Commons:Categories for discussion/2013/11

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

November 2013[edit]

Category:Animals in Guantanamo Bay Naval Base[edit]

An older category, Category:Animals in Guantanamo, was systematically emptied when its elements were transferred to this new category. The older category was then speedy deleted on the grounds it was empty. This always bugs me. Maybe a discussion would conclude Category:Animals in Guantanamo Bay Naval Base was a more appropriate name -- or maybe it would't. It is not in line with some earlier categorization. In any case I don't think these kinds of actions should be taken without discussion.

Why Category:Animals in Guantanamo? Guantanamo is not just the name of a base, it is the name of a Bay, a city and a Province. The base only takes up the outer half of the Bay, the inner half is Cuban. Geo Swan (talk) 23:12, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

  • I'm sorry if I was hurry but the 3 subcategories are all related to animals in the US naval base and it was the appropriate name. I've requested a deletion for some reasons: Category:Animals in Guantánamo (with the accent) would be the proper name related to the city, an eventual Category:Animals in the Province of Guantánamo... related to the province. And categories by province for animals in Cuba (or elsewhere) are still not existant... and btw this name was not technically correct. Would it be a redirect to the province, to the city or to the base? Anyway, I left the history of the original category in category's talk, as I do when I make this kind of moves. Just to note, a category by city for animals in Cuba exists but Guantánamo (city) is a different thing from Guantanamo Naval Base. Sorry for technical problems. --Dэя-Бøяg 23:32, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Just another note to explain the tech problem: The US naval base is entirely bordered by the Cuban municipality of Caimanera, not Guantánamo. So, a possible category related to animals in the city (or in its municipal territory) would not be a subcategory/main category of this one. At least a disambiguation. And btw I've simply followed the proper categorization form of subcategories related to the Category:Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, that for almost all the categories chose the name as precisely as possible. Regards. --Dэя-Бøяg 00:13, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Another example: The Category:Nature of Punjab was deleted and its content (evidently all Indian) was moved to the Category:Nature of Punjab, India. Because the Punjab may refer to Indian or Pakistani one. In the same way... due to the fact that all the pictures come from Gn. Bay Naval Base; general categories as Nature of, Animals in, People from etc, preferably chose this style. An example is the Category:Domestic cats at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base‎, and not "Domestic cats in Guantanamo", created by you. I'm sorry for my length, explaining the facts, but it's just to explain the technical nature of this categorization. Again, regards. --Dэя-Бøяg 00:45, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Hunza Valley[edit]

Deletion Request: Cat is redundant with Category:Hunza. I emptied it by recategorizing the files accordingly Rupert Pupkin (talk) 15:18, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

The cat is being refilled right now. Well, I don't mind. We can keep the Cat Hunza Valley, but then we don't need the Category Hunza. One of them is superfluous. (And Hunza Valley had less entries than Hunza so I chose that one for deletion) Ohter opinions? --Rupert Pupkin (talk) 15:55, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

(Edit conflict)

  • Comment - Sorry! I added more files to Category:Hunza Valley before I realized what was going on. Please forgive. Since Hunza is a valley, could it be named with "valley" included, since it is a geography feature? When cats have one name (which could be city, mountain peak, etc.) it's very hard for me to figure things out. But you are a better judge I'm sure than I am of cat names, since I find them very confusing. Thanks, Soranoch (talk) 16:07, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, I have only basic knowledge about categories on commons. I look after (and for) images related to the Karakoram mountain range from time to time. And so I came across this category Hunza valley. Because it had not many entries and had only one master-category (i don't know how to call "higher" categories), i chose this one for deletion. I don't see any objections to my opinion that one category is enough. But I think you're right about the appropriate name. It should rather be Hunza Valley as all the files are about the valley. But I'm struggeling with the Category Hunza as a political division. Hunza is categorized under Hunza-Nagar district and within this district-cat next to the tehsils. But the valley spreads over different tehsils, so that does not fit so well... This is hard to find out. See for example the first sentence in category:Hunza, follow the link city of hunza to the english wikipedia and see what you find there... This is so confusing.--Rupert Pupkin (talk) 12:06, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Keep the Hunza Valley category. My reasoning for supporting Hunza Valley is the following: According to en:Hunza Valley, the Hunza is a mountainous valley in Pakistan. The article distinguishes Hunza Valley from en:Hunza (princely state) which was a princely state until 1974 when it was dissolved, the article says. There is also Category: Baltit Fort; according to en:Baltit Fort, this fort is in Hunza Valley. There is also Category:Minerals of Hunza Valley‎ which are in Hunza Valley and Category:Hunza River. The en:Hunza River article isn't very helpful but it seems likely the river is also in Hunza Valley. According to en:Hunza (princely state): "The area of Hunza now forms the en:Aliabad tehsil of en:Hunza–Nagar District. It's very confusing, I agree. Best, Soranoch (talk) 21:33, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Fachhochschule Ludwigshafen[edit]

I propose moving this category to Category:Hochschule Ludwigshafen am Rhein which since 2012 has been the new name of this school. PanchoS (talk) 00:34, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Decorated vehicles[edit]

Seems redundant to parent Category:Art vehicles. Suggest deletion and upmerging of all entries to the parent cat. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 02:19, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Universities and colleges in Ludwigshafen[edit]

Please move to Category:Universities and colleges in Ludwigshafen am Rhein. Sorry for creating this category with a name inconsistent to the rest of the tree. PanchoS (talk) 10:57, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Paintings in the Alte Pinakothek (flat list)[edit]

I don't think this category is needed. Flat list categories don't belong in the middle of the hierarchy, and this one isn't even populated. ghouston (talk) 11:59, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
It looks pretty populated to me. Are we sure that all the items are adequately categorized for the AP without it? Johnbod (talk) 03:48, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
  • query: "adequately categorized for the AP" -- what is "AP" in this useage? searching commons gets me nothing useful. Lx 121 (talk) 05:42, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Somebody has populated it in the meantime. It's not even a list, it also contains 777 images. If there's some need for this category for maintenance (I have no idea what that would be), it should at least be marked as hidden and removed from the main category heirarchy. --ghouston (talk) 05:22, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Symbol keep vote.svg Keep -- if we had a TOOL for ordinary users to seamlessly flip-flop between flat lists & nested categorization, then we WOULDN'T NEED ANY separate "flat list" categories. however, UNTIL we get that, flat lists serve a useful purpose, & NOT just for "maintenence" or "experienced editors". Lx 121 (talk) 05:24, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

So we should require every category that has subcategories to also have a (flat list) subcategory? How many categories would a single image here need to be added to? We could start with:
Category:Interior of the Alte Pinakothek (flat list)
Category:Alte Pinakothek (flat list)
Category:Art museums in Munich (flat list)
Category:Museums in Munich (flat list)
Category:Museums in Upper Bavaria (flat list)
Category:Museums in Bavaria (flat list)
Category:Museums in Germany (flat list)
Category:Museums (flat list)
--ghouston (talk)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Delete As per nomination. I'm hard-pressed to see a useful purpose to this category. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:26, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Category:Limestones[edit]

Category was wrongly moved by User:Foroa some time back, along with others such as this one, and all of these moves appear to display a lack of familiarity with applicable English usage. "Limestone" is a non-count noun (like "deer" and "fish"), so like Category:Shale and Category:Sandstone, we should name this category for the type of stone, rather than giving it a plural form that's never used in real life. Nyttend (talk) 22:11, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Agreed. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:37, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support: while “limestones“ can be a count noun, meaning types of limestone, or geological formations consisting of limestone, I agree that the singular mass noun is more appropriate here, considering both consistency with other cats and the range of its present contents. (I notice a couple of subcats that should probably be dealt with at the same time, Limestones in Malta & Limestones in Ukraine.)—Odysseus1479 (talk) 07:29, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Category:Dialog Arena[edit]

This category should be named Category:Stadion Zagłębia Lubin Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 23:14, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Old Polish Books[edit]

old is subjective, i also brought up Category:Old books Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:34, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Microsoft web logos[edit]

We should have sperate categories, like Category:Bing, Category:Internet Explorer. taxonomic point of this category is low, so remove this. Rezonansowy (talk) 23:34, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Now, Category:Internet Explorer logos does not contain any of Microsoft web properties. (IE is web-related, but it is a computer program.)
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 06:37, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Taxonomic point of this category is confusing to me. There's no nothing like Microsoft web, can be Microsoft software, Microsoft hardware logos, so I don't understand the sense of it. --Rezonansowy (talk) 13:15, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi. There is something called Microsoft web property which refers to websites, web services and web applications. Microsoft web logos is logos used to identify these properties but not logos merely used on them. For instance, Hotmail logo identifies Hotmail. But Hotmail uses Facebook logo too, but that logo does not represent Hotmail. (It represents Facebook.) So, Hotmail logo goes to Microsoft web logos but Facebook logo does not. Now, let me add a more difficult example: Microsoft logo does not go to Microsoft web logos because it represents Microsoft, the company, not one of its web properties. (That logo goes to Category:Microsoft company logos.
I hope these made sense. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 07:18, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

I've expressed my opinion, but why other users do not speak? --Rezonansowy (talk) 10:03, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:University of Wales Institute, Cardiff[edit]

Move to Category:Cardiff Metropolitan University Aloneinthewild (talk) 20:50, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Symbol delete vote.svg Disagree: people who graduated from the University of Wales Institute, Cardiff, in the daughter category "Category:Alumni of University of Wales Institute, Cardiff‎" do not automatically become alumni of Cardiff Metropolitan University. I suggest creating "Category:Cardiff Metropolitan University" and making "Category:University of Wales Institute, Cardiff" a subcategory of it. New files created on or after the establishment of Cardiff Metropolitan University should of course go into that category, but files relating to the former University of Wales Institute should continue to be placed in that category. — Cheers, JackLee talk 10:51, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Tudor Buildings[edit]

Fits awkwardly with Category:Tudor_houses and Category:Tudor style architecture (also incorrect caps). Jarry1250 (talk) 15:11, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Coalition of Radical Left (SYRIZA)[edit]

Please rename to Category:SYRIZA, as the subtitle has changed a few times (and is no more "Coalition of Radical Left") while "SYRIZA" (which used to be an acronym) is what the party remains being referred to both in Greece and worldwide. PanchoS (talk) 02:05, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Gilberto González[edit]

Self promotion, See deletion request https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:GILBERTO_GONZ%C3%81LEZ_O._M%C3%BAsico_Contempor%C3%A1neo_-Pian%C3%ADsta-Organ%C3%ADsta-Teclad%C3%ADsta_Profesor_de_m%C3%BAsica_contempor%C3%A1nea,_moderna_y_folcl%C3%B3rica._Nacido_en_Maracaibo,_Edo._Zulia,_Venezuela.jpg Wilfredor (talk) 18:32, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Category:Gifford[edit]

Either this should be merged with Category:Gifford, East Lothian or vice versa; although other places called Gifford exist, from a quick survey of the gallery all the files here appear to belong to the Scottish town & surrounding region. (I have removed a few Category:Images from the Gifford Photographic Collection.) —Odysseus1479 (talk) 23:14, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Merge to Category:Gifford, East Lothian. Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 12:14, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
It seems uncontroversial, so I’ll be merging the current contents to the longer name WIGATI. I hope it’s not improper to do so before this discussion is formally closed.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 06:11, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
✓ DoneOdysseus1479 (talk) 21:12, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Redirected to Category:Gifford, East Lothian, as per nom. When other Giffords get categories, this can be made into a disambiguation category. --rimshottalk 19:33, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Category:Electric lamps with emergency exit pictograph[edit]

Bad named, no lamps, the accurate categories for those safety lighting devices are Category:Luminous emergency exit signs and Category:Emergency exit pictograms, under parent Category:Emergency exit signs Bohème (talk) 12:19, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

*1) They leave being Luminous after empty battery (3...4 hours after energy missing);
*2) Standarts provide electric illuminant as luminous source, so construction of those devices implies redundant-powered electric lamp with pictograph of emergency exit on lampshade. Dmitry G (talk) 18:45, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Lamp posts, Category:Lamp poles & subcategories[edit]

These seem too synonymous with Category:Street lights. JesseW (talk) 04:54, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

See the redirects to w:en:Street lights -- both of these phrases are redirects. JesseW (talk) 05:10, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, JesseW, a lamp pole is a utility pole. Meanwhile a lamp post is often a historcial and/or ornamented light support. Both are only one of several components. They are topped by the light source/lamp and its housing/lantern. A lamp post bracket is required for suspended lanterns. Whether you call them lamp poles or lamp posts, they hold not necessarily street lights, but all kind of park lights, garden lights, porch lights, courtyard lights, harbour beacons, they are beside promenades, footpathes, waterbodies, on piers and footbridges ... Sometimes they are lost in the countryside. For all those the Category:Lamp posts is absolutely indispensable. --Bohème (talk) 05:39, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, that helps explain the intended distinction. Could you add that to the category pages? I'd do it myself, but I'm still not sure how best to phrase it. JesseW (talk) 23:24, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Former Lisbon trams in Sóller[edit]

Beter name would be Category:Former Lisbon trams in the Sóller - Port de Sóller tramway, so that it clearly doesn’t mean the exact location along the line but service in this system. -- Tuválkin 15:55, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Since no one’s against, I’ll do the move. -- Tuválkin 21:19, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Category:Drigadnyj Podryad (band)[edit]

Переименовать категорию Drigadnyj Podryad (band) в Brigadnyj Podryad (band) (ошибка названия) Dogad75 (talk) 10:28, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Photos by Pedro Simoes[edit]

Correct spelling: "Simões". -- Tuválkin 14:29, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Correct spelling as per author's name. --FlávR (talk) 17:13, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Category:Pictures of the male nude by Arno Roca[edit]

Does an ordinary flickr user deserve a category? I arno roca is no notable photographer and this category brings this person in spheres were only established photographers are bundled 188.104.100.218 16:40, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

I do not know whether he "deserves" anything: categories are bundles, not awards. Having scores and scores of images of his cluttering the main category "Male nude" was very unconvenient, so I created it. If you can find any name to bundle them, please go ahead, I don't mind. But sub-categorisation is meant to keep in order the main cat, not to appoint or deny an award to a contributor. There is no implicit judgement in the choice. Otherwise we should ask ourselves whether every and each artist "deserves" a category of her own: not all of them are great artists... Love - --User:G.dallorto (talk) 00:38, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Incidentally: Roca is not an "ordinary flickr user" but an established professional photographer regularly published in fashion magazines:

I think we should encourage professional photographers to contribute us their work, rather than dismissing them, possibly out ot envy, as mere "flickr users". --User:G.dallorto (talk) 00:42, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

We need good gay photographers, not amateurs!

Interesting. Where this rule is stated in Wikipedia statement of scope? Please show me. And, I suppose it is you who will be telling the difference between "good" and "amateur", won't you? --User:G.dallorto (talk) 20:12, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Symbol keep vote.svg Keep

Category:Graffiti in funiculars in Lisbon[edit]

Should be Category:Graffiti on funiculars in Lisbon. -- Tuválkin 16:45, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

✓ renamed to even better Category:Graffiti on Lisbon funiculars. -- Tuválkin 05:20, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Category:Esplanadi[edit]

The name of the category, Esplanadi, refers to a non-specific entity, a narrow park between two streets, but the contents of the category refer to three separate locations; Esplanadin puisto, the actual park named so in the core of Helsinki, and its bounding streets Pohjoisesplanadi and Eteläesplanadi. I propose that the contents of this category should be divided into three separate categories, one for each entity. The name of the category for the park is still open to debate, as it appears as in the forms "Esplanade park" and "Esplanade" in equal measure.

Same in Finnish:

Kategorian nimi Esplanadi viittaa epämääräiseen käsitteeseen, puistoalueeseen kahden tien välissä, mutta kategorian sisältö kuvaa kolmea eri aluetta; itse puistoa, ja sen rajaavia teitä Pohjoisesplanadia ja Eteläesplanadia. Ehdotan että tämän kategorian sisältö jaetaan kolmeen osaan koskemaan Pohjoisesplanadia, Eteläesplanadia ja puistoa, erillään toisistaan. Kategorian nimi puistolle täytyy sopia erikseen, koska muodot "Esplanadin puisto" ja "Esplanadi" esiintyvät samoissa määrin. Nelg (talk) 19:59, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Heritage streetcars in Seattle[edit]

Category:Heritage streetcars in the United States had no entry for Seattle. After starting Category:Heritage streetcars in the United States I came across Category:Streetcars in Seattle (historic). I anticipate some people will think the new category should be merged with the older related category. But "heritage" systems refer to older systems that are currently in use. Thus I think there should be two categories, and I am seeking endorsement. I may move a couple of the images from the old category to the new. Geo Swan (talk) 15:56, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Police of Washington, D.C.[edit]

There is something odd here. Washington DC has several Police departments, including Category:Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia, and independent Police Departments for Congress, and for the Parks within the city. The category Category:Government of Washington, D.C. has Category:Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia as a member, but Category:Police of Washington, D.C.. Shouldn't Category:Police of Washington, D.C. be a member of Category:Government of Washington, D.C. with all the Police departments included in it? Geo Swan (talk) 21:11, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

This sounds reasonable to me, but my knowledge of U.S. police and government is very limited, so I don't have any strong opinions. --Sebari (talk) 18:49, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Good question, but not necessarily. Two issues:

First, Category:Police of Washington, D.C. is already a subcat of Category:Emergency services in Washington, D.C., which itself is a subcat of Category:Government of Washington, D.C.. Placing Category:Police of Washington, D.C. directly in Category:Government of Washington, D.C., without instituting some sort of larger reorganization, would create an COM:OVERCAT problem.

Second, and although we are very inconsistent in our approach to this on the Commons, Category:Government of Washington, D.C. seems to refer to the government of the district, not to all government in the district. So while the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia‎ would seem to belong to Category:Government of Washington, D.C., a congressional police force (just to use an example) would not necessarily full under the rubric of the district's government (but rather the larger federal government).

Sorry, but I feel as though I have just possibly made this more complicated. Sigh. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 16:30, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Category:Views of Igreja de Sao Domingos, Lisbon[edit]

Rename to correct spelling "São". -- Tuválkin 14:02, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Concordo. José Luiz disc 01:32, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Igreja de Sao Domingos, Lisbon[edit]

Rename to correct spelling "São". -- Tuválkin 14:05, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Interior of Igreja de Sao Domingos, Lisbon[edit]

Rename to correct spelling "São". -- Tuválkin 14:05, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Concordo. José Luiz disc 01:32, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Exterior of Igreja de Sao Domingos, Lisbon[edit]

Rename to correct spelling "São". -- Tuválkin 14:06, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Concordo. José Luiz disc 01:33, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Jean skirts[edit]

What’s more correct? Category:Jean skirts or Category:Denim skirts? -- Tuválkin 00:07, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

I think it's denim skirts. The word 'jean' doesn't exist, exept as a girls' name. --Judithcomm (talk) 13:44, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
I think a "jean skirt" (or "jeans skirt") is a skirt that was made from an actual pair of jeans, as opposed to just being made of denim. We may not need that distinction. Also, not all the images in Category:Jean skirts look like they were made from actual pairs of jeans. FWIW, the English Wikipedia article en:Denim skirt calls the term "jean skirt" erroneous (although it doesn't say why). --Auntof6 (talk) 21:17, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Lets close this, then, and kill the "jean" categories. When we have 1000 photos of denim skirts (which would be already by tomorrow if most photos weren’t undercategorized), then we can split it — one of the possible cleft lines being "by style", with one its subcats being Category:Skirts made from jeans. -- Tuválkin 16:39, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Category:Denim skirts[edit]

What’s more correct? Category:Jean skirts or Category:Denim skirts? -- Tuválkin 00:10, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Symbols of Jewish national identity[edit]

Overcategorization. There is already category about symbols of Israel Δαβίδ (talk) 18:25, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Symbols of Armenian national identity[edit]

Overcategorization. There is already category about Armenian symbols. Title is original resarch. Δαβίδ (talk) 18:25, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Athabasca Landing, Slave River[edit]

Nonsensical title, Athabasca Landing (now known as the Town of Athabasca), is not on Slave River. 117Avenue (talk) 03:09, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

I just noticed that there was a talk page. The source for the images that were in this category mentions a route from Athabasca Landing to the mouth of the Slave River, which would have been along the Athabasca River. The category mentions a 16 mile portage to Fort Smith, which would have been from Fort Fitzgerald, also known as Smith's Landing, the category for that is at Category:Portages between Fort Fitzgerald and Fort Smith, on the Slave River‎. 117Avenue (talk) 07:41, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

This leaves the question as to whether Athabasca Landing and Category:Athabasca, Alberta merit two separate categories. I think the do, even though they both are for the same geographic space, they are for two separate historical eras.
I suggest we leave Category:Athabasca, Alberta for all images after the community was renamed, and I suggest Category:Athabasca Landing, Slave River should be renamed to one of the names I think you have agreed is appropriate: Category:Athabasca Landing or Category:Athabasca Landing, Northwest Territories; or Category:Athabasca Landing, Athabasca River; or Category:Athabasca Landing, Alberta.
I believe the actual category renaming -- preserving contribution history, requires someone with administrator privileges. Geo Swan (talk) 12:55, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
It doesn't need two categories, it's the same town. 117Avenue (talk) 03:55, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Category:Particle experiments[edit]

Contains no files and only one single subcategory. IMHO the contents shall be moved to Category:Particle accelerators and the category shall be deleted. Passerose (talk) 22:02, 27 November 2013 (UTC)