Thread:Support/MediaWiki:donate interface-ILS/en/reply (2)

I also think so. The term "New" may have some usage when there's a dual currency usage period, but rapidly, it disappears. In fact it's the older shekkel that should be renamed as "Old Sheqqel" or possibly "Sheqqel (time interval)" for historic references if there are multiple entries.

In fact this is general for all currencies, only the historic ones should contain a precision of "Old" or with a time interval, and the current ones should not need such qualification (as long as there's no ambiguity with a currency from another country or organization, for which the precision is needed in all cases, notably because the usage periods do not match across all these countries : there must be no duplicate names for currencies with distinct ISO codes ; if such conflict occurs, the ISO code should be used for all currencies whose name are in conflict for any period of time).

A few countries have several currencies which are all used at the same time for extended period (for example : one for daylife use by national residents in shops, personal bank accounts, and payments of salaries by the state, this currency not being tradable internationally ; and another one for international trading and negciation of debts by central banks, governments and between banks), and it is the case where there's a need for a precision (but this precision is not defined in terms of "New" or "Old").