Help desk
< February 27	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	March 1 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

February 28[edit]

Is wiki broke?[edit]

Due to high database server lag, changes newer than 15250 seconds may not appear in this list??? Ryan4314 (talk) 03:40, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be OK now :) Chamal ^talk 05:08, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was discussed at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 126#Watchlist. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:51, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Signature problem[edit]

I have a signature worked out that should look like this I Grave Rob_«talk» but when I check the raw signature box so the WikiMarkup becomes part of it and save my preferences it says Invalid raw signature. Check HTML tags.

How can I fix this? '''[[User:I Grave Rob|I Grave Rob]]'''[[User talk:I Grave Rob|«talk»]] (talk) 06:12, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Signature taken out till I can fix this. I Grave Rob (talk) 06:15, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of HTML, it should be:

I Grave Rob_«talk»

I'm sorry, I haven't been able to test it, but that should do it. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 10:02, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the element is called 'span', not 'span style'. is nonsense. Algebraist 10:59, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

COI[edit]

I am new to wikipedia and see a conflict of interest box at top of page for "Gavin Lurssen". I apologize for the deletion of one of the COI notices. Did not understand the meaning of this and that they should be left there even after reverting to previous version. I had added some factual points to this page and did not realize there would be a conflict of interest because I am related to this person. I thought I had reverted to a previously saved version where the page was started by an outside individual. Please advise what needs to be done to remove this COI box on the page. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeanlurssen (talk • contribs) 07:01, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From the discussion on User talk:Jeanlurssen it appears the problem you are asking about is fixed now. However, it is obvious from the problems you ran into that you got in way over your head by trying to start with a tricky type of editing that requires an advanced level of skill, along with knowledge of how to communicate with other users on Wikipedia: editing an article in which you have a personal association with the subject. Wikipedia is extremely complex and unlike anything most people have experienced before, so there are a tremendous number of things you have to learn before you can really understand what that whole situation was about. If you are serious about using Wikipedia, you should read Wikipedia: The Missing Manual. That book will give you all the background you need to make sense of what you are experiencing here. --Teratornis (talk) 23:08, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

disambiguation[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Resolved

– Ka renjc 12:12, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My page "John Cook (musician)" does not currently appear on the John Cook disambiguation page. This makes it impossible to find the article on this person unless one searches for the exact title. Is there a way to change this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brenterstad (talk • contribs) 07:08, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then edit the disambiguation page and add his name (and his link via [[ ]])there.

Angdl (talk) 08:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've done it for you. Take a look at the diff to see what I did. Feel free to do it yourself in a similar situation. Ka renjc 12:07, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Would any of the actresses/actors in this reliable local newspaper article pass as notable?[edit]

http://www.goldstardailynews.com/content.php?sectionid=4&id=1429

Look at the last sentences in the article to find the names of the said actors/actresses. They are mentioned in a local newspaper, so that does mean they pass as notable as an actor/actress right? There are many famous people from the country Philippines, which are featured in the said local newspaper Gold Star. Angdl (talk) 08:34, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can't say from the single mention. You'd have to find out if their role in the performance is relevant and if there's actually any other information to build an article with. (I know several people who are notable under the guidelines. But I wouldn't write an article on them, simply because there's too little information I can use) - Mgm|^(talk) 10:54, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Tagalog Wikipedia may have more lenient requirements for notability of Filipino celebrities. Since the Tagalog Wikipedia is much smaller than the English Wikipedia, perhaps the Tagalog user community is more interested in adding content than deleting it, but I have no idea. I also have no idea whether you speak Tagalog, since you don't have any Babel boxes on your user page. If you do speak Tagalog, I would expect you might have an easier time developing articles on the Tagalog Wikipedia first, and then translating them to the English Wikipedia once they were well-developed there. Just something to consider. --Teratornis (talk) 23:15, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It might help the case for an article's notability on the English Wikipedia if well-developed articles already exist on other language Wikipedias for the same subject, but I don't have direct experience with deletion debates in which the existence of other language versions of an article was a deciding factor. I would expect it to help. If nothing else, it would give grounds for browbeating any would-be deletionists as blinkered ethnocentrists. --Teratornis (talk) 23:20, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Twin cities of U.S. cities[edit]

Whenever I go onto a "Twin cities" section of a city, I always see something like this:

Pierre, South Dakota, USA

Should it be this or:

Pierre, United States?

Filper01 (Chat, My contribs) 09:02, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the answer (though I prefer the first) but one quick comment: in the first example "USA" should either be "United States" or piped to United States, e.g. [[United States|USA]] (this avoids a redirect). Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 09:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The US is such an enormous place, that - to me - it seems reasonable to narrow it down by mentioning the state in the link. It gives the reader a general indication on where the twin city is located which your suggestion wouldn't do. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:51, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For larger cities, I think Los Angeles, United States would probably be fine. The problem with smaller cities is that there is often another city in the US by the same name. According to our disambiguation page, there are 31 Springfields, and I'm willing to bet that every medium to large British city has at least two American towns named after it. This doesn't apply to all US cities, just enough that it's probably something to keep in mind when making a twin towns list. AlexiusHoratius 15:59, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#United States says:

The canonical form for cities in the United States is [[City, State]] (the "comma convention").
A United States city's article should never be titled "city, country" (e.g., "Detroit, United States") or "city, state, country" (e.g., "Kansas City, Missouri, USA").

However, that refers to the naming convention for an article title, not for the text to display when linking to an article. In an article which is about a city outside the United States, it could be ambiguous to omit the trailing "United States" or "USA", for example when the state name is also the name of a country ("Georgia"). You might ask this question again on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names) after searching the archives there. --Teratornis (talk) 21:31, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not finding my name[edit]

I uploaded my research paper, thesis and photography. But when in search box i write my name or topic of the article, i didnot get it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AminaTara (talk • contribs) 12:36, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason, you created these on Wikipedia talk pages, not in article space. I will respond further on your talk page. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 14:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User page rediredcting to article I created and moved.[edit]

Hoping someone can tell me how to either unconnect my user page from the article I created or create a new user page.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kreiny (talk • contribs) 14:00, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Simply open it for editing and remove the redirect. The trick is that after it redirects to the article, you will see a small "(Redirected from User:Kreiny)" at the top; click on this link to get to the redirected page. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 14:14, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have blanked your user page so it doesn't redirect. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:41, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

font[edit]

why do every page in wikipedia had a font in script? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marius zephius (talk • contribs) 15:07, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you see all of the article text as a script font? --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 15:13, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How to add images[edit]

I wish to upload an article written by me. This is in MS Word and has a table, and a few graphics drawn using MS drawing tool. How can I upload this? I am a registered user. 91.140.201.155 (talk) 15:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, firstly you don't appear to be a registered user (unless you forgot to log in). You need to have an autoconfirmed account, which means you have to have 10 edits, and been registered for 4 days. If these are currently applied, you can log in a upload them. Sunderland06 (talk) 15:37, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Your first article about creating an article. Unfortunately you cannot upload an MS Word file. You will have to convert it to Wikitext including the Wikipedia:Table. Each graphic will have to be uploaded separately as a Wikipedia:Image and licensed under a free license. —teb728 t c 18:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please note also that the subjects of all articles must be notable, and the article must demonstrate that notability with references to reliable sources. Articles cannot be used for advertising the subject: they must be written from a neutral point of view. —teb728 t c 18:45, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How to format a second response in a Talk page thread[edit]

In the Talk pages, what is the proper way to indicate the start of a new response to an entry, when there is already a response to it?

Assume that there is an entry at a certain heading level, and one response at the next higher heading level (the customary way to format a response). I wish to respond to the first entry (not to the first response).

If I simply append a new entry to the section, at the same heading level, it is often not clear that it is a new entry. At first glance, it appears to be part of the first responder's entry.

If, instead, I append to the section, increasing the heading level by one, it appears that I am responding to the first responder.

In the example below, the first three response lines are from Ivan, and the last by me.

Example:

(New Section:) The sky is blue --signed by Mary

Good point, Mary. But why is the sky blue?

Many reasons have been given.

I will research this and update this page. --signed by Ivan

According to reference xxx, the sky is purple. --signed by me.

Mark.camp (talk) 15:39, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I prefer your way - i.e. indent by the same amount as "Ivan" - and I consider this "the one true way". I've noticed some people indent as if they were replying to Ivan, and of course some people simply don't indent at all ;-) Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 15:47, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To Mark.camp: when I want to respond to someone's comment which is not immediately above mine, I type "To: (whoever I mean)". That way I can use indenting to distinguish my comment from the comment immediately above it, yet still make clear who I am responding to. Wikipedia:Indentation says to indent according to the comment you are replying to, but the illustrative example is misleading because it shows only two short replies. When replies get long, as mine like to do (why state in a few words what can fit comfortably in twelve paragraphs?), having successive replies at the same indent level rapidly becomes unreadable, in my opinion. --Teratornis (talk) 21:38, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More points:

On the Help desk, most users successively indent their replies, although most replies are to the original questioner.
On a talk page elsewhere, the style in Wikipedia:Indentation may be more appropriate.
If a reply comes after several successively indented replies, then it can be clearer to indent one level below the entry to which one is replying (since the entry immediately above will be indented farther, helping to distinguish the new comment from it).
If a discussion thread is evolving considerably away from its first comment, it may be better to start a new section.
Summarizing the points you are responding to can be helpful if you are responding to points after a large amount of intervening text, regardless of what indentation you use.
Be aware that MediaWiki's talk page feature is not perfect. It is really an example of opportunistic design, a reuse of wiki technology originally developed for the article pages. People realized later that having pages to discuss things was useful, so the talk page feature got tacked on cheaply. Notice that we use no special markup codes for talk pages - because there aren't any. There was no attempt (initially) to create a real threaded discussion feature. However, see WP:EIW#LT for information about an attempt to fix that.

--Teratornis (talk) 22:00, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prayers for the sick-[edit]

My name is rev. Miguel A Urrea; Catholic Chaplain at Arrowhead Regional Medical Center, <contact details removed> I would like to respect your beliefs especially with the patients that come to our hospital. I would like to know what prayers I may pray with them and in which way I can help the patient as well as the family when they are terminal ill. Will you please help me in this matter. Thank you very much for your time. Respectfully yours, Rev. Miguel A Urrea/Catholic Chaplain —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.164.246.221 (talk) 16:22, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. Algebraist 16:26, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hello[edit]

why do i keep getting emails saying that im vandalising? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.4.37.177 (talk • contribs) 16:54, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody using your IP address made these edits. If you do not want to receive messages that someone else is responsible for, you can create an account and login. That would also protect you from being blocked from editing due to someone else's vandalism.

By the way when you post to discussion forums like this one, please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). That will add a signature like this: —teb728 t c 17:55, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

downloading music score[edit]

I went to the I.M.S.L. project to get some Bach and Beethovan ..I can't figure out how to find it or down load itKennyYoung (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:13, 28 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

You may find information at the IMSLP article. Otherwise ask at the Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities; they answer general knowledge questions. This forum is for questions about using Wikipedia. —teb728 t c 18:18, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep getting logged out[edit]

I keep getting logged out. One of your FAQs tells me I might be able to fix this by removing all my Wikipedia cookies. Unfortunately it gives me no clue how to go about this. How do I remove all my Wikipedia cookies please?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:54, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This will depend on your browser. On FireFox it's tools/clear private data. Algebraist 18:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On Internet Explorer up to 6.0 it's Tools > Internet Options > "General" tab > "Delete Cookies" button. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 20:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See also Help:Logging in for tips on staying logged in. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading picture[edit]

Hi, Ive never uploaded a picture of my own and am not familliar with the process. I think a picture of mine can help an article im working on but have never uploaded one before, can some one direct me to the pages I need to upload a picture, and also how to clear the copyright thingies so it doesnt get removed, thanks a bunch, Im sure its probably something silly to ask Ottawa4ever (talk) 18:26, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand correctly that you have not used anyone else's work in making it, go to Wikipedia:Upload and click on the link in the first bullet. That will describe the applicable free licenses and give you an upload form. —teb728 t c 18:55, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If it is an image that you created yourself, a better option is to upload it to Commons so that it is available for use on all Wikimedia projects. – ukexpat (talk) 19:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MOS[edit]

Resolved

What part of the Manual of Style deals with appropriate linking in "See also" sections? THF (talk) 19:18, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does WP:SEEALSO give what you are looking for? —teb728 t c 19:30, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just so. THF (talk) 19:39, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How can I fix a GFDL historical issue long after the violation?[edit]

If an article was forked into another or merged in violation of the GFDL, but discovered much later, is there a standard way to deal with this? I have come across an article that has its entire content taken from another. The content was deleted from the first and placed in the later one without giving any attibution for where the material came from. But this was two years ago. It looks today like the new article was created by the person who forked it. But the prior article history has a over a hundred edits adding the material. There's no way for anyone, looking at the history of the newer article, to know that the material was not created and added in one edit as a new article by the forker. Can we fix the GFDL problem by making a banner note at the top of the forked article talk page? Is there some other way? I know that there are history merges. Can I ask that just the part of the history of the prior page which added the material be merged to the beginning of the other article history page? I thought this might be very difficult since the old article history has lots of other edits that are not dealing with this material that are interspersed (and some that were edits to the forked material and also to other material in the article). So I do not think a clean history merge is possible. 70.19.64.161 (talk) 19:41, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to ask at Wikipedia:Copyright problems, which is a noticeboard designed for questions like this. At the least, someone who patrols that noticeboard may be more likely to know how to answer your question. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 21:21, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{Splitfrom}} and {{Split-to}} may be appropriate. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:32, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And see Help:Moving a page#Fixing cut and paste moves. (These situations can become nightmarish.) --Teratornis (talk) 23:23, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New Account[edit]

I know that there is a list of every Wikipedia user account ever made somewhere, but I con't remember where it is. I want to create an account and keep running into the "username is already taken" message. 86.45.153.52 (talk) 20:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Listusers. Xenon54 (talk) 20:07, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm lost...[edit]

I was editing the Fort Kent, Maine article, and placed one of my own photos [1] of the town in that section. A few months later, user Fame uploads a copywrited picture [2] of the town from Paul A. Cyr of NorthernMainePhotos [3], the same one that's there now. I know this because I have his DVD, and that is on there.

I reverted it, but soon I got some whining from him, complaining that my picture did not reflect the town. I countered by saying that his photo was not fair use, according to the allegations on his user talk page, and my DVD I have. I even took a picture ( [4] ) of the DVDs and the original picture. Still, this did not satisfy him, so he fired back at me and made me feel guilty, so I ended up reverting to the picture HE uploaded, since I didn't want to have to fight with him.

I actually LIVE here, and that picture DOES convey an actual sense of the town, but my picture was taken looking down Main Street, and that is the liveliest part of our town. Should I just put mine back up and forget about Fame unless he does this scheibe again, or should I just let it go? Did I do the right thing?

Draconiator (talk) 21:19, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, if that picture is uploaded without the permission of the photographer, fair use has to be asserted and in this case that would fail because at least a couple of hundred people could make a free alternative. Since you live in the area, it's a good idea to listen to ideas for improvement if he has specific complaints about your image, but otherwise reverting is indeed the right thing to do. - Mgm|^(talk) 21:28, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Alternatively, you could ask the original photographer to donate the image if you feel adventurous. - Mgm|^(talk) 21:30, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- You are certainly in the right here. A picture taken and specifically uploaded by the copyright holder is always and forever prefered over a copyrighted photo claimed under fair use. There is no fair use where a free equivalent is availible, regardless of arguements over which picture is "better". Quality is not a consideration on fair use with regards to Wikipedia policy. If you need some back up on this, post your complaint to Wikipedia:Copyright problems, a noticeboard designed to deal with these issues. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 21:36, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- - Thanks, if he does this AGAIN, I will take it to the Copyright Problems page, but I'm just going to revert to my picture and see what happens. Thanks, y'all! Draconiator (talk) 21:44, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(undent) And read Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria so you can authoritatively cite the rules in this dispute. Wikipedia's rules are complete enough to resolve most disputes. Often in a dispute, it's a simple matter of one side or both not being fully aware of the rules that apply to their situation. Wikipedia has so many users doing similar things that the same kinds of disputes tend to come up repeatedly. --Teratornis (talk) 21:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When you revert, add a link to the guideline or policy page you are following, to your edit summary. That will make your actions easier for other interested users to understand. --Teratornis (talk) 21:50, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I could also add that WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF suggest we should not characterize another editor's communication as "whining" even if it seems to be. Just describe objectively what another user has done, and allow other editors to independently decide how to characterize it, if they choose to characterize it at all. What may seem like whining or ranting to one editor might seem like an honest mistake or even reasoned discourse to another. Try to be aware of how different other minds can be. On Wikipedia the challenge is to work harmoniously with the staggering diversity of our 47,333,321 registered users and the unknown number of unregistered users. (Life would be so much simpler if everybody thought like I do, but so far I haven't really found one person who does, across the board.) --Teratornis (talk) 22:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Teratornis that you should not characterize the other editor’s posts as “whining.” Is File:Fort kent.JPG the other photo? The uploader claims to have created entirely by himself. If you know that is false, you could tag it with {{db-imgcopyvio|source url}}. (It is odd that the photo has not been tagged {{di-no license}} since it was uploaded in November.) —teb728 t c 01:19, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

force category to show all its subcategories[edit]

Resolved

Is there an instruction to force a category to show all its subcategories on the first page? Debresser (talk) 21:57, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does Special:CategoryTree do what you want? Algebraist 22:00, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Or mw:Extension:CategoryTree? PrimeHunter (talk) 22:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is how you do it [5]. DuncanHill (talk) 22:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That one I knew. But these add the cattree in addition to the subcategories.

I remember that there is a command to force the category page to show all its subcategories on the first page (if there are more than 200 members and so more than 1 page in that category). Debresser (talk) 22:59, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have not heard of such a command. Wikipedia:Categorization#Split display only says <categorytree> can be used. It's possible to place a sort key like space or * in each subcategory to list it before articles starting with normal characters. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:36, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I must have been mistaken. Debresser (talk) 16:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Homeowner Associations (HOA) Problems and Solutions[edit]

How does one add this entry to start a discussion on HOA horror stories and solutions? Let's move beyond rant and rave about the injustices and provide each other with constructive solutions through education and advocacy at the local, county, state, regional and national levels. Include links and letters to elected officials and media contacts as a beginning.

65.91.82.62 (talk) 23:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Wikipedia is not for discussion or sharing a point of view. Should a HOA article exist, you could include a criticism section providing reliable sources are used. Computerjoe 's talk 23:34, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How do you create an article?[edit]

How do you create an article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Williscool123 (talk • contribs) 23:41, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Before creating an article, please search Wikipedia first to make sure that an article does not already exist on the subject. Please also review a few of our relevant policies and guidelines which all articles should comport with. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles must not contain original research, must be written from a neutral point of view, should cite to reliable sources which verify their content and must not contain unsourced, negative content about living people.

Articles must also demonstrate the notability of the subject. Please see our subject specific guidelines for people, bands and musicians, companies and organizations and web content and note that if you are closely associated with the subject, our conflict of interest guideline strongly recommends against you creating the article.

If you still think an article is appropriate, see Help:Starting a new page. You might also look at Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:How to write a great article for guidance, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:46, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]