Talk:2009 flu pandemic in Asia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Asia confirmed cases map[edit]

File:SWINE Flue in Asia.PNG
  100+ confirmed cases
  30+ confirmed cases
  20+ confirmed cases
  10+ confirmed cases
  1+ confirmed cases

I think the scale needs adjusting. For one thing "red" as 30+ looks out of place, for another, 20+ and 30+ seems too close together. I suggest using the standard key (1+/5+/50+/500+/5000+) or the magnitude modified key (1+/10+/100+/1000+) or the 5x key (1+/5+/20+/100+/500+/2000+/10000+) or the doubling key (1+/5+/10+/20+/50+/100+/200+/500+/1000+/2000+/5000+/10000+) (talk) 11:57, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Type map counterpart for SWINE Flue in Asia.PNG[edit]

Can someone make a counterpart map for cases by type for this file (file:SWINE Flue in Asia.PNG)? (The black-red-yellow maps) (talk) 08:03, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Here you go a black-red-yellow map and also a new case count map now both in a better SVG format. -- [[ axg ⁞⁞ talk ]] 23:56, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
What scale did you use for the new pink map? (talk) 07:52, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
The new map uses the same colour scale as the old map however, I do remember saying that the current scale is not right and needs to be changed (colour wise).-- [[ axg ⁞⁞ talk ]] 08:26, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


A seperate Thailand article should be created. The main article is getting far too large and unruly.Johnpacklambert (talk) 17:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

As you're a logged in user, you can do the first part... create 2009 swine flu outbreak in Thailand, copy all the stuff over, and then leave a stub here (probably keep the picture here also). And add a {{main|2009 swine flu outbreak in Thailand}} to the top of the section here. (talk) 06:21, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
I've done the split. --Roentgenium111 (talk) 00:32, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
You forgot to leave a summary. (talk) 04:09, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Article Assessment for WikiProject Medicine[edit]

Hello. I am a member of WikiProject Medicine, a Wikipedia wide project that maintains and improves articles that fall under the scope of medicine. Since your article has not fallen under our scope, I have placed the correct template(s) on this talk page. Leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. Thanks, and keep editing Wikipedia! Renaissancee (talk) 16:39, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Per discussion at WP:MED itself, Renaissancee's decision is incorrect, and it is appropriate to tag this article. (talk) 06:35, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Hong Kong[edit]

HK has reports that primary schools and kindergardens will be closed for a week due to a cluster in primary school children... (talk) 14:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Country inclusions (Europe/Asia)[edit]

There are minor issues with the inclusion of various territories in this article and its homologue for Europe, namely those countries which may straddle both Europe and Asia. The WHO regional office for Europe ( includes Cyprus, Turkey, and other territories (e.g., ex-Soviet republics and Israel!) But, this is misleading. It would be very odd to include Israel, for instance, in the entry for Europe when very clearly it is not part of that continent; as well, the bulk of Turkey (i.e., Anatolia) and nearby Cyprus are physiographically parts of Asia; of course, Cyprus is in the EU and it is sometimes included in Europe, but the EU isn't the same as Europe. For this reason, I believe the articles should include territories per continental articles and per the United Nations geoscheme, which list countries by continents and various regions. Otherwise, the articles would have to be named '2009 flu pandemic in World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe' or whatever. However, I'm flexible. I've made these text changes to the articles. Also, if agreeable, I'll also amend the maps. Thoughts? Bosonic dressing (talk) 17:35, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

If this isn't a geographical article, we shouldn't be using geographical terms in the title or categorizing them according to commonly known continents/regions, as reflected in the 'Asia' and 'Europe' articles ... the main maps and content of which generally include these countries in Asia (aside from Trakya in Turkey, commonly part of Europe). Though I'm cognizant of other viewpoints, a great many other sources -- including the UN (which I cite as an unbiased example for lists) -- generally consider these countries, Israel unequivocally so, to be in Asia (or, in other instances, wherever they may be). The bulk of Turkey's area and population are in Anatolia (AKA Asia Minor), and I'm sure not all 'diseased people' are in Trakya. As well, your alias reinforces perception of bias. If you can't convince or unless a consensus compels otherwise, I will restore the prior scheme per the UN shortly. Bosonic dressing (talk) 19:37, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't think swine flu is about geography. It's about health. You said "UN geoscheme is unbiased" but it includes geographically mostly Asian Russia in Europe! But the WHO, a sub-organization of the UN classifies Cyprus, Turkey, Azerbaijan, etc. in Europe. It also includes Israel and ex-Soviet republics in Europe too, but I didn't move them to 2009 flu pandemic in Europe article. But you gave the Israel example all the time. And you said "I'm sure not all 'diseased people' are in Trakya". But they came from the US and stopped in Atatürk International Airport and treated in Şişli Etfal Hospital which is too in Europe. Do you really think Turkey would let those diseased people walk freely in the country? No. I also realized you are canvassing [1]. This isn't allowed in Wikipedia. --Turkish Flame 20:31, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Epidemics and pandemics are all about geography, and health: that's why the flu situation is now considered a pandemic (a wider, global situation). Anyhow, as for the UN geoscheme, it is unbiased: you can't split countries in two for statistical purposes, or here for that matter; while most of Russia's area is in Asia, most of its population and its capital are in Europe (which is likely the reason why it's included there). Can you say that of Turkey? (I may be mistaken as to where the cases in Turkey are being treated, but that's beside the point.) And, yes: it's important to note the example of Israel (included in the WHO region of Europe, but in Asia almost everywhere else), and the curiosity of why you didn't move that initially while moving/reverting other countries that are perhaps of more relevance to you (given your alias/background); this demonstrates that you've a point to prove. As well, my notice to that administrator is not canvassing, as I didn't ask anyone to say this or that, but simply a request of someone uninvolved to weigh in. And, you haven't yet convinced me why the countries included should stay the way you prefer them. Bosonic dressing (talk) 20:53, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
If Russia classified in Europe by the UN geoscheme because of its population in Europe, the name of this geoscheme would be population scheme. There is an unequal treatment in that scheme. Anyway, as for Israel, I'm sure you know why it is classified in the WHO European regional group. Because of political reasons including Palestinian dispute. I didn't add Israel to Europe because of this reason. I hope this can satisfy your curiosity. Also, I don't have to convince you. You are not the owner of this article. There is a discussion here and we are seeking for a consensus. And I think the UN geoscheme is already eliminated because all the cases in Turkey seen in the European part of İstanbul. --Turkish Flame 21:21, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
The UN geoscheme, nor a wealth of other reputable sources that corroborate it, is not invalidated just because you say so. As for Israel's inclusion in the WHO scheme for Europe, politics notwithstanding, your explanation is insufficient. Anyhow, I wonder how you would react regarding the country's location if the pandemic spread to the rest of Turkey. No matter, Turkish Flame, it is clear that have a point to prove regarding the location of Turkey and its neighbours. And, yes, we are seeking to garner consensus, which you dismissed when you reverted content which has been in place for a bit of time. So, I will await other comments, and will act accordingly. Bosonic dressing (talk) 21:30, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Personally, I would place the country in whichever continent most if its territory resides in (ie. Russia should be in this article). Israel and Turkey would then be part of this article. Marginal cases in the Caucuses which depend on where one draws the line... whichever one works. I would keep the Mediterranean islands as part of Europe, so that would be Crete, Cyprus, Malta, Sardinia, Corsica, Sicily, etc. (talk) 06:26, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Russia is European, even if the lightly and recently colonized region we all know as Siberia constitutes most of its territory. Likewise, Canada and India constituted the majority of Britain's territory for over a century, but that didn't make Britain part of Asia or America. This is not comparable to Turkey, which is essentially Anatolia with Thrace attached (Turks will often tell you that the "real" name for Turkey is "Anadolu"). It would make sense to have Turkey in Asia and Russia in Europe, but all that matters is that we have the information and it really isn't worth edit-warring over. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 05:54, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
I agree. Can you please tell that to a certain editor who maintains otherwise? Bosonic dressing (talk) 06:06, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Look Bosonic! I said you were canvassing! He came and support your absurd POV. Deacon of Pndapetzim, do you mean Siberia is Russia's colony? I don't think so. You also said Turks will often tell you that the "real" name for Turkey is "Anadolu". I'm a Turk and I don't think Turkey's real name is Anadolu! Our largest city, former capital, cultural and economical capital, Istanbul, is in Europe. It will be the European Capital of Culture in 2010. Swine flu in Turkey only seen in the European part of the country and the WHO classifies Turkey as European. How can you put it in Asia even if you think Turkey isn't European? See this link. --Turkish Flame 06:22, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
I am not canvassing: please read up on what that means. As well, DofP is an administrator, and I foresaw that there would be challenges in resolving this issue. Look: I'm not insensitive to your viewpoint -- after all, who do you think crafted the current introductions (more or less) for Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia which embrace the dual viewpoints of their locations? Nonetheless, most of Turkey -- its area AND population -- IS in Asia, as the respective articles and many other sources attest to. It must go in one list/article, and I largely fail to see why we should include Turkey's entry in Europe, given the above, just because of your absurd POV-pushing. And, frankly, you are the only commentator explicitly supporting Turkey's inclusion in the European list/article; three above have so far indicated otherwise -- that's a preliminary consensus. Lastly, I've warned you about edit warring (and admit a bit myself), but you will be reported if you don't stop. That's all. Bosonic dressing (talk) 06:40, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
TF, I'm not here to back BD up. I don't care if Turkey is in the Europe or Asia article, and I'm saying you guys shouldn't either because it doesn't matter. BTW, you know as well as I do most Turks think of Anatolia as Turkey-proper. As for Siberia, see Russian_conquest_of_Siberia and History_of_Siberia#Imperial_Russian_expansion. Siberia is virtually uninhabited, and almost all of the European population are settled around around the old railway see this map. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 06:49, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Russia is only culturally European with its Ethnic Russians. most of its ethnic groups are Asian. And Geography should trump Culture, otherwise we should place Australia in Europe. I'd be fine if we split Russia in two. French Guyana is part of France, does that mean it's not part of South America? (talk) 07:16, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Forget everything. Reaching a consensus in this matter is nearly impossible. And I don't understand why you're insisting on moving Turkey to the Asia article. Swine flu has never seen in Anatolia. It's valid for Russia too. Swine flu has never seen in Siberia. So moving these countries to the Asia article is meaningless. --Turkish Flame 07:32, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Very clearly, a consensus does seem to be emerging that at least Turkey is misplaced (i.e. that its entry should be in the Asia article instead of in the Europe article as you maintain): at least three editors have commented to that end or have made that edit, one of which you just reverted,[2][3] while you alone support it. (And before you start producing another reason to justify your edit warring, I'm in the Americas.) It's very clear discussion with you is fruitless, since (per your alias) you've an obvious point to prove. So, I suggest you forget it. Bosonic dressing (talk) 19:41, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Swine flu has never seen in Anatolia so it's impossible to move Turkey to the Asia article. You said three editors want it to be moved. One of these editors is an IP with no edit history which means he/she is here for an edit war and I'll start a sock puppetry case about that IP. I think he/she forgot to move Russia to the Asia article too. If not, why didn't he move Russia to the Asia article too? The second editor is an IP too but he/she supports moving not only Turkey but also Russia to the Asia article. None of these users are supporting you. They don't mention anything about the UN geoscheme. And look what I've found. You moved Turkey and Cyprus to the Asia article first. [4] [5] The WP community put Turkey, Cyprus, etc. (but not Israel or Central Asian countries) in the Europe article first, but you moved them without a consensus. --Turkish Flame 20:33, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
If one thing is clear, these users are definitely not supporting YOUR position. I boldly updated the articles with consistent rationale stated, and all was fine until you started pushing your very obvious point-of-view with the insertion of a 'new' scheme. You then used the WHO regional definition as a crutch, yet didn't migrate Israel to the Europe article. You now maintain that because there may be no confirmed cases on the Asian portion of Turkey, where most of its area and people are, this entry belongs elsewhere. You also try to disprove arguments by disputing the editors. Enough. There's a Wikipedia guideline called boldly edit, revert, discuss -- you have been reverted and will continue to be until a consensus supports your position. And that's all I really have to say for now. Bosonic dressing (talk) 05:33, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
These users are not supporting your position too. You moved Turkey, Cyprus, etc. to the Asia article first without a consensus but kept Russia in the Europe article. When I came and reverted it, you said this articles uses the UN geoscheme. Who said it? Only YOU! This articles should use WHO's definition of Europe or real geographical borders of Europe. You rejected the WHO's Europe, so the real borders must be used. --Turkish Flame 06:13, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
There was no controversy when I made the changes, but your changes are senseless. And, yes, we should use 'real' geographical borders: almost all of Turkey is in Asia (per that article, and its many sources, etc.):
and that demarcation goes back centuries. Deal with it. Bosonic dressing (talk) 06:42, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm not denying that Anatolia is in Asia. I'm only trying to explain swine flu has never seen in Anatolia. It has seen in European part of Turkey. Like it has never seen in Asian part of Russia. When the virus will seen in Asian parts of these countries, we'll move them to Asia too. --Turkish Flame 07:02, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Of course you are denying it, and your rationale makes little sense ... if only because it disregards the potential of unconfirmed cases elsewhere in the country (which has happened in many others). I see no reason to cater to your will alone despite centuries of reckoning to the contrary. And I remind you that no other commenting editor has yet to support your viewpoint. Bosonic dressing (talk) 06:56, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
We don't have any sources which claim that H1N1 has seen in Aatolia. Also no other editor supports your POV too. --Turkish Flame 07:07, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Obviously, you can't count, since at least three commentators agree with including Turkey here -- none agree with you. So, that's that. Bosonic dressing (talk) 07:25, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
One of that users is a sockpuppet. And the other IP user supports moving not only Turkey but also Russia to the Asia article. And H1N1 hasn't seen in Anatolia, no consensus can move Turkey to the Asia article. --Turkish Flame 07:39, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Who is the sockpuppet? Please prove your allegations. As well, regardless of where editors may include Russia, only you support including Turkey here. Moreover, you have just violated the stipulations regarding edit warring and have been warned before, and may be reported and blocked. Bosonic dressing (talk) 07:46, 25 June 2009 (UTC) is the sockpuppet. And don't threaten me, you have violated the 3RR too! --Turkish Flame 07:59, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
And who do you think it's a sockpuppet of? That IP is in Germany; as you've been told before, I'm in the Americas. And, no: you will not get anywhere through discrediting other editors. Bosonic dressing (talk) 08:03, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
I decided to support's country classification. Because nobody accepted using the real geographical borders except me, I'll move Russia to the Asia article. --Turkish Flame 09:32, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
And I am moving Russia back (per the UN geoscheme, which does not sway with opinion), since there's no consensus yet supporting this change/move -- at least two other editors maintain the entry should be kept in Europe, since most of the country's population is in Europe ... and epidemics affect populations. Bosonic dressing (talk) 14:56, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Which two users want it to be kept in Europe except you? There are 4 users in this discussion: you, me, and (he/she has no edit history). Two of these users want Russia to be moved to Asia, you don't want to and the other IP User has gone. Please obey the consensus. --Turkish Flame 15:27, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Do not start this again. Myself and Deacon of Pndapetzim have indicated including Russia in Europe, where most of the people and its capital are. Anyhow, you were just blocked for edit warring, and emerge to resume? And you're now agreeing with the 'sockpuppet'? What point are you trying to make exactly? I highly recommend you get added input and await consensus supporting this before I'm compelled to escalate this matter again. Bosonic dressing (talk) 15:39, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
First you moved those transcontinental countries, except Russia, to Asia and now you are the one who says there is a consensus to keep Russia in Europe. And I'm agreeing with (I don't think he is a sockpuppet, even if he is a sockpuppet, you agreed with him in the past on Turkey issue.) Look at the very first beginning of the discussion, I voted as Oppose and no other editors voted. And you said this article is about geography when I offered to use the WHO's classification, so Russia's population isn't concerned here. It's vast majority is in Asia. --Turkish Flame 15:56, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
This is getting rather tiresome. This is largely about human geography. You of course 'offered' the WHO scheme, but didn't touch Israel -- so, it's your own scheme. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone per se, but deferring to an impartial scheme (that of the UN) which reflects both article content and common usage. And, this is not a 'vote': you hae not compelled through discussion why we should change this entry, which has been unchanged for some time. Please await additional feedback before reverting again ... after which you will be reported and likely blocked again for edit warring. Bosonic dressing (talk) 16:04, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
If I had moved Israel to Europe, would you accept it? NO! That's why I didn't touch Israel. And do not despise the WHO's classification because it's a sub-organization of the UN. See the Tourism article, where Wikipedia community uses WTO's country classification not yhe UN geoscheme. --Turkish Flame 16:14, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Now, that is beside the point -- the point is that your changes have made little coherent sense. My consideration of the WHO scheme was dealt with when I initiated this discussion, and I have no intention of going in circles with you; whatever the tourist editors have decided is their affair, but the WHO scheme didn't apparently have traction in the flu articles. The basic point is that this article should be structured (agreeably and consensually) in a way most users will understand, not as you alone believe it should and with your unique scheme -- and you have yet to convince us why. Feedback from other editors is welcome. Bosonic dressing (talk) 16:32, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I support including Turkey in Asia. It is not a question of where in the country the cases are, but what continent we put the country in. The vast majority of the population of Russia lives in Europe, so we place Russia in Europe despite the fact most of the area is in Asia. On the other hand, we place Turkey in Asia because that is where its capital is, most of its population is, and the overwhelming majority of its area. The part of Turkey in Europe is a very small part. Not since 1912 has an argument placing Turkey in Europe had any logic to it. Since Turkey is in Asia, so should Cyprus be in Asia. Cyprus is closer to Africa than to Europe. If you use arguments about it being largely Greek to place it in Europe, than was not the Pontic Coast part of Europe before 1919? If we had a seperate Middle-East category, some of these issues would be different, but since we do not, we have to use physical placement and not focus on other issues. Cyprus is in Asia, Egypt is in Africa, so is Tunisia, despite them having little in common with Botswana, and Russia is in Europe because that is where most of its population is. It makes as much sense to put Turkey in Europe as it does to put Spain in Africa, since Spain has almost as high a percentage of its land area in Africa as Turkey does in Europe.Johnpacklambert (talk) 18:31, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Another note. Turkis Flame is way out of connection with the main understanding of geography. NO ONE PUTS AZERBAIJAN IN EUROPE. Armenia and Georgia are both clearly in Asia, as they our south of the Caucuses. Azerbaijan is not only south of the caucuses, has spent more of its history in Persia than in Russia, and culturally more similar to its southern neighbors than its northern ones, but it is further from Europe than its western neighbors. Some places may be questionable which continent they belong in, but Azerbaijan is without question in Asia. To place it in Europe is totally to ignore present boundaries and the fact that the Caucus mountains, north of Azerbaijan, are the accepted southern boundary of Europe.Johnpacklambert (talk) 18:37, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


Do we really need a separate China article? (2009 flu pandemic in China) The section isn't all that long right now. (talk) 11:25, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes we do! An artical covering both China, Mongolia, N. Korea, S. Korea, Japan, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan woud be both informative and aproriate for the situation!-- (talk) 14:19, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

[[6]] Mongolia quarantines some tourists come swine flu suspects.-- (talk) 14:19, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Some resent Chinese border casese. [[7]]. -- (talk) 14:19, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of which, I am unsure why the entries for Hong Kong and Macau are standalone ones, or continue to be made as such, when very clearly are parts of the PRC. The fact that these two articles may have more information than the parent entry is, frankly, irrelevant. So, I've moved the HK adn Macau entry to be subsections of the PRC entry, and will correct this unless a groundswell (inexplicably) opposes this. Thanks. Bosonic dressing (talk) 02:30, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Article Assessment for WikiProject Medicine[edit]

Hello. I am a member of WikiProject Medicine, a Wikipedia wide project that maintains and improves articles that fall under the scope of medicine. Since your article has fallen under our scope, I have placed the correct template(s) on this talk page for verification. Upon reviewed of the article, I'd like to make a few points, as shown below:

  • Assess article with class and importance factors

Leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. I'm glad this article could fall within our scope, and I hope to see it grow large! Many thanks! Renaissancee (talk) 04:48, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Deaths map[edit]

H1N1 map by confirmed deaths.svg

So can someone update the world deaths map to account for the Philippines? (talk) 07:35, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Can somebody update the map on 2009 flu pandemic in Asia to include the deaths in South Korea and Japan? Thanks. K.L.Riley 16 August 2009 22.39 UTC

Chinese flu countermeasures.[edit]

I don't have an English source, but I just found an article from the Japanese newspaper Sankei which says that the Chinese government has announced that anyone intentionally spreading swine flu in Beijing will be subject to criminal penalties up to and including execution. [8] (talk) 10:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Proposed article move[edit]

A proposal is afoot to move the 'country' article to a more appropriate location. Thoughts? Bosonic dressing (talk) 10:41, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Onset map[edit]

  Late April
  Early May
  Mid May
  Late May
  Early June
  Mid June
  Late June

Can someone harmonize the color keys of the two onset maps? (talk) 14:47, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I think there are some countries that are missing from the equation such as Bangladesh and some of the countries from the former Soviet Union. Roman888 (talk) 01:39, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

community outbreak maps[edit]

Can the various community outbreak maps have their colours harmonized?

How about additing in all countries with confirmed infections, and adding a second color for "isolated infections" ? (talk) 06:05, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


The article has a lackluster of updates. I have fixed the facts missing from current updates about the virus. It clearly states that the total of cases has increased to over 1,005 people, and 4 deaths, in which three were reported negative.--BoeingRuleOfThe9th-700 Contact Jakarta Center at 121.965 02:20, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Keeping the article on topic[edit]

Should the Israel section contain a discussion on the naming of the flu? It adds too much noise to the article. And frankly, it is offtopic to this article. (talk) 11:58, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Cyprus belongs to the European Union, not to Asia![edit]

Cyprus belongs to the European Union, not to Asia! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:21, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

india section extremely outdated[edit]

the section on india was written in 2009 and is extremely outdated since then many more people have died and major sporadic outbraks have occured in cities like pune and mumbai. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:28, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Proposed merge[edit]

Hello all, I'm proposing a merge between these two articles and the main article:

I feel these articles are very short and that content is already mentioned in the main article (which is very informative!). These haven't received major edits in 2+ years, and I think content would be better left here, until such time as a split is needed (such as the 2009 flu pandemic in Malaysia and 2009 flu pandemic in China splits). Kind Regards, LT90001 (talk) 00:03, 10 August 2013 (UTC)