1672: Women on 20s - Revision history

Jacky720: /* Explanation */ Newer source that doesn't ambiguously say "next year"

2025-04-18T01:15:10Z

‎Explanation: Newer source that doesn't ambiguously say "next year"

162.158.62.195: /* Explanation */

2025-01-03T23:34:02Z

‎Explanation

Theusaf: grammar, https

2022-08-18T15:24:10Z

grammar, https

172.70.135.34: /* Explanation */

2022-08-18T07:44:57Z

‎Explanation

Theusaf: Reverted edits by Donald Trump (talk) to last revision by CRLF

2022-05-26T20:00:24Z

Reverted edits by Donald Trump (talk) to last revision by CRLF

Show changes

Donald Trump: Reverted edit by anti-crap user

2022-05-26T19:02:53Z

Reverted edit by anti-crap user

Show changes

CRLF: Reverted vandalism with User:CRLF/OneClickUndo.js

2022-05-26T18:03:30Z

Reverted vandalism with User:CRLF/OneClickUndo.js

Show changes

Donald Trump: Reverted edit by anti-crap user

2022-05-26T17:04:56Z

Reverted edit by anti-crap user

Show changes

Vandalbane: Reverted vandalism with User:CRLF/OneClickUndo.js

2022-05-23T18:46:08Z

Reverted vandalism with User:CRLF/OneClickUndo.js

Show changes

Xray Kilo Charlie Delta: haha your js cant stop my js

2022-05-23T18:16:36Z

haha your js cant stop my js

Show changes

@@ Line 36: / Line 36: @@
 The mention of the "[https://google.com/search?q=illuminati+confirmed&tbm=isch weird pyramid eye thing]" is a reference to the {{w|Eye of Providence}}, which is an old and {{rw|Illuminati|somewhat arcane symbol}} that appears on the {{w|United States one-dollar bill|US $1 bill}}. Randall seems to be using this as an example of the outdated and frankly strange design of American currency, the implication that using that on all US dollar bills would constitute giving up on ever having a design relevant to the modern world. Also by replacing all portraits with this image, there would no longer be any gender controversy.
-As of 2025, progress on updating both the $10 and the $20 has stalled, with the Treasury stating that [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/us/harriet-tubman-bill.html no new changes will be unveiled until next year].
+As of 2025, progress on updating both the $10 and the $20 has stalled, with the Treasury stating that [https://www.businessinsider.com/harriet-tubman-20-bill-update-redesign-timeline-2030-2021-4 efforts to accelerate the redesign ahead of 2030 failed].
 ==Transcript==

@@ Line 36: / Line 36: @@
 The mention of the "[https://google.com/search?q=illuminati+confirmed&tbm=isch weird pyramid eye thing]" is a reference to the {{w|Eye of Providence}}, which is an old and {{rw|Illuminati|somewhat arcane symbol}} that appears on the {{w|United States one-dollar bill|US $1 bill}}. Randall seems to be using this as an example of the outdated and frankly strange design of American currency, the implication that using that on all US dollar bills would constitute giving up on ever having a design relevant to the modern world. Also by replacing all portraits with this image, there would no longer be any gender controversy.
-As of 2020, progress on updating both the $10 and the $20 has stalled, with the Treasury stating that [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/us/harriet-tubman-bill.html no new changes will be unveiled until 2026].
+As of 2025, progress on updating both the $10 and the $20 has stalled, with the Treasury stating that [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/us/harriet-tubman-bill.html no new changes will be unveiled until next year].
 ==Transcript==

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 This comic portrays a series of press conferences with a {{w|US Treasury}} spokesperson (different from [[Cueball]] in the first panel as he has a bit of hair). The panels after the first summarize and ridicule the recent controversy over the upcoming redesign of US currency. The dialog between the US Treasury and reporters is paraphrased for comedic effect, but the events depicted are {{w|United_States_twenty-dollar_bill#Proposal_for_a_woman.27s_portrait|otherwise factual}} (including the punchline).
-American currency has only once had a woman as the primary portrait on paper currency ([http://www.mountvernon.org/george-washington/martha-washington/martha-on-1/ Martha Washington] was on the $1 Silver Certificate in the 1880's and 1890's), which is widely seen as a real problem. A large-scale petition was organized which advocated replacing {{w|Andrew Jackson}} on the {{w|United States twenty-dollar bill|$20 bill}} with a woman, to be chosen by public voting. The {{w|Trail of Tears}} is a reference to the {{w|Andrew_Jackson#Indian_removal_policy|forced re-locations}} of Native American peoples that Andrew Jackson conducted during his presidency. This is now seen as a human rights violation on a massive scale, and is presented as a reason why Andrew Jackson should not be honored on American currency.
+American currency has only once had a woman as the primary portrait on paper currency ([https://www.mountvernon.org/george-washington/martha-washington/martha-on-1/ Martha Washington] was on the $1 Silver Certificate in the 1880s and 1890s), which is widely seen as a real problem. A large-scale petition was organized which advocated replacing {{w|Andrew Jackson}} on the {{w|United States twenty-dollar bill|$20 bill}} with a woman, to be chosen by public voting. The {{w|Trail of Tears}} is a reference to the {{w|Andrew_Jackson#Indian_removal_policy|forced re-locations}} of Native American peoples that Andrew Jackson conducted during his presidency. This is now seen as a human rights violation on a massive scale and is presented as a reason why Andrew Jackson should not be honored on American currency.
-The timing of the release of this new bill with a woman was to be scheduled with the 100 year anniversary of {{w|Women's suffrage in the United States|Women's suffrage}} in 2020 and should thus preferably also be on the $20 bill.
+The timing of the release of this new bill with a woman was to be scheduled with the 100-year anniversary of {{w|Women's suffrage in the United States|Women's suffrage}} in 2020 and should thus preferably also be on the $20 bill.
 The voting process [http://www.womenon20s.org/results selected] {{w|Harriet Tubman}}, a 19th century {{w|abolitionist}} and a major figure in the {{w|Underground Railroad}} system which freed {{w|Slavery in the United States|American slaves}}. Cueball is seen to be clearly pleased and excited about this prospect in the first panel, where he votes for her first, among several other options.
@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 Finally, the spokesperson announces that they will put Tubman on the $20 bill, but their schedule demands that they do the $10 bill first. They decide to put a "mural to women" on the new $10 bill to try and contain the tension until the new $20 bill is released. The reporters say that the Treasury has total control over the release of currency, so the simpler solution is just to change the schedule, but they apparently ignore that suggestion.
-In the final panel, the spokesperson mentions that Jackson's portrait will still appear on the new $20 bill, seriously weakening the symbolism of replacing him and adding irony since Jackson was a slave owner. This is likely an effort to head off the complaints of traditionalists, but is seen here as an unfortunate attempt to avoid taking a real stand.
+In the final panel, the spokesperson mentions that Jackson's portrait will still appear on the new $20 bill, seriously weakening the symbolism of replacing him and adding irony since Jackson was a slave owner. This is likely an effort to head off the complaints of traditionalists but is seen here as an unfortunate attempt to avoid taking a real stand.
 In the title text [[Randall]] reiterates that this is a rare case in politics in which there's a clear and simple solution. The Treasury has the authority to redesign currency, and a petition to Congress could change the release schedule to fit their needs. That makes all the compromises and backtracking unnecessary: they could simply replace Jackson with Tubman and hypothetically release the new $20 bill whenever they choose. Randall appears frustrated with the artificial constraints that are holding back what should be a simple and straightforward process although he does acknowledge that it takes time to evaluate the security of a redesign's resistance to {{w|Counterfeit money|counterfeiting}}.
-The mention of the "[http://google.com/search?q=illuminati+confirmed&tbm=isch weird pyramid eye thing]" is a reference to the {{w|Eye of Providence}}, which is an old and {{rw|Illuminati|somewhat arcane symbol}} that appears on the {{w|United States one-dollar bill|US $1 bill}}. Randall seems to be using this as an example of the outdated and frankly strange design of American currency, the implication that using that on all US dollar bills would constitute giving up on ever having a design relevant to the modern world. Also by replacing all portraits with this image, there would no longer be any gender controversy.
+The mention of the "[https://google.com/search?q=illuminati+confirmed&tbm=isch weird pyramid eye thing]" is a reference to the {{w|Eye of Providence}}, which is an old and {{rw|Illuminati|somewhat arcane symbol}} that appears on the {{w|United States one-dollar bill|US $1 bill}}. Randall seems to be using this as an example of the outdated and frankly strange design of American currency, the implication that using that on all US dollar bills would constitute giving up on ever having a design relevant to the modern world. Also by replacing all portraits with this image, there would no longer be any gender controversy.
 As of 2020, progress on updating both the $10 and the $20 has stalled, with the Treasury stating that [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/us/harriet-tubman-bill.html no new changes will be unveiled until 2026].
 ==Transcript==
-:[Cueball is sitting at his laptop. Above him is the text he reads on the screen, then he speaks, and below that text is the list of women from his computer showing his three picks, each with a gray "drop-down menu" triangle to the right of the names. Below this is his final spoken line. At the top of the panel is a small frame breaking the top left border with a caption:]
+:[Cueball is sitting at his laptop. Above him is the text he reads on the screen, then he speaks, and below that text is the list of women from his computer showing his three picks, each with a gray "drop-down menu" triangle to the right of the names. Below this, is his final spoken line. At the top of the panel is a small frame breaking the top left border with a caption:]
 :2015
 :Website: Petition: Replace Andrew "Trail of Tears" Jackson with a woman on the $20 for the 100<sup>th</sup> anniversary of women's suffrage in 2020.
@@ Line 81: / Line 81: @@
 :Offscreen voice 7: What?
-:[The executive again from the front behind the lectern. On the front of the lectern only the text and the very top of the circle around the image can be seen.]
+:[The executive again from the front behind the lectern. On the front of the lectern, only the text and the very top of the circle around the image can be seen.]
-:Treasury Executive: We'll put a mural to women on the back of the $10. Hopefully that will tide you over until we get to the $20?
+:Treasury Executive: We'll put a mural to women on the back of the $10. Hopefully, that will tide you over until we get to the $20?
 :Offscreen voice 8: ''Seriously?'' How is this so complicated? Just say "We're putting Harriet Tubman on the $20," then do it.
 :Text above the seal: Treasury

@@ Line 34: / Line 34: @@
 In the title text [[Randall]] reiterates that this is a rare case in politics in which there's a clear and simple solution. The Treasury has the authority to redesign currency, and a petition to Congress could change the release schedule to fit their needs. That makes all the compromises and backtracking unnecessary: they could simply replace Jackson with Tubman and hypothetically release the new $20 bill whenever they choose. Randall appears frustrated with the artificial constraints that are holding back what should be a simple and straightforward process although he does acknowledge that it takes time to evaluate the security of a redesign's resistance to {{w|Counterfeit money|counterfeiting}}.
-The mention of the "[http://google.com/search?q=illuminati+confirmed weird pyramid eye thing]" is a reference to the {{w|Eye of Providence}}, which is an old and {{rw|Illuminati|somewhat arcane symbol}} that appears on the {{w|United States one-dollar bill|US $1 bill}}. Randall seems to be using this as an example of the outdated and frankly strange design of American currency, the implication that using that on all US dollar bills would constitute giving up on ever having a design relevant to the modern world. Also by replacing all portraits with this image, there would no longer be any gender controversy.
+The mention of the "[http://google.com/search?q=illuminati+confirmed&tbm=isch weird pyramid eye thing]" is a reference to the {{w|Eye of Providence}}, which is an old and {{rw|Illuminati|somewhat arcane symbol}} that appears on the {{w|United States one-dollar bill|US $1 bill}}. Randall seems to be using this as an example of the outdated and frankly strange design of American currency, the implication that using that on all US dollar bills would constitute giving up on ever having a design relevant to the modern world. Also by replacing all portraits with this image, there would no longer be any gender controversy.
 As of 2020, progress on updating both the $10 and the $20 has stalled, with the Treasury stating that [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/us/harriet-tubman-bill.html no new changes will be unveiled until 2026].