Forum:Can Vanguard of the Dragon's Effect be used by my opponent?

What the question says^^ But to give a scenario Player A's Vanguard of the dragon changes control to Player B. Player A then uses Dark Hole to destroy all monsters on the field. There is a normal dragon in the graveyard. Is Player A or Player B the one that is able to use Vanguard of the Dragon's second effect to special summon a normal dragon from either graveyard? "When this card you control is sent to the Graveyard by your opponent's card effect, you can Special Summon 1 Dragon-Type Normal Monster from either player's Graveyard." Just want some clarification. --75.33.54.117 (talk) 06:31, September 17, 2010 (UTC)Anonymous Duelist

Nether player gets the effect.

"When this card you control is sent to the Graveyard by your opponent's card effect, you can Special Summon 1 Dragon-Type Normal Monster from either player's Graveyard."

Vanguard of the Dragon will be sent to the Graveyard of its owner (player A) after it is destroyed. But it was sent there from player B's side of the field, so the condition of Vanguard of the Dragon's effect to be sent from your field to your Graveyard is not met, thus the effect cannot be activated.

ATEMVEGETA (Talk) 09:56, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

...It doesn't say your graveyard. it says the graveyard. I thought "the graveyard" was either graveyard. So why does the opponent not get the ability? Does the Jap version say your? --LordGeovanni- (Talk To Me) *Kupo* 12:18, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

oh forget about my answer that wording is too confusing for me D: Kearowind (talk • contribs) 15:21, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

I thought that the card was pointing at the one who controlling the dragon? "You" mean the player who control him. As for Sangan or Mystic Tomato got dead by battle when they were under opponent's side, then it should be by original owner's since they attended to original owner's Graveyard by game technology. And now, you said that you used "Dark Hole" to destroy all monster while your Vanguard is on opponent's side of the field, right? --FredCat ^{T.P. • F.R. • J.R. • W.S.} 15:27, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

To everybody after ATEMVEGETA: What he was trying to explain is that the card specifically states "When this card you control is sent to the Graveyard by your opponent's card effect,". You must control it before it was sent to the graveyard by your opponent's card effect. Also by Game Mechanics, cards are always sent to the graveyard of the owner.-- HHTurtle ^Talk   18:06, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

I am well aware that ATEMVEGETA means the controler. However, ATEMVEGETA also said "But it was sent there from player B's side of the field, so the condition of Vanguard of the Dragon's effect to be sent from your field to your Graveyard is not met, thus the effect cannot be activated." This is not right. It says ""When this card you control is sent to the Graveyard by your opponent's card effect, you can Special Summon 1 Dragon-Type Normal Monster from either player's Graveyard." Due to "the Graveyard" being used instead of "your Graveyard" it doesn't matter which graveyard it goes to. The effect activates and the person who controled the monster gets the effect because the term "you control" is used. --LordGeovanni- (Talk To Me) *Kupo* 19:24, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

The card will end up in the owner's graveyard and will activate in the owner's graveyard. It is the owner that controls the effects that activate in his/her graveyard.-- HHTurtle ^Talk   19:36, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

Again, the card reads as follows: "When this card you control is sent to the Graveyard by your opponent's card effect, you can Special Summon 1 Dragon-Type Normal Monster from either player's Graveyard." If Player B controls the card and it is destroyed, the player refered to as "you" would have to be Player B. If we substitute "Player B" in place of "you" we get the following: "When this card "Player B" control(s) is sent to the Graveyard by "Player B"('s) opponent's card effect, "Player B" can Special Summon 1 Dragon-Type Normal Monster from either player's Graveyard." Regardless if the monster has to go to its controller's Graveyard or not, Player A cannot "Special Summon 1 Dragon-Type Normal Monster from either player's Graveyard." because Player A did not control Vanguard of the Dragon when it was sent to the Graveyard. --LordGeovanni- (Talk To Me) *Kupo* 20:49, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

You seem to be missing the point. That effect activates in the graveyard. Since it is always in the owner's graveyard, "you" in the card text will always refer to the owner of the card.-- HHTurtle ^Talk   20:51, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I will attempt to explain my reasoning. The following paragraph will provide an example of why I think the term "to the Graveyard" encompasses both Graveyards while "to your Graveyard" only applies to one.

The Equip Spell card "Symbols of Duty" States the following: "Send 1 Normal Monster you control to the Graveyard. Select and Special Summon 1 monster from either Graveyard and equip it with this card. When this card is removed from the field, destroy the equipped monster." The term of focus is you control to the Graveyard. If I activate "Creature Swap" and gain one of my opponent's Normal monsters, I can send it to the Graveyard as the cost for Symbols of Duty. Because the Origional Owner is my opponent, the card is placed into their graveyard. If the card specified your Graveyard then I would be unable to send that Normal Monster due to that card not being able to be in my Graveyard.

Now, a player can only control a card while it is on the field. The term you control is sent to the Graveyard on Vanguard of the Dragon can only be used if the card is on the field. If the opponent controlled Vanguard and I was the Origional Owner, the card would be refering to my opponent. I am not the you in control so therefore the statement that you made (..."you" in the card text will always refer to the owner of the card.) is false.

The end result is found mathmatically. Follow this logic with IF=YES, THEN CONTINUE logic:

• Was the monster sent "to the Graveyard"? (as opposed to Removed From Play) = Yes, Continue
• Was the monster sent there from an opponent's card effect? (In the example, Dark Hole did it from Player A) = Yes, Continue
• RESULT = "you" (person has not changed since identification, so therefore Player B) may Special Summon one Dragon-Type Normal Monster from either player's Graveyard. --LordGeovanni- (Talk To Me) *Kupo* 21:27, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

in short, since player B was the last "Controler" of the card before it hits the graveyard, player B gets the effect, even if it lands in player A's graveyard, as cards in the graveyard have no controler.

The problem here is that Vanguard of the Dragon is not sent to player B's Graveyard but to player A's Graveyard. This happens because if a card is sent to the Graveyard, then it is sent to its owner's Graveyard, even if the other player was controlling the card before.

See Sangan's rulings: "If you control your opponent's "Sangan" and it is destroyed, your opponent gets the effect since it activates in his/her Graveyard."

In this situation normally player A should be able to activate Vanguard of the Dragon's effect since it activated in his Graveyard, but he cannot activate it because the condition that Vanguard of the Dragon must be sent from your side of the field (the "you control" in the text) to the Graveyard is not met since it was sent from the opponent's side (player B's side) of the field to the Graveyard.

ATEMVEGETA (Talk) 22:45, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

And again, two reasons why that doesn't apply here:

• Sangan doesn't discuss the player so by default any "you" has to be the owner. Vanguard refers to the "you" who had control when it was sent.
• When this game was first started, the reference of "Graveyard" was singular. There was only one. The term used was "the Graveyard". Since that time, the Graveyard has had two subdivisions put in: "your Graveyard" and "your opponent's Graveyard". If it refers to it as "the Graveyard" then it talks of it as a whole. It is just like saying that a Synchro Summon is a Special Summon. Synchro Summon in this case is "your Graveyard" while Special Summon is "the Graveyard". --LordGeovanni- (Talk To Me) *Kupo* 00:46, September 18, 2010 (UTC)
  • This concept hasn't changed. Look at the ruling for Dragon Knight Draco-Equiste: "You can target a Dragon-Type Synchro Monster in your opponent’s Graveyard." This is because of its effect saying "the Graveyard".

It's not "the Graveyard"; it's "you control". When you get to activate the effect of "Vanguard of the Dragon" it's in your Graveyard, but it was on your opponent's side of the field when it was destroyed. You didn't control it when it was destroyed, so you can't activate its effect.

"Symbols of Duty" is different. It was successfully activated (you sent a monster you control to the Graveyard), so its effect will resolve properly. Right now, we're asking whether or not the effect of "Vanguard of the Dragon" activates.

The activation condition of "Vanguard of the Dragon"'s effect is "When this card that you control is sent to the Graveyard by your opponent's card effect". You can't activate the effect, since you didn't control it when it was destroyed. Your opponent can't activate the effect, since (unless it specifically states otherwise [like "Pandemonium" or "Verdant Sanctuary" do in their texts and rulings]) you can't activate your opponent's effect.

Unless otherwise specified, "you" means "the player who currently controls* this card". (For example, that's why, "Fairy Meteor Crush" causes problems if you equip it to your opponent's monster.)

"Dark Necrofear" works similarly, but its text is weird, so *shrug*.

*Using the OCG definition of "control". --Deus Ex Machina (Talk) 06:43, September 18, 2010 (UTC)

Also:

If you use the effect of "Ancient Lamp" to make the opponent’s "Don Zaloog" or "The Bistro Butcher" attack your opponent’s own monster, the effect of "Don Zaloog" or "The Bistro Butcher" will not activate because they are not doing battle damage to the opponent’s Life Points.

If "you" works the way you said and if PlayerB controls "Ancient Lamp", then you could read "Don Zaloog"'s effect as "When this card inflicts Battle Damage to PlayerB's opponent, PlayerB can select and activate 1 of these effects: ● Discard 1 random card from PlayerB's opponent's hand. ● Send 2 cards from the top of PlayerB's opponent's Deck to the Graveyard.". The ruling contradicts this. --Deus Ex Machina (Talk) 07:02, September 18, 2010 (UTC)

Hello Deus Ex Machina! Love to see you on yet another ruling forum. Please understand that I am not causing trouble, just that I disagree with what the others have been saying. This is just more of a debate. For your answer just now, I have some questions about your statements.

• Your first statement is this: "It's not "the Graveyard"; it's "you control"." in order to fully understand this, both must be defined. your control is simple, just that it must be on that person's side of the field. But what about "the Graveyard"? If it is defined as I said, as one single Graveyard consisting of "your graveyard" and "your Opponent's Graveyard" as sub-divisions, then any card refering to "the graveyard" can have a player send their opponent's monster to "the graveyard". If it stated it must go to "your Graveyard" then a player could not use a monster that is origionally owned by their opponent.
• For Symbols of Duty, the part I was refering to was the monster to be tributed. If I have my opponent's monster, can I use it for the cost of this card? I say yes because it used the term "the graveyard".
• The problem with Vanguard is I think it should be classified as automatically activating if possible. As if there was a prompt in the video games, the game would check if the monster was "Sent to the Graveyard by your opponent's card effect. If it was, the game would prompt the "you" to activate its effect. Because the "you" listed is specified as the player who controled Vanguard at the time it was sent to the Graveyard, the same person should be the person who gains the effect. The only reason, that I have been told, why the origional owner can receive the effect of Vanguard and the opponent cannot is because it would go to "the opponent's Graveyard". Vanguard doesn't specify which Graveyard it has to go to. Just that it has to be "Sent to the Graveyard". As such, if a monster on my field was sent to my opponent's Graveyard, it still was "Sent to the Graveyard".
• For Pandemonium: There is a ruling for this situation, however it uses the term "a player's Archfiend" instead of something along the lines of "An Archfiend that a player controls". Because of this, it is unclear which player can claim the archfiend as "theirs".
• For Verdant Sanctuary: There is not a ruling stating what happens when a player controls a monster that is not origionally theirs. I do not see how any of the rulings for it can help this discussion. However, there is a ruling stating that if that card's effect can activate for the opponent, the controller of that card must ask and possibly grant the ability of using the effect to the opponent. That ruling could work similarly for Vanguard.
• "Dark Necrofear" is not a card I would like to discuss, even if it is in my benefit. There are just too many problems with it. I am not opposed to discussing it if we have to, however I would like to avoid doing so.
• The example you gave with "Ancient Lamp" and "Don Zaloog" or "The Bistro Butcher" was a little unclear. Please let me explain what I understand about it. If "Ancient Lamp" was controled by Player B, the Ancient Lamp makes the attack from "Player A's monster attacks Player B's" to "Player A's monster attacks Player A's" in such a case, the opponent (Player B) cannot receive battle damage and therefore Don Zaloog cannot activate its effect because of such. The same is true for "The Bistro Butcher". He cannot damage the opponent so the effect will never activate. --LordGeovanni- (Talk To Me) *Kupo* 21:18, September 18, 2010 (UTC)

Yay for friendly debates! :)

For "Symbols of Duty", you can Tribute an opponent's monster that you control since, at the time of activation, you control the monster, so it can satisfy the activation conditions. What about "Vanguard of the Dragon"? Its activation condition is, "When this card you control is sent to the Graveyard by your opponent's card effect" (it doesn't just check whether or not it was sent to the Graveyard; you had to control it before it was sent to the Graveyard). It says "you" and not "a player", so why would "you" mean "a player"? It's certainly not written the same was as "Zombie Mammoth".

For "Pandemonium" and "Verdant Sanctuary", I was referring to how (in general) you can't activate your opponent's effects. When "Poison Draw Frog" (Text: When this face-up card on the field is sent to the Graveyard (unless it was attacked while face-down and destroyed by battle), you can draw 1 card.) is sent to the Graveyard, your opponent can't draw a card.

"Pandemonium" specifically says "a player" and "that player", so your opponent can activate the effect of your "Pandemonium". It's different from, for example, "Ancient City - Rainbow Ruins". It doesn't matter that all the effects say "You can «do X»" - only the control of "Ancient City - Rainbow Ruins" can activate its effects. If it worked the way you said and PlayerA controlled "Ancient City - Rainbow Ruins", then PlayerB could read the effect as "PlayerB can send 1 "Crystal Beast" monster PlayerB controls to the Graveyard to negate the activation of a Spell or Trap Card and destroy it."; but, the rulings directly contradict this.

Likewise, with "The Bistro Butcher " vs "Ancient Lamp", PlayerA's "The Bistro Butcher" will inflict Battle Damage to PlayerA's own Life Points. Using your explanation, "you" doesn't mean "the player who currently controls this card", so we can read it as follows: "The Bistro Butcher" inflicted Battle Damage to {your/PlayerB's} opponent's Life Points, so {your/PlayerB's} opponent draws 2 cards. It's exactly the same as your explanation that a "Vanguard of the Dragon" that {you/PlayerB} control was sent to the Graveyard (PlayerA's Graveyard, but that's not important right now), so {you/PlayerB} can Special Summon 1 Dragon. --Deus Ex Machina (Talk) 01:23, September 19, 2010 (UTC)

---

So what I'm basically getting from this is that in the above situation:

== "Player A's Vanguard of the Dragon changes control to Player B. Player A then uses Dark Hole to destroy all monsters on the field. There is a normal dragon in the graveyard." ==

Player B is the one that gets to use Vanguard's effect? The debate is a little confusing. Just a simple yes or no would suffice. --The guy who asked the question 75.33.54.117 (talk) 03:27, September 21, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I kinda gave up when I saw the Wall of Text that was created by LordGeovanni and Deus Ex Machina. No, the effect of Vanguard of the Dragon activates in the graveyard of the owner. However, before it was destroyed and sent to the graveyard. it was not controlled by the owner so its activation requirement wasn't fulfilled. Furthermore, as I've said the effect activates in the owner's graveyard so Player B won't be the one to use it.-- HHTurtle ^Talk   04:01, September 21, 2010 (UTC)

---

Okay, sorry for not replying quickly Deus Ex Machina, I had some trouble with my computer. Each following is my responce to your comments:

• The two main points about Vanguard are as follows: 1 - It specifies who "you" is, the controler at the time it is sent to the graveyard, therefore only that person may activate Vanguard's effect. 2 - Any time the term the graveyard is used, the Graveyard that the card is sent does not matter. So the fact of Vanguard going to the controler's opponent's graveyard means nothing.
• When refering about "Symbols of Duty": My point was that the card says the graveyard. If it said your Graveyard, you would be unable to tribute a monster that is origionally owned by your opponent because your opponent's card cannot be sent to your Graveyard. This is just like a token can be tributed but cannot be tributed and sent to the Graveyard. Because a token cannot exist in the Graveyard, a player may not use the token as the cost for that card. This would be completely true concerning monsters that you control that origionally belong to your opponent IF Symbols of Duty read your graveyard. The reason I brought this card up was because of two reasons: 1 - This card says the Graveyard. 2 - A player can send their opponent's origionaly owned card to the Graveyard for this card's cost. Because of such, the Graveyard CANNOT mean the same thing as your Graveyard.
• For "Pandemonium": Due to this card being a Field Spell Card, this card effects both players by default. The reason "a Player" and "that Player" are used are so there would not be any problems understanding that the controler doesn't gain the effect for the opponent. The opponent does.
• For "Ancient City - Rainbow Ruins": Due to this card being a Field Spell Card, this card effects both players by default. Konami made a mistake when origionally creating this card because they forgot that the Field Spell affects both players not just the controller. Due to this error, they fixed this mistake by making a ruling. This ruling states that only the controler of "Ancient City - Rainbow Ruins" gains the effect of and may activate the effect of this card. Because of this, this card is not a typical card, but instead an exception to the rule. this card should have stated something to the same effect as "Skyscraper 2 - Hero City"'s last line.
• For "The Bistro Butcher" and "Don Zaloog": Their effects require their owner's opponent taking damage. An example to explain will be shown below:
  • Player A has "The Bistro Butcher" and "Don Zaloog" on his side of the field. Player B has only "Ancient Lamp" on his field face-down. Player A attacks the face-down monster with "Don Zaloog". "Ancient Lamp" is flipped and Player B redirects the attact to Player A's "The Bistro Butcher". Because both monsters belong to Player A, Player B CANNOT receive damage from this battle. "The Bistro Butcher" and "Don Zaloog" battle and "Don Zaloog" is destroyed. "The Bistro Butcher" causes 400 damage to the owner of "Don Zaloog" due to being 400 attack points higher. Because the controler of "Don Zaloog" (Player A) is NOT the "your opponent" (Player B) from "The Bistro Butcher", "The Bistro Butcher"'s effect is not activated. My proof is a Ruling for "Ancient Lamp": If you use the effect of "Ancient Lamp" to make the opponent’s "Don Zaloog" or "The Bistro Butcher" attack your opponent’s own monster, the effect of "Don Zaloog" or "The Bistro Butcher" will not activate because they are not doing battle damage to the opponent’s Life Points.
• I believe that we can agree that, when using the term "you" in Vanguard's effect, "you" cannot refer to two different Players. If this is true, unless specified, because it activates in the Graveyard, The origional owner is the player who gains the effect of Vanguard. Because vanguard specifies the controler at the time it was destroyed, only that person can gain the effects of Vanguard. Because the current controler's opponent's effect sent this card to the Graveyard, the effect activates so Player B would gain the effect. --LordGeovanni- (Talk To Me) *Kupo* 06:20, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

Can you please don't type your questions in long walls of text? As I and Deus Ex Machina have said, it doens't work that way and I'll break it to you in parts.

The effect's activation requirement states: "When this card you control is sent to the Graveyard by your opponent's card effect,..."

1st, the activation of this effect activates in the graveyard, not on the field.

2nd, that is why while it is on the field, it is not active in any manner. In fact, the player that controls it is not the "you" because it is not looking for the "you" while it is on the field.

3rd, As said above, it activates in the graveyard. So after it is destroyed by the opponent's card effect, it is now then that the activation requirement checks for the "you" that controled. Please remember that cards are always sent to the owner's graveyard.

4th, it is a general rule that you can never activate effects in your opponent's field, RFP zone, hand and most importantly, graveyard because it is under their control, not yours. This applies to all kinds of effects, even Madatory Trigger Effects.

• • Example: The ruling for Sangan: "If you control your opponent's "Sangan" and it is destroyed, your opponent gets the effect since it activates in his/her Graveyard."

5th, In the ruling for Sangan, it says your opponent gets the effect since it activates in his/her Graveyard. However in this case, the owner can't activate it. This is because the "you" also refers to the controller of the effect at that moment, which is the owner of the card and graveyard that it activates in. Since it is found that the controller of the effect did not fulfill the "you control" part of the activation requirement, in the end, neither player is able to activate the effect of Vanguard of the Dragon.

Finally, please note that I've not stated anything about "the graveyard" or "your graveyard" or "your opponent's graveyard" as it is has significance in this situation.-- HHTurtle ^Talk   09:53, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

JUST TRY IT ON A VIDEOGAME!!!! -Sarcon- (talk • contribs) 13:33, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

Well there is the OCG ruling for Scrap Dragon:

The effect of a monster like "Scrap Dragon" or "Voltic Bicorn" cannot be activated unless it is under the control of its original owner when it is destroyed. Thus, if a "Voltic Bicorn" that you own is destroyed while on your opponent's side of the field, then you cannot activate its effect.

That pretty much lays it out.--DarwinDawkins09 (talk • contribs) 16:44, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

• Okay, I was hoping to hear from Deus Ex Machina, however I need to tell HHTurtle, -Sarcon-, and DarwinDawkins09 somethings and would not like to keep them waiting any longer. Each in order listed, One per paragraph:
• For HHTurtle, Unfortunately for you, I don’t want to leave "long walls of text”. In order to cover all the topics I am talking about, I need to. If you look at my most recent post, each Bullet was an entire thought or discussion on a ruling or card. Each is relevant and to ignore sections of another's post would seem as if I agree with those. Since I do not, I type out my reason. Due to you leaving such a large amount for me to comment to, please understand why I comment to each part in order for you to understand that I do not agree. If I did, as shown in my response to DarwinDawkins09 below, I would tell you. Even if it takes up a little more space. Due to this being the internet, I doubt anyone is paying taxes on this space I type anyway. I am actively debating with Deus Ex Machina. If I do not understand a ruling or disagree with a ruling I really have two options. 1 - Accept the ruling without understanding the reason why. 2 - Debate (my way of learning) until I understand. Because I refuse to follow a blind sheep idea, my only possible answer is 2. If I do not reach a satisfying conclusion, I will write Konami and attempt to get an official ruling. Part of my debate is where this card's effect begins. Due to the card's effect saying the following, "When this card you control is sent to the Graveyard by your opponent's card effect, you can Special Summon 1 Dragon-Type Normal Monster from either player's Graveyard." I believe the card is written in present tense. So the card would have to be "being sent to the Graveyard" when its effect activates. Due to chain rules, the effect would immediately take place as soon as possible, such as at the end of whatever chain is taking place. Due to this card being an "optional effect", it being sent to the Graveyard would have to be the last thing to occur. Even with it being the last thing to occur, it still takes place and then this card's effect activates. If this card was to activate in the Graveyard, a much better script should read "If this card you controlled was sent to the Graveyard by your opponent's card effect, you can Special Summon 1 Dragon-Type Normal Monster from either player's Graveyard." Part of your second 'paragraph' said that "because it is not looking for the 'you' while it is on the field" this would only really apply if the card was written in past tense, not present tense. For your third 'paragraph', I am debating where the effect activates so that point is moot. For your fourth 'paragraph', again, I am debating where the effect activates. If it activates on the field or in transition to the Graveyard then it is not in an opponent's anywhere. On top of that, see my post above for Verdant Sanctuary. If I read the ruling for that card correctly, the controller MUST inform the opponent if the card can be activated in the opponent's favor. If the opponent wishes to activate the effect, the controller MUST allow the opponent to activate it. If this is correct, then it is possible to activate an effect of a card on your opponent's side of the field/Graveyard/ect. In closing, you did mention that you were not saying anything about "the Graveyard" and "your Graveyard". Thank you. However, as you said, it does have significance on the situation. For my discussion as such, see above.
• For -Sarcon-, unfortunately, not everyone has a copy of the video games. Please "speak" civilly. If you have a video game, please test this out and say the result along with the game. It would be useful to this discussion.
• For DarwinDawkins09, That seems like the first response that was relevant to my argument and yet against my argument efficiently. However, rulings serve two purposes: 1 - to restrict cards, rules, and rulings. 2 - To fix problems between two or more cards. The ruling you gave is of the first type. This does give good reason to the idea that the opponent cannot benefit from Vanguard's ability, however because it is specifically saying those two monsters and those monsters have different terms I believe there still is room to debate. For Scrap Dragon it does specifically mention "the Graveyard" however it doesn't use the term "you control". I am not sure how much of a difference this would make. For Voltic Bicorn it doesn't mention where it goes at all. It also doesn't mention "you control". Another thing to note is that both of the cards listed are Mandatory Effects while Vanguard is an Optional Effect. To finish, I still think there is a lot to discuss about the ruling you brought up, but as I said before, this ruling restricts those cards effects. This is a ruling that changes the rules of the game for those cards. Because vanguard was not listed there, this ruling is not a final nail in this debate's coffin. --LordGeovanni- (Talk To Me) *Kupo* 02:44, September 28, 2010 (UTC)