Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Latinized Russian

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Latinized Russian

submitted verification final decision
This proposal has been rejected.
This decision was taken by the language committee in accordance with the Language proposal policy based on the discussion on this page.

The closing committee member provided the following comment:

Proposal summary
Please read the handbook for requesters for help using this template correctly.

Arguments in favour

  • Latinized Russian is spreading more and more, used in different sites, blogs, SMS-messages, chats etc. I think this is future of the Russian language. Besides of that, modern Russian of 21 century has many differences from the Russian standard of 20 century, used in general ruwiki, for example using of many slang and English words. This makes Latin Russian wikipedia useful, the second usage will be helping in learning Russian for those who do not know Cyrillic script. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:59, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Laughing out loud. Transliteration is used only when there is no access to Russian script. Currently, all respectful sites, blogs, forums and chats support UTF-8 or cyrillic charsets at least, and don't use transliteration. If it isn't possible, some of them use English.
    SMS messages have no problem with it too, because, as of now, it's hard to find a mobile phone that doesn't support UTF-8. Although there are ones, their amount decreases rapidly.
    Slang English words are just slang English words, so it is not an argument in favor.
    People who don't know Russian script have access to our wonderful project, Wiktionary, that provides IPA and X-SAMPA transcriptions. These people can also install conversion JavaScript at any time. — Kalan ? 15:32, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    FreeBSD (in Stable version) console does not support UTF-8 normally yet; media program & flash players has not united system to support encodings in mp3-tags. Your arguments an UTF-8 are looserlich. --Deutscher Friedensstifter 10:19, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Typing Ž is not sinificantly simpler than typing Ж. Конст. Карасёв 20:12, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm sorry, but Yaroslav Zolotaryov is lying. He said that there are two different languages in Russia: Russian and Latinized Russian. In fact there is only one language, Russian. But some people, for example, from USA, are unable to write with Cyrillic letters. So these people need the way to speak Russian without Cyrillic letters. Using translit is just the most comfortable way to speak Russian without Cyrillic letters. Translit is nothing but an agreement about how to substitute Cyrillic letters for Latin letters. For example, using translit means that you substitute Cyrillic letter "ч" with Latin letters "ch", as you can see on Of course, there are other ways to substitute Cyrillic letters. For example, sometimes "ч" is substituted with number "4" (because "четыре" is a Russian translation of "four"). Once again, translit is nothing but one of many agreements and there is only one, Russian language, not two different languages. These citations: "Latinized Russian is spreading more and more, used in different sites, blogs, SMS-messages, chats etc", "this is future of the Russian language", "modern Russian of 21 century has many differences from the Russian standard of 20 century, used in general ruwiki, for example using of many slang and English words" are nothing but blatant, deliberate lie. I'm really sorry and I don't know why this man acts in that way. If you have any additional questions, please ask. — Ash063 19:45, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • And if the people have to use internet shops, or another people computers for a while, always to install the programms the owner will need not in future? To make him to wach the unised pakets and to delete it? It's just unpolite. --ryu 15:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    In these rare cases you can use services like — Kalan ? 16:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Many Russians living outside Russia and CIS use the Latinized Russian because they have to be mobile, to travel a lot, and under such a circomstances it's much more easy not to install Russian each time on different computers, not to care all the time notebooks with them. --ryu 10:50, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is only technical problem with WRITING, which can be solved by using I am not sure that it is easy to READ latinized Russian texts. -- 18:30, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I live outside Russia long time too, and for me personally it's very convenient to use the romanized Russian. And I want to say: it's not any kind of unrespect towards Russian language and Russia from my side, it's just my way of life and my choice, it's my right what letters to use, what language to use, what ideas to joint, what life to live. The freedom is to respect free choice of any people, but not to press them to be like You. Am I not right? --ryu 14:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, you are right, but, imho, if your opinion doesn't have broad support, you should care about this by yourself. — Kalan ? 16:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    In these cases (lots of travelling) such cyrillic-writing people install special scripts (see below) to convert them to cyrillic. Or they use translit sometimes, but only for short periods. Ask Yurik, for example, he is Russian-speaking man living in US, and he should know it. — Kalan ? 15:32, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • We already have 3 active contributors in the first 10 min of existence of the test project! --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:08, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Viel mittelasian Sprachen verändert ihre Schriften nach Latinisch (anfangt von Türkisch). Die Reihe an Slawischen zur Zeit. Übertritt nach latinisch Schrift wird beitragen, daß europisch und amerikanisch Menschen verstehen besser slawischen Sprachen. Latinisch Schrift ist Fortschritt, Zukunft und Zivilisation. --Deutscher Friedensstifter 19:14, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Bother to explain why you write your commments in completely broken German? --Johannes Rohr 23:16, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Here the translation of this comment for non-Germans:Many middle Asian languages change their writing system to Latin (beginning with Turkish). It's now time for the Slavic ones. The change to the Latin script will contribute to a better understanding of the Slavic languages for European and American people. Latin script is progress, future and civilization. (End of translation)
Comment: You want to say that non-Latin scripts are uncivilized? Wow. --Thogo (talk) 19:25, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ich sage nicht "Alle Schriften", aber Kyrillisch — eindeutlich. --Deutscher Friedensstifter 19:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Asian languages may lack some specifics (as palatized consonants) that Russian has and makes Cyrillic more suitable. Second, change to Latin had also political reasons. Конст. Карасёв 20:12, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Existing many sources with laitn russian like this: [1] [2] [3]
First is transliterated song lyric for listeners' and maybe singers' use. It's quite special. Two latest are production of automated transliteration services. Third even kept a Ь. Конст. Карасёв 10:13, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Arguments “against” that mention “ugliness” have no sense as in this case the Volapük language Wikipedia also need to be closed (Volapük is apparently uglier than latinised Russian). Also, Latin alphabet have less number of letters and doesn't have such redundancy as Cyrillic. Automatic conversion doesn't stimulate the language development in any way. I'm definitely voting “pro”. --Twooneeight 18:08, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Could You please give an example what do You mean with redundancy in cyrillic? --Obersachse 20:25, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is a neo - ru-sib project, isn't it? "Siberians" just want to get supporting for them nationalistic ideas. I oppose, and I hope all clever people will oppose this project. - Dmitry-spb 19:29, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arguments against

  • Translit is not the future, it is the past. Technically speaking, it is legacy from the old times when the lack of support for Cyrillic letters. Right now all mobile phones support Russian characters, all blogs, wiki engines, etc., do too. Starting a new Wikipedia in Translit is the same as starting writing a new software piece in Algol-58. Why bother with it if we have C#? --Ru.spider 15:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    C# is not a very good example. Why bother with it if we have Java and Python? :-) — Kalan ? 15:40, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Python is a nice language and actually one of my favourites, but it will never make it to mainstream software engineering. C# has been created after Java, they learned lessons from it and now with Eric on their side they lead language development and Java struggles to follow (yet it is more mainstream now, I agree). It's OK if you want to raise a discussion (however off topic it might be), but I'm warning you: it's the area of my professional expertise and I'm a part of language engineering community ;) --Ru.spider 08:49, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would love to see a guy who will decide to approve Is it going to be a substitute for ru-sib or another nonsense project? Stop using wikimedia resources for self-promotion! --Volkov 16:19, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think it's another Zolotaryov's idea of antirussin propaganda. Latinization is ugly, it's very informal. There is no reason to create such one --VasilievV 2 16:25, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ack Volkov. That would be original research. Zolotaryov permanently tries to get kind of "official" status for his private languages via Wikimedia. That's the wrong way and should be not supported. (I want to cite the following from above: I think this is future of the Russian language. one can think much, but it doesn't then need to be true... There are absolutely no references given that the Russian people plans to change to Latin script.) --Thogo (talk) 16:59, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is laughable. I was in Austria for a month recently, and it took me under 5 minutes to install Russian keyboard layout on computer I used there with recent Fedora Linux. Russian fonts would show up out of the box, I didn't need to do anything at all. Zolotaryov is well known as the main "force" behind "Siberian" Wikipedia. If no admin is courageous enough to close it down, at least please don't let him abuse Wikimedia resources more. -- Paul Pogonyshev 17:06, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • As Volkov, an unneeded Wikipedia. I don't know about Zolotaryov but from what I've heard his activities haven't been too great. Majorly (talk) 17:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • An unneeded Wikipedia, Russian is not written in latin script, ak Volkov, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 17:16, 8 August 2007 (UTC) (it would be really embarrassing for Wikimedia to start such a thing, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 17:18, 8 August 2007 (UTC))[reply]
  • Yet another nonsense Wikipedia. There is no need to create it. Wikimedia is not a place for self-promotion. --Zserghei 18:25, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is no common way of transliteration. Although there are some standards of transliteration, they are not used by non-academic people. The invention of an own Wikipedia standard is an original research. --Obersachse 19:20, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Obersachse. There's no romanization rule accepted worldwide by everyone. Personal opinion, it's a real nonsense. --Paginazero - Ø 19:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rebjata, please have a look a the Language proposal policy. New Wikipedias just for a different writing system are deprecated. You can be sure that it will not be approved. And rightfully so. In case that languages are written in multiple scripts, automatic conversion is, whenever technically feasible, the preferred solution. Look at Wikipedias in Multi-writing System for working examples. The conversion cyrillic-latin works fine for sr: and the technical challenges are moderate compared to, say, the various Chinese writing systems or the conversion between Inuktitut Syllabics and Latin. There is even a working three-way conversion on the Kazakh Wikipedia. Plus, yet another Russian Wikipedia would have a marginal chance ever to develop into a viable Encyclopaedia. --Johannes Rohr 21:39, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another ravings from creators of "Siberian" Wikipedia. --Pauk 22:19, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • As birdy. Nonsense. --Complex (de) 22:26, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please, Speedy close this request, because it doesn' match following WM:LPP criteria: The language must be sufficiently unique that it could not coexist on a more general wiki. In most cases, this excludes regional dialects and different written forms of the same language. --VasilievV 2 06:55, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    But it does not coexist - ruwiki have not latinized department. When we can see in this voting such bad attitude to the idea of latinization from administrators and bureaucrats of ruwiki I doubt that something will be made --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:26, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    It says "could not coexist", it does not say "coexists". Edricson 07:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Either latinised Russian is well-established, as the proposer claims. If so, it will be eventually integrated with the existing ruwiki, as it has been done at sr: or kk:. Or it is not well-established. In that case it is not eligible under the language proposal policy. In either case, the current proposal will not be approved. Compare also Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Eurofarsi --Johannes Rohr 08:24, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I would say the claim that it is "well-established" is false. That some people have to use transliteration, maybe often, does not mean that it is "well-established" as in "having reliable sources". In particular, I defy the proposers to cite one printed book in latinised Russian (for example you get media and books printed in the Tarashkievich orthography for Belarusian, not to mention Serbian/Croatian/Bosnian). I am 99% sure nothing of the kind has appeared in recent times, not to claim "it is well-established". Therefore, it does fall outside the scope of the policy. Edricson 10:16, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I fully agree. The only common uses I know is in bibliographies and appendices to scientific works and in electronic communication, when Cyrillic input is unavailable. In either case, this is not a new language, but simply a transliteration, therefore it has no place at Requests for new languages. Additionally, as Obersachse correctly noted, there is a plethora of different transliterations, many of them using ISO-8859-2 diacritics which are typically not easily available on non-Slavic keyboards. And there are so many different national standards for transliterations: Gorbachev (en) Gorbatschow (de), Gorbatchev (fr), Gorbačëv (academic) etc. pp. The proposer did not even explain which one he intends to use. Further, there is no ISO code and the content of the test project gives me the firm impression that this is just deliberate trolling. --Johannes Rohr 12:11, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is clearly a bad-faith move: yes, I know about AGF, but the nominator has done enough to dispel all doubts about it. Aside from that, it is true that in the 1920s there were projects regarding "Latinization" of Russian (to make it more accessible as a vehicle of world revolution), but what is used there is not close to any of them. There are a few more systems of varying degrees of officiality (e. g. the Library of Congress has its own standard for Russian transliteration). On the contrary, this project is edited at will with no regard for any sources at all, and I have, let's put it mildly, a suspicion that it's not about a free encyclopedia at all. Besides, Zolotaryov already has his own Russian-language "encyclopedia" at which he uses to copycat the Russian Wikipedia: he can easily write a bot to convert our articles into Latinized Russian. Edricson 07:42, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is Zolotaryov's umpteenth attempt to game the Wikimedia process. Some people find trolling amusing, I don't. Zolotaryov's entire project is a vehicle for dissemination of Russian swear words. A random pick: "Bitch is a gal who likes to be a slut".[4] Other entries conform to the same pattern. I would like to see the reaction of our sysops to a proposal for a wikipedia consisting entirely of English swear words spelled in Cyrillic. It does not appear likely that it would have been tolerated as long as this mess has been. --Ghirla -трёп- 08:59, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Aside the arguments cited above I want to point out that the proposed form of latinization distorts the Russian pronounciation and deforms the language itself.--Nxx 12:13, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose. It's not a request for new language, it is just a new attempt of well-known by their anti-wikipedia bias group of people to make self-PR. We already saw such attempts from these guys, nothing new, nothing constructive, nothing good. MaxiMaxiMax 12:24, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly oppose. My arguments:
    1. Precedent: similar request for Latinized version of Farsi has been rejected: [[5]] where this argument has been brought up, quote: "This proposal is somewhat misplaced, because it is not about a new language (I haven't checked, but I'm pretty certain, that a Farsi wikipedia exists) but about a new writing system", unquote. Let me finish the quoted phrase " ... a new writing system for an existing language". Adding insult to injury, the system in question (Latinized Russian) is not standardized and never used whenever Cyrillic is available.
    2. Russians often use any other available script whenever the Cyrillic script is not available: Latin, Arabic, Georgian, you name it. Same thing native speakers of other languages do: the Arabs use Latin symbols and numbers in SMS messaging to write in Arabic. This does not mean another language, just a writing system which has no norm, no acceptance, no practical importance. Whenever Cyrillic is available to Russians, or whenever Arabic script is available to Arabs, the native script is always preferred because it's much more clear and easy to write.
    3. The usage of Latin symbols to project Russian language features into varies widely from user to user and even from a mood to a mood of one single user. Some sometimes write "ja" for "я" like in German or Eastern European languages, some write "ya" for the same like in Spanish, Turkish or English. Some write "j" for "ж" like in French or Portuguese, some write "zh" for the same like in English. I won't be able to count all the ways to write the Russian letters ё, й, х, ц, ч, ш, щ, ъ, ы, ь, э, ю, я I've seen in my life, including usage of numbers (4 for ч or 9 for я) and punctuation symbols such as apostrophe and colon. It's so hard to read such Latinized Russian that it has been banned in most prominent Russian forums: you get a ban for writing in Russian in Latinitsa.
    4. The argument of Cyrillic feature availability does not stand any rational test. Most Russian forums and social networks provide some way to turn a Latin input into Cyrillic - either a soft keyboard, or a scripted Russian keypad or Latin to Cyrillic transliteration. There are free multilingual pads available such as the Unipad [[6]] Simredo [[7]] and others. Any recent OSes support Russian input: Windows and MacOS out of the box just like most Linux distributions.
    5. Latinization of Russian orthography has been proposed many times on different levels by the Government officials [[8]], by crazy individuals, by bored members of the Academy of Science, none of those projects got anywhere, each and every single one died in the stage of a proposal: [[9]]. It just happened that the Cyrillic alphabet turned out the best way to write in Russian so far.
    6. The personality of the proposer. He's a troll preying on Wikipedia with one failed hoax (Siberian Language) on his belt going for one more shameful waste of Wikipedia resources while tarnishing Wikipedia's reputation once again. He's a member of another (unfortunately approved) fringe at best and hoax at worst project, namely Belarussian Normative. This person should be banned for life from any Wikipedia project and sued for fraud. It's because of people like him the educational institutions around the world cease recognizing Wikipedia as a valid source. Elephas 04:09, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  1. According to the rejected Aeres Wikipedia, this reason: no code, no project. -Markvondeegel 08:37, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support for speedy closure - Enough of clogging the language requests' process queue and wasting langcom's time. What's next, a ru-wiki in caucasion accent, with a central asian accent to follow?! One can't loathe his native language this much! - Teak 03:24, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

General Discussion

If people like to use it, why not. Wikipedia is not paper. Mutante 17:19, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • It will probably be interesting to know some story about this project. As you know, Yaroslav is well-known for his story with Siberian Wikipedia (no need to repeat it again even in short, I think). He has been blocked in ruwp many times for outrages, personal attacks and vandalism, and currently the arbitration case (Russian) about his infinite block is processed.
    Yaroslav was very angry due to this. The story of project's idea can be found at (Russian; site is blacklisted due to spamming with personal attacks on ruwiki users). I would be very glad if someone would provide the translation of this section.
    As of now, Zolotaryov creates almost empty and sometimes offensive articles, whose style is similar with articles that Siberian Wikipedia has. For example, Jopa (Ass):
    Wp/ru-lat/ Jopa - eto chast' tela (ne tol'ko cheloveka, no u jivotnyh ona imenuetsya "kloaka"). Takje upotreblyaetsya v kachestve emotsional'noy otsenki situatsii. Naprimer, "polnaya jopa" (ili inogda: kranty) - ochen' nepriyatnaya situatsiya. Prosto "jopa" (ili inogda: kapets; kabzdets; pipets; laja; mat' moya jenshina; mat' tvoyu tak; tvoyu mat'; mama rodi menya obratno; ni huya sebe iriska; popandos; popets)- otnositel'no neudovnaya, psihologicheski nekomfortnaya situatsiya.
    In English:
    Wp/ru-lat/ An Ass is a body part (not only human's, but if of an animal's then it's called "cloaca"). Also used to emphasize emotional content. For example, "polnaya jopa" (literally: "full ass" — Kalan ? 17:26, 8 August 2007 (UTC)) (or sometimes: "kranty" may be translated as "the end" — Kalan ? 17:26, 8 August 2007 (UTC)) - very unpleasant situation. Just "ass" (or sometimes: kapets; kabzdets; pipets; laja; mat' moya jenshina; mat' tvoyu tak; tvoyu mat'; mama rodi menya obratno; ni huya sebe iriska; popandos; popets synonymous Russian words (illiteral in some cases, left here as they are) — Kalan ? 17:26, 8 August 2007 (UTC))- inconvenient, psychologically incomfortable situation.[reply]
    Or another example, Bog (God):
    Bog - eto koroche siljno krutoj, kruche cheloveka i dazhe angela.
    In English:
    Bog is a macho dude, bossier than a human and even an angel.
    As you can see, there is nothing useful.
    Due to these arguments, I conclude that the new wiki will be another strongly politically biased project, "the second Siberian Wikipedia."
    Kalan ? 17:26, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    One more quote in order to prove my words [10]:
    Скоро эта вика будет переполнена статьями людей, желающих писать на цивилизованном алфавите подлинной цивилизации, а не на этом алфавите деспотов и убийц. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 14:13, 8 August 2007
    Soon, this wiki will be flooded with articles by people wanting to write in civilized alphabet of a true civilization, not in an alphabet of tyrants and murderers. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 14:13, 8 August 2007
    Kalan ? 17:38, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    The above translations are accurate, and very disturbing for an encyclopedia. I strongly oppose creation of this wiki. --Yurik 17:49, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I confirm the correctness of Kalan's translation, too. --Obersachse 18:31, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think offensive people here try to stop freedom and modern point of view on many things that just must be reopened. Zolotaryov is the new time person who does it, but the opponents even do not understand it, it's just personal for them as everytime in human history when genius open something new, but the crowded "people" cry "burn him" as in the Middle Age. We remmember it. You are already masters in your part of Wikki, now you try to delete our island of freedom in your ocean of your unlimited power and lie. ryu
    "Modern point of view"? Wikipedias should be written neutrally, and this is deliberate. If you want an "island of freedom", you are welcome to create your own project hosted by you (or your confederates), not by Wikimedia Foundation. is a good place to start, I think. — Kalan ? 18:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think You may think as You would like to think, but I will continue as I like to, OK? Still neutral towards You. It's my project too, I'm happy to be not like You and all of you. It's not a Middle Ages, but how much all of you would like it should be such a plaisant time? So simple just to burn the different people: NO person means no problem (Iosif Stalin), is it the right way for communist totalitarian people like you? ryu
Stop this, please. "To be modern" means to treat all modern seriously as equal but not to praise it as in w:Cargo cult. Конст. Карасёв 20:07, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Best way for languages that has different writing modes is a Wikipedia with bi-alphabet pages as Serbian-Croatian is. (Let's assert there will be a two-way ambiguity-free transliteration). I don't think that would be many users who could need a "latinize" inlay. Конст. Карасёв 19:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • While I think that is a good idea to see some languages in different scripts (it is particularly useful for Slavic languages because I am sure that one young Czech will be more able to read Bulgarian in Latin and vice versa), projects like this are typical wasting of resources: it is possible to make transcription/transliteration engines for all languages. Personally, I would like to see French Wikipedia written in IPA and so on. All in all, this particular idea is not good, while it opened some interesting general possibilities. --Millosh 13:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose studying of foreign alphabeth, espesially not so different, is not so hard in respect to learning whole language, even closely relative. Конст. Карасёв 12:21, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quote:Zolotarev эта вика будет переполнена статьями людей, желающих писать на цивилизованном алфавите подлинной цивилизации, а не на этом алфавите деспотов и убийц./Soon, this wiki will be flooded with articles by people wanting to write in civilized alphabet of a true civilization, not in an alphabet of tyrants and murderers.
    Всегда знал, что у Вас, товарищ, фашистские наклонности, но чтобы настолько? Может, для Вас Вики-психушку сделать?
    In English:
    I always knew, Zolotatev have a nazi tendencies, but I didn't knew he have too much. Maybe better make Funny house-wiki for him?
    - Dmitry-spb 19:47, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]