Coordinated Universal Time was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Time, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Time on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TimeWikipedia:WikiProject TimeTemplate:WikiProject TimeTime
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Measurement, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.MeasurementWikipedia:WikiProject MeasurementTemplate:WikiProject MeasurementMeasurement
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.
Kill sub-section on "Daylight saving time" ?
The sub-section on DST (which should hyphenate daylight-saving) seems entirely irrelevant and misplaced. At best one might mention DST, in the preceding sub-section's discussion of time-zones and how they are expressed relative to UTC: it's something UTC doesn't do; and the examples of other zones expressed in terms of UTC can mention how DST affects a zone's offset from UTC. It does not warrant a section of its own, on this page. 84.212.163.209 (talk) Eddy
Is UTC time smooth like calculus?
Will 2 calls of java.lang.System.currentTimeMillis() big n milliseconds apart ever average (UTC time) differently than as near to n milliseconds as the systems are able? Article says "A number of proposals have been made to replace UTC with a new system that would eliminate leap seconds". I hope that is just about Gregorian time and has no effect on computers telling us how many seconds, milliseconds, or nanoseconds we are from the start of year 1970. If time jumps around discontinuously, like in leap seconds or daylight savings, in the computers clock, it would break alot of stuff (and unexplained errors do occur often many places) and would likely motivate many programmers to stop using such systems and create a new standard instead, in the hopefully unlikely event that UTC is not calculus smooth. 75.130.143.161 (talk) 19:55, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Java gets the time from the operating system. The most popular operating systems, like Windows, haven't made leap second information available to the apps and language runtimes that run on the system. Each operating system has a different way of adjusting the time near the leap second to make it appear there was no leap second. If leap seconds are eliminated, the short term result there won't be any leap seconds, so the operating systems won't have to deal with them. Over the course of decades or centuries, some way of dealing with the accumulated difference between time as kept by the Earth and time as kept by atomic clocks will have to be dealt with. Jc3s5h (talk) 21:47, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
The opening paragragh is non-factual. There is a technical difference between UTC and GMT. According to TimeandDate.com "GMT is a time zone officially used in some European and African countries. The time can be displayed using both the 24-hour format (0 - 24) or the 12-hour format (1 - 12 am/pm).
UTC is not a time zone, but a time standard that is the basis for civil time and time zones worldwide. This means that no country or territory officially uses UTC as a local time." TheeFactChecker (talk) 12:41, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"In Some Countries GMT is used", should be removed as it is irelevant. Or rather it should say "GMT is not to be confused with UTC as GMT refers to a time zone, whereas UTC is the universal time standard."
Not done. GMT means many different things, some of which are contradictory. I would certainly not state "GMT refers to a time zone". Indeed, I consider it undefined. Jc3s5h (talk) 19:55, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
UTC stands for "Universal Time Coordinate", so article title should reflect this. "Coordinated Universal Time", the current article title, is misleading as there is no "coordination" going on. Furthermore, "Coordinated Universal Time" is redundant, as you can not have "Un-coordinated Universal Time". These are the reasons the accronym is UTC and not CUT. 181.12.64.53 (talk) 21:11, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The assertion is simply false, as attested by the many reliable sources cited in the article. I warn anyone that attempts to carry this through that adverse action by administrators is likely to result. Jc3s5h (talk) 21:37, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
