Kansas Bear (talk | contribs) |
Nasir Ghobar (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 50: | Line 50: | ||
::::"''First, the Saffarid amirs and maliks were rulers of Persian stock who for centuries championed the cause of the underdog against the might of the Abbasid caliphs.''" -- Savory, Roger M.. "The History of the Saffarids of Sistan and the Maliks of Nimruz (247/861 to 949/1542-3)." The Journal of the American Oriental Society. 1996. HighBeam Research. (September 3, 2012). [http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-19027555.html] |
::::"''First, the Saffarid amirs and maliks were rulers of Persian stock who for centuries championed the cause of the underdog against the might of the Abbasid caliphs.''" -- Savory, Roger M.. "The History of the Saffarids of Sistan and the Maliks of Nimruz (247/861 to 949/1542-3)." The Journal of the American Oriental Society. 1996. HighBeam Research. (September 3, 2012). [http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-19027555.html] |
||
::::Here Savory explains the difference between plebeian and aristocrat. "''It is true that the background of Ya qub b. Layth, the founder of the dynasty, '''was plebeian''', and '''contrasted sharply with the aristocratic origins''' of the Tahirids and the Samanids, the rivals of the Saffarids for power in eastern Iran.''" --[[User:Kansas Bear|Defensor Ursa]] 16:59, 3 September 2012 (UTC) |
::::Here Savory explains the difference between plebeian and aristocrat. "''It is true that the background of Ya qub b. Layth, the founder of the dynasty, '''was plebeian''', and '''contrasted sharply with the aristocratic origins''' of the Tahirids and the Samanids, the rivals of the Saffarids for power in eastern Iran.''" --[[User:Kansas Bear|Defensor Ursa]] 16:59, 3 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
:::::#Plebein has 3 meanings, but you only mentioned the 1st. It is YOU who removed a reliable published source that stated that they were of Plebeian origin.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Saffarid_dynasty&diff=510593355&oldid=510591872] On the other hand, if you follow my Clean Up [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Saffarid_dynasty&diff=501007080&oldid=494411815] I did NOT remove the sources, I just moved them down to the ''Culture'' section which is where it should be. You are making this dynasty of Persian origin while all historians disagree with yout theory. This is what I mean by you forcing your belief/theory/opinions on everyone. The way the introduction is written right now is really disgusting.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Saffarid_dynasty&diff=510611211&oldid=510594705] Read: "The Saffarids ('''Persian''': سلسله صفاریان) were a Muslim '''Persianate'''[2] dynasty, of '''Persian''' origin, who established a '''Persian Empire''',[3][4] between 861 and 1002, in much of eastern '''Persia''', including Khorasan, Afghanistan and Balochistan.[5] The dynasty was founded by Ya'qub bin Laith as-Saffar, a '''native Iranian''' of Sistan, who worked as a coppersmith (ṣaffār) to becoming a warlord.... " |
|||
:::::#The first thing that common viewers/readers notice is that whoever edited this is definatly a Persian nationalist who want everything to be Persia, Persian, and Iranian. Us English readers know that Iran was created as a country in 1935 so how can there be Iranians in the 8th century? "Persian" is an ambiguous term, it could mean from Persia, Persian ethnicity, or a Persian-speaker.--[[User:Nasir Ghobar|Nasir Ghobar]] ([[User talk:Nasir Ghobar|talk]]) 03:32, 4 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::::#[[Clifford Edmund Bosworth]] states that "The Saffarid chiefs were plebeian in origin". ''The New Islamic Dynasties: A Chronological and Genealogical Manual'', by Clifford Edmund Bosworth, p. 173. |
|||
:::::#Many other historians and book writers state that they were Plebeian in origin. |
|||
::::::*''The Cambridge History of Iran, Volume 4'', by R. N. Frye, p. 107. |
|||
::::::*''The Persian Presence in the Islamic World'', by Richard G. Hovannisian, Georges Sabagh, p. 233. |
|||
::::::*''The History of Iran'', Elton L. Daniel, p. 73. |
|||
::::::*''Age of Achievement: A.D. 750 to the End of the Fifteenth Century,'' p. 57. |
|||
::::::*''Indo-Persian Historiography Up To The Thirteenth Century'', p. 90. |
|||
:::::5. As soon as I added this into this Wikipedia article you and the edit-warrior below quickly removed it. In fact, you don't even want the mention of "plebien" in this article and that explains alot about what you are upto.--[[User:Nasir Ghobar|Nasir Ghobar]] ([[User talk:Nasir Ghobar|talk]]) 03:32, 4 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
As in most cases, Nasir Ghobar (the sockpuppet of banned [[User:Lagoo sab]]) is on his general anti-Persian trip, but does not have much knowledge of the subject. He certainly does not understand the meaning of "plebian" and he also has no idea which sources are considered reliable as per [[WP:RS]]. There is [http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/saffarids an excellent article] in the [[Encyclopaedia Iranica]] about the Saffarids, and in there, the author states that ''Yaʿqub’s early success against the Kharijite bands of northern Afghanistan and his overthrow of the Tahirids seem to have prompted poets to compose panegyrics on him (Tāriḵ-e Sistān, p. 209, tr. pp. 166-67), but these were in Arabic, <u>'''which the Amir could not understand'''</u>. Therefore, continues the local history, Yaʿqub’s chief secretary, Moḥammad b. Wāṣef, began writing verses in the vernacular, i.e. New Persian, lauding his master’s subjugation of the Kharijites and his campaigns against the Zunbil (pp. 209-10, tr. p. 167ʿ Bosworth, The History of the Saffarids, pp. 176-77). <u>Of historical interest is a consideration of the early Saffarids’ eulogists as the expressers of a certain sense of '''Persian proto-nationalism'''</u>. Connected with Saffarid expansion westwards into the caliphal lands is the Arabic poem of a secretary of the ʿAbbasids, Abu Eshāq Ebrāhim b. Mamšāḏ, who at some point went over to Yaʿqub when the latter was being borne on the crest of military successes in Persia. The poem was carefully analyzed by S.M. Stern, who noted its assertion of '''Yaʿqub’s illustrious origins in Persian legendary history times, and its anti-Arab message and call to Yaʿqub to revive the ancient glories of the Persians'''. The skeptical Amir cannot have swallowed all this, but the poem is indicative of the appeal of such nations at this time (see Stern, “Yaʿqub the Coppersmith and Persian National Sentiment,” pp. 535-55ʿ Bosworth, “The Heritage of Rulership in Early Islamic Iran,” pp. 59-60ʿ idem, The History of the Saffarids, pp. 177-80). Moḥammad b. Wāṣef remained active in ʿAmr’s court circle, and wrote a poem celebrating the Amir’s final crushing of Rāfeʿ b. Harṯama in 283/896 (Bosworth, The History of the Saffarids, p. 239).'' Whether the Amirs themselves were of Persian origin or belonged to a related people is not fully clear, but what is certain is that they did not understand Arabic and that they were surrounded - and actively sought the company - of writers, intellectuals and loyal chiefs who were anti-Arabic and inclined toward Persian nationalism. The author of the EIr article, by the way, is [[Clifford Edmund Bosworth]]. --[[User:Lysozym|Lysozym]] ([[User talk:Lysozym|talk]]) 15:37, 3 September 2012 (UTC) |
As in most cases, Nasir Ghobar (the sockpuppet of banned [[User:Lagoo sab]]) is on his general anti-Persian trip, but does not have much knowledge of the subject. He certainly does not understand the meaning of "plebian" and he also has no idea which sources are considered reliable as per [[WP:RS]]. There is [http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/saffarids an excellent article] in the [[Encyclopaedia Iranica]] about the Saffarids, and in there, the author states that ''Yaʿqub’s early success against the Kharijite bands of northern Afghanistan and his overthrow of the Tahirids seem to have prompted poets to compose panegyrics on him (Tāriḵ-e Sistān, p. 209, tr. pp. 166-67), but these were in Arabic, <u>'''which the Amir could not understand'''</u>. Therefore, continues the local history, Yaʿqub’s chief secretary, Moḥammad b. Wāṣef, began writing verses in the vernacular, i.e. New Persian, lauding his master’s subjugation of the Kharijites and his campaigns against the Zunbil (pp. 209-10, tr. p. 167ʿ Bosworth, The History of the Saffarids, pp. 176-77). <u>Of historical interest is a consideration of the early Saffarids’ eulogists as the expressers of a certain sense of '''Persian proto-nationalism'''</u>. Connected with Saffarid expansion westwards into the caliphal lands is the Arabic poem of a secretary of the ʿAbbasids, Abu Eshāq Ebrāhim b. Mamšāḏ, who at some point went over to Yaʿqub when the latter was being borne on the crest of military successes in Persia. The poem was carefully analyzed by S.M. Stern, who noted its assertion of '''Yaʿqub’s illustrious origins in Persian legendary history times, and its anti-Arab message and call to Yaʿqub to revive the ancient glories of the Persians'''. The skeptical Amir cannot have swallowed all this, but the poem is indicative of the appeal of such nations at this time (see Stern, “Yaʿqub the Coppersmith and Persian National Sentiment,” pp. 535-55ʿ Bosworth, “The Heritage of Rulership in Early Islamic Iran,” pp. 59-60ʿ idem, The History of the Saffarids, pp. 177-80). Moḥammad b. Wāṣef remained active in ʿAmr’s court circle, and wrote a poem celebrating the Amir’s final crushing of Rāfeʿ b. Harṯama in 283/896 (Bosworth, The History of the Saffarids, p. 239).'' Whether the Amirs themselves were of Persian origin or belonged to a related people is not fully clear, but what is certain is that they did not understand Arabic and that they were surrounded - and actively sought the company - of writers, intellectuals and loyal chiefs who were anti-Arabic and inclined toward Persian nationalism. The author of the EIr article, by the way, is [[Clifford Edmund Bosworth]]. --[[User:Lysozym|Lysozym]] ([[User talk:Lysozym|talk]]) 15:37, 3 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
:#You are a sockpuppet of [[User:Tajik]], see your blocks [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3ATajik] and tell us how many times you were blocked and for what you have been blocked. As for me, I already made it clear to everyone that I'm just using this one account. |
|||
:#You don't impress me. You are doing the same thing what some Sikh editors are doing at [[Talk:Ranjit Singh]], purposly ignoring some facts that they don't like while repeating to me something that I already know. It is time to change your attitude. Learn the fact that it is a big waste of time to be arguing over things like this in 2012 because we all have a tool (PC) in our hands and can search for info in seconds. What you and Kansas Bear are doing is just destroying the reputation of Wikipedia.--[[User:Nasir Ghobar|Nasir Ghobar]] ([[User talk:Nasir Ghobar|talk]]) 03:32, 4 September 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:32, 4 September 2012
Afghanistan Start‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Iran Start‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Central Asia Start‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Former countries Start‑class | |||||||
|
Middle Ages Start‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Saffarid Maps
Hi. I noticed the 2nd map on this article shows the Umayyad Caliphate lands, even though the Umayyads had fallen over 100 years before and thus weren't directly related to the Saffarids. I have a map of the Saffarid Dynasty lands in 900 AD (immediately before they were defeated by the Samanids). The map also depicts the neighbors of the Saffarids at that time, which is educational and very helpful for people reading the article. I will upload it soon and would like to replace the Umayyad map. Are there any objections? Thomas Lessman (talk) 20:12, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Tajik nation
(1) There is no Tajik nation. (2) The Saffarid dynasty was prior to the Mongol invasion which completely altered the locations and relationships of the various peoples in the area. (3) No citation is provided for a relationship between the Saffarid dynasty and the non-existent Tajik nation. Obviously, I am not talking about Tajikistan which is perfectly real. --Bejnar (talk) 08:06, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
More tendentious editing
Nasir, again, removed referenced information from the lede, placing it where HE wants. I see no discussion or consensus for this. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:55, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- I had to re-write this article because it was not written very unencyclopedic, and I explained my changes in the edit summary. Why would I need a permission from anyone to correctly write a free encyclopedia that anyone can edit? You do not own this article and the way the information was presented was slightly wrong.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 23:34, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- I noticed this little edit war while patrolling recent changes—remember, decisions on Wikipedia are made by consensus. If you edit something, and someone else reverts your edit, as has happened here, stay calm and try to figure out what the problem is. Talk pages like this one are the best places for discussing changes to an article, so that compromises can be reached and everyone can be happy with the way the article is written. dalahäst (let's talk!) 23:44, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you. The page was written very bad, couldn't follow what it was explaining so I improved it by using an encyclopedic tone. I have various books about this and the other dynasties and they are written by the leading experts so I know what I'm doing when I make changes to them.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 23:59, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- That's good; just remember to cite those books when you pull information from them, so that everything remains verifiable. (Citing sources has the added advantage of giving other users a starting point for finding sources such as books that may go into detail about other topics related to the article, too.) dalahäst (let's talk!) 02:55, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
- Which does not explain nor justify the removal of references which state Saffarids were a Persian dynasty. Nasir Ghobar/NasirKand's anti-Persian edits are getting tiresome. Removes referenced information he doesnt like since he is here to keep Iranians from stealing Afghan history.[1]
- "Saffarids: A Persian dynasty.....", Encyclopedia of Arabic Literature, Volume 2, edited by Julie Scott Meisami, Paul Starkey, p674[2]
- "There were many local Persian dynasties, including the Tahirids, the Saffarids....", Middle East, western Asia, and northern Africa, by Ali Aldosari, p472.[3]
- "Saffarid, the Coppersmith, the epithet of the founder of this Persian dynasty...", The Arabic Contributions to the English Language: An Historical Dictionary, by Garland Hampton Cannon, p288.[4]
- "The Saffarids, the first Persian dynasty, to challenge the Abbasids...", Historical Dictionary of the Ismailis, by Farhad Daftary, p51.[5]
- "...with the establishment of the Saffarids, considered the first autonomous Persian dynasty under the Abbasids...", Frontier Fictions: Shaping the Iranian Nation, 1804-1946, by Firoozeh Kashani-Sabet, p186.[6]
- And more and more...[7]
- The false accusation of misrepresenting a source.[8]
- Odd how this information is suppressed by Nasir, by removing such information from the lede under false or blank edit summaries. Like this[9], which Nasir removed "Cambridge History of Iran" reference, stating, "I edited according to what mainstream historians know about this "dynasty")". According to Nasir, "There is no reliable information available about the ethnicity or ancestry of the Saffarids." There is your censored history. --Kansas Bear (talk) 03:43, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Kansas Bear, you are forcing your beliefs/opinions on others and that is not good. You are claiming that the Saffarids were Persians but according to experts their ethnicity or origin is uncertain and unconfirmed. This is what I was trying to address but you found a misleading/decieving way to make them Persians. You should try to understand basic history that by 642 AD Arabs had conquered Persia, and many of these Arabs settled in Persia, including in Sistan. Even the governor of Zaranj was an Arab (Abdur Rahman bin Samara).
- "Some of these Arabs, interestingly enough, were called Saffarids. It is not suggested here that the Saffarids of Sistan were of Arab origin, though the possibility cannot be totally excluded." Islamic History: Volume 2, AD 750-1055 (AH 132-448): A New Interpretation, by M. A. Shaban, p. 98.
- Their names are clearly Arab names, and you CANNOT call Arabs Persians.
- A number of book writers claim that they were Plebeian by origin. The Historical, Social and Economic Setting, by M. S. Asimov, p. 57.
- The books that you listed do not explictely state their ethnicity.
Wikipedia is suppose to explain to the readers about what mainstream historians say about the subject, NOT what one particular group of book writers say or claim. It appears that your policy is to make everything Persian in Wikipedia by any means possible and that is not good. Your view is so radical that you NEVER add any other ethnicity but always Persian, Persian, Persian. I understand why you're trying to discredit me, you want readers to think that you're telling the truth while I'm trying to make up lies, and that doesn't impress me.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 11:09, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- Your personal attacks and accusations are getting old and tiresome. Keep it up and you will be reported.
- As for Asimov, you clearly do not understand what "plebeian" means.
- Plebeian - belonging or pertaining to the common people.
- One book is not "a number of writers".
- "It is not suggested here that the Saffarids of Sistan were of Arab origin, though the possibility cannot be totally excluded". Sounds to me like he is saying he isn't suggesting they were of Arab origin. --Defensor Ursa 14:44, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- He also says "though the possibility cannot be totally excluded". He is basically reminding readers that nobody knows the true origin of the Saffarids. I didn't attack you. I first read in the dictionaries what Plebeian means before adding it here. There are many more books, you want me to list all? Did you read about Ya'qub-i Laith Saffari? Why are you deleting sources that mention them being NON-Persian?--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 14:58, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- I have deleted nothing on Ya'qub-i Laith Saffari and have never edited that article. Yet I noticed another incarnation has edited the exact same way as you.[10] I know exactly what plebeian means, it means common person(people)[11]. This is the context Asimov uses it. If you seriously believe he means Roman, you need to get an education.
- It is your hatred of Persians, Persianate, etc that has blinded you to the facts that have been listed here. You came to this article, removed sources(Cleanup according to your edit summary[12]) and then proceeded to make accusations against me. The statement, "...Persian empire...", had been in the article long before I ever added a reference,[13] therefore your statement, "It appears that your policy is to make everything Persian in Wikipedia..", is unfounded. --Defensor Ursa 16:15, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- "First, the Saffarid amirs and maliks were rulers of Persian stock who for centuries championed the cause of the underdog against the might of the Abbasid caliphs." -- Savory, Roger M.. "The History of the Saffarids of Sistan and the Maliks of Nimruz (247/861 to 949/1542-3)." The Journal of the American Oriental Society. 1996. HighBeam Research. (September 3, 2012). [14]
- Here Savory explains the difference between plebeian and aristocrat. "It is true that the background of Ya qub b. Layth, the founder of the dynasty, was plebeian, and contrasted sharply with the aristocratic origins of the Tahirids and the Samanids, the rivals of the Saffarids for power in eastern Iran." --Defensor Ursa 16:59, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- Plebein has 3 meanings, but you only mentioned the 1st. It is YOU who removed a reliable published source that stated that they were of Plebeian origin.[15] On the other hand, if you follow my Clean Up [16] I did NOT remove the sources, I just moved them down to the Culture section which is where it should be. You are making this dynasty of Persian origin while all historians disagree with yout theory. This is what I mean by you forcing your belief/theory/opinions on everyone. The way the introduction is written right now is really disgusting.[17] Read: "The Saffarids (Persian: سلسله صفاریان) were a Muslim Persianate[2] dynasty, of Persian origin, who established a Persian Empire,[3][4] between 861 and 1002, in much of eastern Persia, including Khorasan, Afghanistan and Balochistan.[5] The dynasty was founded by Ya'qub bin Laith as-Saffar, a native Iranian of Sistan, who worked as a coppersmith (ṣaffār) to becoming a warlord.... "
- The first thing that common viewers/readers notice is that whoever edited this is definatly a Persian nationalist who want everything to be Persia, Persian, and Iranian. Us English readers know that Iran was created as a country in 1935 so how can there be Iranians in the 8th century? "Persian" is an ambiguous term, it could mean from Persia, Persian ethnicity, or a Persian-speaker.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 03:32, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- Clifford Edmund Bosworth states that "The Saffarid chiefs were plebeian in origin". The New Islamic Dynasties: A Chronological and Genealogical Manual, by Clifford Edmund Bosworth, p. 173.
- Many other historians and book writers state that they were Plebeian in origin.
- The Cambridge History of Iran, Volume 4, by R. N. Frye, p. 107.
- The Persian Presence in the Islamic World, by Richard G. Hovannisian, Georges Sabagh, p. 233.
- The History of Iran, Elton L. Daniel, p. 73.
- Age of Achievement: A.D. 750 to the End of the Fifteenth Century, p. 57.
- Indo-Persian Historiography Up To The Thirteenth Century, p. 90.
- 5. As soon as I added this into this Wikipedia article you and the edit-warrior below quickly removed it. In fact, you don't even want the mention of "plebien" in this article and that explains alot about what you are upto.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 03:32, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- He also says "though the possibility cannot be totally excluded". He is basically reminding readers that nobody knows the true origin of the Saffarids. I didn't attack you. I first read in the dictionaries what Plebeian means before adding it here. There are many more books, you want me to list all? Did you read about Ya'qub-i Laith Saffari? Why are you deleting sources that mention them being NON-Persian?--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 14:58, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
As in most cases, Nasir Ghobar (the sockpuppet of banned User:Lagoo sab) is on his general anti-Persian trip, but does not have much knowledge of the subject. He certainly does not understand the meaning of "plebian" and he also has no idea which sources are considered reliable as per WP:RS. There is an excellent article in the Encyclopaedia Iranica about the Saffarids, and in there, the author states that Yaʿqub’s early success against the Kharijite bands of northern Afghanistan and his overthrow of the Tahirids seem to have prompted poets to compose panegyrics on him (Tāriḵ-e Sistān, p. 209, tr. pp. 166-67), but these were in Arabic, which the Amir could not understand. Therefore, continues the local history, Yaʿqub’s chief secretary, Moḥammad b. Wāṣef, began writing verses in the vernacular, i.e. New Persian, lauding his master’s subjugation of the Kharijites and his campaigns against the Zunbil (pp. 209-10, tr. p. 167ʿ Bosworth, The History of the Saffarids, pp. 176-77). Of historical interest is a consideration of the early Saffarids’ eulogists as the expressers of a certain sense of Persian proto-nationalism. Connected with Saffarid expansion westwards into the caliphal lands is the Arabic poem of a secretary of the ʿAbbasids, Abu Eshāq Ebrāhim b. Mamšāḏ, who at some point went over to Yaʿqub when the latter was being borne on the crest of military successes in Persia. The poem was carefully analyzed by S.M. Stern, who noted its assertion of Yaʿqub’s illustrious origins in Persian legendary history times, and its anti-Arab message and call to Yaʿqub to revive the ancient glories of the Persians. The skeptical Amir cannot have swallowed all this, but the poem is indicative of the appeal of such nations at this time (see Stern, “Yaʿqub the Coppersmith and Persian National Sentiment,” pp. 535-55ʿ Bosworth, “The Heritage of Rulership in Early Islamic Iran,” pp. 59-60ʿ idem, The History of the Saffarids, pp. 177-80). Moḥammad b. Wāṣef remained active in ʿAmr’s court circle, and wrote a poem celebrating the Amir’s final crushing of Rāfeʿ b. Harṯama in 283/896 (Bosworth, The History of the Saffarids, p. 239). Whether the Amirs themselves were of Persian origin or belonged to a related people is not fully clear, but what is certain is that they did not understand Arabic and that they were surrounded - and actively sought the company - of writers, intellectuals and loyal chiefs who were anti-Arabic and inclined toward Persian nationalism. The author of the EIr article, by the way, is Clifford Edmund Bosworth. --Lysozym (talk) 15:37, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- You are a sockpuppet of User:Tajik, see your blocks [18] and tell us how many times you were blocked and for what you have been blocked. As for me, I already made it clear to everyone that I'm just using this one account.
- You don't impress me. You are doing the same thing what some Sikh editors are doing at Talk:Ranjit Singh, purposly ignoring some facts that they don't like while repeating to me something that I already know. It is time to change your attitude. Learn the fact that it is a big waste of time to be arguing over things like this in 2012 because we all have a tool (PC) in our hands and can search for info in seconds. What you and Kansas Bear are doing is just destroying the reputation of Wikipedia.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 03:32, 4 September 2012 (UTC)