. Lost to Cornwall Royals 3–2 in OT in the championship game.
 * 1980–81 Lost to Oshawa Generals 3 games to 2 in division quarter-finals.
 * 1981–82 Defeated Kingston Canadians 6 points to 2 in first round. Lost to Oshawa Generals 8 points to 2 in quarter-finals.
 * 1982–83 Earned first round bye. 2nd place in Leyden. Lost to Oshawa Generals 8 points to 0 in quarter-finals.
 * 1983–84 Defeated Cornwall Royals 6 points to 0 in first round. Lost to Toronto Marlboros 8 points to 2 in quarter-finals.
 * 1984–85 Defeated Ottawa 67's 9 points to 1 in first round. Earned bye through quarter-finals. 1st place in Leyden. Defeated Belleville Bulls 9 points to 1 in semi-finals. Lost to S.S.Marie Greyhounds 9 points to 5 in finals.
 * 1985–86 Defeated Toronto Marlboros 8 points to 0 in first round. Finished tired for first in round-robin vs. Belleville & Kingston with 4 points. Lost to Belleville Bulls 9 points to 7 in semi-finals.
 * 1986–87 Earned bye through 1st round. 2nd place in Leyden. Defeated Ottawa 67's 4 games to 2 in quarter-finals. Lost to Oshawa Generals 4 games to 2 in semi-finals.
 * 1987–88 Defeated Toronto Marlboros 4 games to 0 in first round. Earned bye through quarter-finals. 1st place in Leyden. Defeated Ottawa 67's 4 games to 0 in semi-finals. Lost to Windsor Compuware Spitfires 4 games to 0 in finals.
 * 1988–89 Defeated Belleville Bulls 4 games to 1 in first round. Earned bye through quarter-finals. 1st place in Leyden. Defeated Cornwall Royals 4 games to 2 in semi-finals. Defeated Niagara Falls Thunder 4 games to 2 in finals. OHL CHAMPIONS Finished Memorial Cup round-robin in third place. Lost to Swift Current Broncos 6–2 in the semi-final game.
 * 1989–90 Defeated Ottawa 67's 4 games to 0 in first round. Defeated Belleville Bulls 4 games to 0 in quarter-finals. Lost to Oshawa Generals 4 games to 0 in semi-finals.
 * 1990–91 Lost to North Bay Centennials 4 games to 0 in first round.
 * 1991–92 Earned bye through first round. 1st place in Leyden. Defeated Ottawa 67's 4 games to 1 in quarter-finals. Lost to North Bay Centennials 4 games to 1 in semi-finals.
 * 1992–93 Lost to S.S.Marie Greyhounds 4 games to 0 in super-series. Earned first round bye. Defeated Sudbury Wolves 4 games to 3 in quarter-finals. Defeated Kingston Frontenacs 4 games to 1 in semi-finals. Defeated S.S.Marie Greyhounds 4 games to 1 in finals. OHL CHAMPIONS Finished Memorial Cup round-robin in second place. Defeated Laval Titan 3–1 in the semi-final game. Lost to S.S.Marie Greyhounds 4–2 in the championship game.
 * 1993–94 Lost to Ottawa 67's 4 games to 3 in division quarter-finals.
 * 1994–95 Defeated Oshawa Generals 4 games to 3 in division quarter-finals. Lost to Detroit Jr. Red Wings 4 games to 0 in quarter-finals.
 * 1995–96 Defeated Kingston Frontenacs 4 games to 1 in division quarter-finals. Defeated Sarnia Sting 4 games to 2 in quarter-finals. Defeated Detroit Jr. Red Wings 4 games to 1 in semi-finals. Defeated Guelph Storm 4 games to 3 in finals. OHL CHAMPIONS Finished Memorial Cup round-robin in third place. Defeated Brandon Wheat Kings 4–3 in the semi-final game. Lost to Granby Prédateurs 4–0 in the championship game.
 * 1996–97 Defeated Kingston Frontenacs 4 games to 1 in division quarter-finals. Lost to Oshawa Generals 4 games to 2 in quarter-finals.
 * 1997–98 Lost to Belleville Bulls 4 games to 0 in division quarter-finals.
 * 1998–99 Lost to Oshawa Generals 4 games to 1 in conference quarter-finals.
 * 1999–2000 Lost to Belleville Bulls 4 games to 1 in conference quarter-finals.
 * 2000–01 Lost to St. Michael's Majors 4 games to 3 in conference quarter-finals.
 * 2001–02 Lost to Ottawa 67's 4 games to 2 in conference quarter-finals.
 * 2002–03 Lost to Oshawa Generals 4 games to 3 in conference quarter-finals.
 * 2003–04 Out of playoffs.
 * 2004–05 Defeated Belleville Bulls 4 games to 1 in conference quarter-finals. Defeated St. Michael's Majors 4 games to 1 in conference semi-finals. Lost to Ottawa 67's 4 games to 0 in conference finals.
 * 2005–06 Defeated Ottawa 67's 4 games to 2 in conference quarter-finals. Defeated Sudbury Wolves 4 games to 0 in conference semi-finals. Defeated Barrie Colts 4 games to 1 in conference finals. Defeated London Knights 4 games to 0 in finals. OHL CHAMPIONS Finished Memorial Cup round-robin tied for third place. Lost to Vancouver Giants 6–0 in tie-breaker game.
 * 2006–07 Out of playoffs.
 * 2007–08 Lost to Belleville Bulls 4 games to 1 in conference quarter-finals.
 * 2008–09 Lost to Brampton Battalion 4 games to 0 in conference quarter-finals.
 * 2009–10 Lost to Mississauga Majors 4 games to 0 in conference quarter-finals.
 * 2010–11 Out of playoffs.
 * 2011–12 Out of playoffs.
 * 2012–13 Out of playoffs.
 * 2013–14 Defeated Kingston Frontenacs 4 games to 3 in conference quarter-finals. Lost to Oshawa Generals 4 games to 0 in conference semi-finals.
 * 2014–15 Lost to Oshawa Generals 4 games to 1 in conference quarter-finals.
 * 2015–16 Lost to North Bay Battalion 4 games to 3 in conference quarter-finals.
 * 2016–17 Defeated Niagara IceDogs 4 games to 0 in conference quarter-finals. Defeated Kingston Frontenacs 4 games to 0 in conference semi-finals. Lost to Mississauga Steelheads 4 games to 0 in conference finals.
 * 2017–18 Out of playoffs.
 * 2018–19 Lost to Oshawa Generals 4 games to 1 in conference quarter-finals.
 * 2019–20 Playoffs cancelled due to Covid-19 Pandemic.
 * 2020–21 Season and playoffs cancelled due to Covid-19 Pandemic.
 * 2021–22 Lost to Hamilton Bulldogs 4 games to 0 in conference quarter-finals.
 * 2022–23 Defeated Sudbury Wolves 4 games to 0 in conference quarter-finals. Defeated Ottawa 67's 4 games to 2 in conference semi-finals. Defeated North Bay Battalion 4 games to 3 in conference finals. Defeated London Knights 4 games to 2 in finals. OHL CHAMPIONS Finished Memorial Cup round-robin tied for third place. Lost to Seattle Thunderbirds 4–1 in the semi-final game.
 * 2023–24 Out of playoffs.

Uniforms and logos
From 1956 to 1974, the Petes wore the red, white & blue colours of the Montreal Canadiens. In 1974–75, the club changed to the maroon & white colours they wear today. In January 2000, a new '3rd' jersey was introduced, that used the maroon background, with white, black & gold trim.

For the 2005–06 season, the Petes unveiled a 50th anniversary jersey that has a black background with maroon & gold trim. During January in the 2006–07 season, the Petes wore throwback jerseys for the TPT Petes.

Arena

The Peterborough Memorial Centre was constructed in 1956, and named in honour of the many war veterans who came from the region. It was built at the east of the fairground and horse track at the corner of Landsdowne and George streets.

The original design included a large stage at the south end of the arena, with an oversized portrait of Queen Elizabeth II above. The seats were all wooden and painted yellow, green and mauve. The Memorial Centre hosted the Memorial Cup tournament in 1996. The arena has a capacity of 4,329 for hockey, and an additional 1,000 for concerts.

In 2003, the Memorial Centre was renovated adding 24 luxury box suites, improved concessions, a licensed restaurant, new seats, boards, scoreboard and the addition of air conditioning. The renovated arena hosted the 2004 OHL All-Star Classic.

Canadian Football Hall of Fame inductee John Badham briefly served as the public address announcer for Peterborough Petes home games.

Broadcasting
The games can be heard on local radio station Extra 90.5 or watched on YourTV channel 700HD 10SD. Petes games can be watched on YourTV with Pete Dalliday (play by play), Scott Arnold (analyst) and Dan Malta (host).

title: Peterborough Petes


text:
Renfrew County

Renfrew County is a county in the Canadian province of Ontario. It straddles the west bank of the Ottawa River. There are 17 municipalities in the county.

Bathurst District
When Carleton County was withdrawn from Bathurst District in 1838, Renfrew County was severed from part of the remaining Lanark County, but the two remained united for electoral purposes. By 1845, all lands in the District had been surveyed into the following townships:

United Counties of Lanark and Renfrew
Effective January 1, 1850, Bathurst District was abolished, and the "United Counties of Lanark and Renfrew" replaced it for municipal and judicial purposes. The counties remained united for electoral purposes in the Parliament of the Province of Canada, referred to as the County of Lanark, until Renfrew gained its own seat in 1853.

The separation of Renfrew from Lanark began in 1861, with the creation of a Provisional Municipal Council that held its first meeting in June 1861. The United Counties were dissolved in August 1866.

Geographical evolution
The territory was originally described in 1838 as consisting of:

"...the Townships of Packenham, McNab, Horton, Ross, Westmeath and Pembroke, together with the unsurveyed lands within the District of Bathurst, and all the islands in the Ottawa River, wholly or in greater part opposite to the said Townships and unsurveyed lands..."

In 1851, Pakenham was transferred to Lanark, while Renfrew was expanded through the addition of:

"...all that tract of land lying between the Western Boundaries of the Townships of Lavant, Blithfield, Admaston, Bromley, Stafford and Pembroke and the Ottawa River, and a line drawn parallel to the general course of the said Boundaries of the said Townships from the western corner of the Township of Clarendon to the Ottawa River."

In 1860, the newly surveyed townships of Miller and Canonto were transferred to Frontenac County, while the townships of Raglan, Lyndoch, Radcliffe and Brudenell were added to Renfrew. The final expansion of the County occurred in 1877-1878, with the transfer of the United Townships of Hagarty, Sherwood, Jones, Richards and Burns, and the United Townships of Head, Clara and Maria, from Nipissing District.

Once all lands had been surveyed in 1878, the County consisted of the following geographic townships:

 * Admaston
 * Alice
 * Bagot
 * Blythfield
 * Bromley
 * Brougham
 * Brudenell
 * Buchanan
 * Burns
 * Clara
 * Fraser
 * Grattan
 * Griffith
 * Hagarty
 * Head
 * Horton
 * Jones
 * Lyndoch
 * Maria
 * Matawatchan
 * McKay
 * McNab
 * North Algona
 * Pembroke
 * Petawawa
 * Radcliffe
 * Raglan
 * Richards
 * Rolph
 * Ross
 * Sebastopol
 * Sherwood
 * South Algona
 * Stafford
 * Westmeath
 * Wilberforce
 * Wylie

Municipal reorganization (2001)
The county seat, Pembroke, is a separated municipality.

Geography
Renfrew County is known for its lakeside cottages and white-water rafting along the Ottawa River, and has more than 900 lakes. It is located in the primary region of Southern Ontario and the secondary region Eastern or Southeastern Ontario. Renfrew County is also the largest county in terms of area in Ontario, ahead of Hastings County.

Demographics
As a census division in the 2021 Census of Population conducted by Statistics Canada, Renfrew County had a population of $106,365$ living in $44,952$ of its $51,134$ total private dwellings, a change of NaN% from its 2016 population of $102,394$. With a land area of 7357.94 km2, it had a population density of in 2021.

Arts and culture
At Wilno, Ontario Canada's Kashubian community celebrates their heritage.

Military
The county is home to CFB Petawawa and gives its name to The Lanark and Renfrew Scottish Regiment.

Notable people

 * Silver Quilty, Canada's Sports Hall of Fame inductee

title: Renfrew County