Talk:Virtual channel

message: Why they know it in the U.S.? As logical channel number (as in Europe) or as a "virtual channel"?
Huh? --CFIF (talk to me) 17:47, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: in the U.S.?

message: Does anyone know if there are any regulations (in the U.S.) on which virtual channels a station can occupy? I know virtually (no pun intended) all stations in the U.S. are mapping virtual channels to their analog equivalents right now, even when they're UHF positions that aren't particularly well liked... just doesn't make sense to me. J. Myrle Fuller (talk) 13:08, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: Please add examples of actual Virtual Channel Tables.  Please tell us how to find the VCTs for various locations.  Do new tuners allow selection of real channels, virtual channels only, or both?
-69.87.203.112 (talk) 01:22, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In the UK the LCNs vary according to your provider.  For Digital Terrestrial they are the EPG numbers shown at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_digital_terrestrial_television_channels_(UK) .  For cable (usually Virgin) and satellite (Sky) some of the numbers differ.  French DTT LCNs are at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_television_stations_in_France and Irish DTT's LCNs are at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_channels_on_Saorview .  NZ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeview_(New_Zealand) . Australia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_digital_television_channels_in_Australia .  I don't know about VCTs for the US and Canada, I've often wondered the same myself. 86.160.149.131 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 15:19, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: add examples

message: The most common reason for a television station using a virtual channel is to minimize viewer confusion when a digital transmission is airing on a different channel than the one the station used in analog mode
If it weren't for the wikipedia, this would still be confusing me. I got a list of channels and it said CBC HD was on channel 20. Try as I might, I couldn't tune in 20.1, I kept getting channel 5.1. Now I know why.
So while this might indeed reduce confusion in the reverse case, I find this re-mapping to be extremely confusing. DTV channels are listed by their DTV channel number, not their virtual channel. So you type in one thing, get another, and then wonder why.
Maury Markowitz (talk) 17:09, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusing! 

message: "In Europe, Africa and the Middle East, there is no special numbering system for subchannels, as two related channels may have completely unrelated numbers (for example, in the UK, ITV1 is channel 3 and ITV2 channel 6)."  The clause following "as" seems to be the effect rather than the cause.  It's certainly not much an explanation.  The obvious question is, why does ITV choose to broadcast its channels as 3 and 6 rather than as 3.1 and 3.2?  Or is it not a choice but something enforced by the particular system that regulators or technology have imposed on the UK?  In which case the "as" should be a "so". 86.177.125.185 (talk)
:I can fix that simply by deleting the "as", but note that you're using "channel" in two entirely different senses here, one technical and the other colloquial.  Channels 3 and 6 are true channels in the technical sense: ranges of frequencies given the official designations "3" and "6".  ITV1 and ITV2 are trademarks or names traditionally associated with channels, but not any more, except in the colloquial sense of the word.  You might think of them as "program streams" with names. Unfree (talk) 12:39, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-explanation 

message: If I'm not mistaken, this is the ordinary meaning of "channel", and can be thought of as "an officially defined and designated range of frequencies", a concept which ought to be introduced very early in the article. Unfree (talk) 12:29, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "actual radio channel"

message: The article starts off with a blast of jargon or acronyms or abbreviations which need to be explained in English or at least Wikilinked in their first usage in the article or even in a section. The following is not at all helpful to the average reader or even to someone with a background in electronics: " DVB extensions such as NorDig or NDS."  Edison (talk) 16:38, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Jargon-fest

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Virtual channel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20061209054242/http://www.dgtvi.it:80/stat/Allegati/Specifiche_LCN.pdf to http://www.dgtvi.it/stat/Allegati/Specifiche_LCN.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:56, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In the section Virtual channel#Usage Examples, there are three lists.  Each of them begins with a number, then switches to bullets, like this:
The order for cable provider TimeWarner:
# Reserved for subscriber on-demand services
* Basic subscriber channels are from 30 to 120
* Extra subscriber channels are from 121 to 199
* Informational subscriber channels are from 200 to 244
Is this intentional?  It looks really bad, but I can't fix it because I don't know what it was intended to mean.  (I also can't figure out how "Reserved for subscriber on-demand services" has to do with the rest.  Does it mean channel one?) — Lawrence King (talk) 05:56, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mixed numbered/bulleted lists 

message: Should the article mention, or maybe see also, to PSIP? Gah4 (talk) 23:21, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  psip