EuroBillTracker

Hong Kong can be found unter countries (17 notes) and under cities within China (225 notes)
wouldn't it be correct to look at HK as a city and to merge those 17 notes to the city HK?
Like Macau - same status as HK, but here in EBT only a chinese city and not a country like HK

There have been entered 17 notes in Hong Kong before it was merged with China.
Bills entered in countries that do not longer exist stay in the profile of the former country.

BaliBennie wrote:There have been entered 17 notes in Hong Kong before it was merged with China.
Bills entered in countries that do not longer exist stay in the profile of the former country.

Hmm, I think I remember this discussion being had before somewhere on this forum.
BUT: How can Euro bills have been entered while Hong Kong was independent from China, when the People's Republic of China regained sovereignity over Hong Kong in 1997? Hong Kong has been a special administrative region since, but not independent.

I'm not a Hong Kong-expert. But I know that Hong Kong used to have its own country profile.

BaliBennie wrote:I'm not a Hong Kong-expert. But I know that Hong Kong used to have its own country profile.

I know, I'm still not sure why, however - the Kosovo e.g. had some sort-of-independence via UN administration before declaring its mixed-recognition independence in 2008, but Hong Kong definitely hadn't. It was in fact never any kind of independent nation at all, until 1996 it was part of the United Kingdom (its last status that of a Dependent Territory, equivalent to the current British Overseas Territories like e.g. Gibraltar), but in 1997 it became part of the PRC, so that begs the question why there was a separate country profile for Hong Kong at all.

honk kong " used to be " a special case but i think those 17 should go with the rest

Hong Kong was listed as a country in EBT because it was put there as a country when EBT was founded in 2002. Including it may have been a political statement from Giro or may have just met his understanding of how things are.

BTW, I certainly would like seeing Tibet listed as an independent country in EBT. (It is also a shame that Burma is called "Myanmar" by EBT)

EBT is claimed to be non-commercial and apolitical.

Therefore, as it should be right now, we should stick to the official list of the UN.

If there are mistakes or interpretations, it should be corrected.

If not, we should not claim to be apolitical.

Myanmar is the official name of former Burma. It is mainly Western countries who still apply the former names of Birma or Burma - owing to the fact that the regime of that country had changed the name in 1989 without the participation of the people. However, UN has adopted this name.

By the way, "Myanma(r)" has been in official use for almost 1.000 years - since the foundation of a united kingdom - while the (Westernly) preferred versions of Birma or Burma had always had a colloquial meaning. The official re-naming by a brutal regime may leave a bad taste, but it is - yes - official!

Dakkus wrote:Tibet listed as an independent country in EBT.

This is an error: the fact that aspires to independence, also for eventual just cause, it doesn't transform in independent country or region with special autonomy like HK or Macao.

If I may add my 2 cents to this discussion:

Hong Kong is not the same case as those countries that disappeared, but are still in the database, as they were valid countries in the past. (Yugoslavia as a good example.) It was, at first a possible entry, but at some point in time it was decided that it should not have been a country. This last fact (at least to me) makes it obvious that all Hong Kong notes and users should be reassigned to China and the country profile removed.