Talk:SECAM

message: This article has much "general" information about how television signals are modulated, which compares SECAM to other television systems.  Shouldn't this information go in another article (like Broadcast television system) instead?  It's very interesting and informative but I don't think it's in the right place.  Neckro 02:50, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Nonetheless, SÉCAM was partly developed for reasons of national pride.
Do we have indications of that? David.Monniaux 09:59, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Many press articles of the era and recent literature about the subject document that the choice of SECAM vs PAL was a complicated political issue. Of course national pride was but one ingredient. Anorak2 04:32, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At the time SECAM was developed, the only established colour system was NTSC.  PAL was still in development and had not yet seen the light of day.  At the time, SECAM was developed solely to avoid the colour problems that plague NTSC. 20.133.0.13 (talk) 07:02, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

text: Ridiculous in today's context how exactly? There is a perfectly-good DVB standard from Europe, yet the US and Japan each came up with their own proprietary, incompatible systems for no better reason than the "not invented here" syndrome. The cost of patent licensing could well add as much as $US40 to the price of an ATSC-compatible TV set (and all new TV tuners in US interstate commerce have been required to have ATSC since at least 2007), benefiting Zenith, Dolby Labs and a few other companies (or their successors). The Japanese ISDB system, as a mess of DRM, is no better. So once again we have three pointless, incompatible standards. Plus ça change, plus ç'est pareil... --66.102.80.212 (talk) 16:36, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speculation 

message: The previous version said
and because of frame rate differences (50 versus 60 Hz) and the requirement for compatibility with monochrome TV receivers, it was not possible for Europeans to adopt NTSC
This is not true as stated. Of course it would not have made sense to adopt the 525 lines/60 Hz system in Europe, but it would have been perfectly possible to introduce NTSC colour encoding on top of the European 625/50 systems. 625/50/NTSC signals were indeed tested in Germany and the UK, and AFAIK the UK seriously considered to introduce it as standard there. It was a matter of preference not to go for that system eventually, but to use PAL or SECAM instead. I changed the text accordingly. Anorak2 04:25, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Addition: Someone edited my comment to the effect that the UK tested 405/25/NTSC signals. Both are true, they tested NTSC with both formats at different times. Anorak2 11:00, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NTSC option 

message: If you want to use "É" instead of "E" in a SÉCAM, then use these keyboard stroke / keys :
Press "S". Then press ...
Alt + 0201 (it means, first press the "Alt" (Alternative/Alternate) key in your keyboard, and keep it pressing with your left hand, then press the digits 0 2 0 1 in sequence, one by one, in the right-side numeric keypad).
Then press "C", "A", "M".
Then you will get SÉCAM. To make it a linkable word (to goto this article,) use two third brackets at the beginning and end of the name, like this SÉCAM, then you will get linkable SÉCAM.
If you want to link to this (English) article through URL, then use below code ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C9CAM
or, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%89CAM
For this type of other characters, see Windows Alt keycodes. ~ Tarikash.
:To do it in Linux, hold down Alt Gr, and press the ; button, followed by the compatable letter of choice, in this case "E". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.137.112.253 (talk • contribs) .
::Or, on Macintosh, hold down the "Option" ("Alt") key, press "e" (which "arms" the accent acute), release "Option", and press "E" (or any other letter compatible with accent acute). Et voila!
::Atlant 21:41, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  On any unix-like system with a configured compose-key: Press the Compose-Key, then press E, then press single-quote. --2001:5C0:1400:A:0:0:0:435 (talk) 17:30, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: How to Type the letter É in SÉCAM ?

message: SECAM was used for TV and VCR (and VHS tapes) until the mid 1990s.
*DVD players are only PAL or NTSC (DVD players sold in france are PAL as zone 2 PAL idem to UK)
what you have to know is first the french tvs were SECAM only, then they became PAL/SECAM (as were the VCRs), hence the DVD players PAL (Z2 PAL/NTSC) sold in france.
*french air tv channels (ground) are still SECAM until the end of this decade.
*modern tvs sold in france are PAL/SECAM/NTSC.
*in the early 90s game consoles sold in france were SECAM! i speak for the sega Master System (i remember the mainboard had a SECAM card). sega console packs sold in france ALWAYS had péritel cable (by default), while nintendo, sony and microsoft devices were sold with RCA with a crappy SCART adaptor (which doesn't produce RGB picture but a fuzzy shitty picture). 
*digital still camera sold in france are PAL/NTSC
*cellular phones in france with video function are PAL/NTSC
as you can see SECAM is almost abandonned technology by now, and PAL is the euro standard. tv and vcr had PAL/SECAM switch option (remote control or set up), while the digital devices introduced since the late 90s have a PAL/NTSC switch option. 
hope it helps.
Paris By Night 15:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Strictly speaking, digital formats are neither PAL nor SECAM. Therefore PAL is on the way out too. DVD players, DVB boxes etc. generate an analogue signal internally only. Anorak2 14:18, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

text: This may be because there is no such thing as a 'SECAM' DVD.  But then there is no such thing as a PAL DVD either.  DVD does not use any analogue colour encoding scheme being, as the are, digital. 86.143.182.112 (talk) 09:50, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: SECAM dvd

message: what you didn't mention is french tvs have built-in Péritel (SCART aka EUROSCART), a cool RVB (french for RGB) connector that most of you have probably never seen. the truth is SECAM picture on a tv w/Péritel kicks ass! your RCA connector that you have on PAL/NTSC devices is actually the crappiest stuff outhere with fuzzy edges and ugly green and red pictures. actually french probably had the best (smooth and clear) picture until the HD era. a Péritel section should be created in this article to complete the overview.
:gives something like RCA > S-VHS > Péritel (sécam-RGB) > HD Paris By Night 15:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: btw i'm not sure the russian had Péritel (SCART) connectors as it was a french technology and the russian were our ennemies during the cold war. if a russian here could confirm or infirm this, it would be useful. i think the russian had SECAM w/RCA tvs. Paris By Night 15:36, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

text: You are (alas) confused. First, there is no such thing as "SECAM-RGB". Thru SCART/Péritel, one can transmit different signals, notably SECAM or RGB. RGB is like the signals used between a computer and a VGA monitor and has little to do with broadcast television. Your digital-cable, satellite or digital-terrestrial box will generally produce RGB signals, and this is why it looks great on a "SECAM" television set. But the greatness results from the RGB abilitity of the set, which is independent of SECAM. It is just that since 1/1980 the French have required that all newly sold sets are really dual-standard, and can act as RGB computer monitors. BTW, to see how SECAM-thru-Péritel looks like, watch your VHS tapes. Or connect the television set to the "VCR" scart connector of the cable/satellite box, and select "SECAM" as VCR type in the menus. In this situation, whether Russians had or not SCART is irrelevant. Adam Mirowski 15:17, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

text: On the contrary, there is no reason to mention SCART here, I think SECAM has nothing to do with SCART, except both are originally French. I think most European TVs have built in SCART connector, regardless of TV norm used, as mentioned on SCART page. I have only seen non-SCART TVs in UK and Ireland. Saying that French had the best picture is a bit misleading, as for transmission in France the SECAM-L norm is used, which is inferior to at least East European SECAM-D/K (see broadcast television system) due to positive video modulation in SECAM-L, so at least Russia has better norm. But you could say, that in many European and non-European countries, where SCART is used, a very good picture can be obtained from VCRs and DVD players that supportes RGB output. Incidentally, I think it is not true, too. My current NTSC-J TV has no SCART but RGB and some kind of YUV device can be connected by CINCH connectors. It is not very convenient, because together with all these video and audio inputs and outputs, my TV has about 30 CINCH connectors in the back, what would be possible to unite into roughly three SCART connectors, one of which would be RGB-capable. 165.93.121.231 11:45, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Old British and Irish televisions (until the mid 1980s) usually didn't have SCART and came with a vast array of different manufacturer-specific connections ranging from DIN plugs to RCA connectors. SCART became the norm in both countries from the late 1980s onwards and it's extremely rare to find anything other than an antique TV with out it. Satellite boxes, cable boxes, games consoles all connected via SCART until HDMI arrived. That being said, the SCART discussion is really for another article. It has nothing to do with SECAM. SCART is just a structured cabling system that was used for connecting analogue televisions and other AV devices. It was normally used to carry RGB and stereo sound on individual wires. Using it with composite video like SECAM or PAL sort of defeats the purpose of using it as you ended up with less clear pictures than component video (RGB).
SCART did however have one nice feature that HDMI lacks : the ability to control the AV output of the television and automatically switch the TV to the correct input when you power up your cable box / sat box etc.--95.44.82.237 (talk) 09:32, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

text: You are mentioning some colour problems with PAL and NTSC, like reddish or greenish picture. I think, I can compare all three norms very well, as I have been using all three for prolonged period. I can not support your claim that PAL is worse than SECAM, but definitely NTSC is much worse. When we switched from SECAM to PAL around 1989, it was slight increase in quality, although not too big. There was definitely no problem with colors in PAL. A very old SECAM-only TVs imported from Soviet Union had some problems with colors. But, clearly that was because they were already older technology in the time of switching to PAL. Now I live in Japan, and I realized that some modern NTSC TVs have completely green or red picture as these SECAM-only TVs thrown out almost 20 years ago. There is tilt control button on remote, that should fix that, but it is usually not sufficient. For instance, my TV is very pink, and I am not able to make it green enough with that button. Some TVs here have exactly opposite problem. I must say, while there was not big difference between PAL and SECAM, the color performance of  NTSC (especially with old TVs) is pathetic, compared to both PAL and SECAM. I have asked Japanese people, and they claim, that my TV is normal. Obviously, they got used to frequent color shift on TV, so it is not problem for long term users, but after one year I can still see it. 165.93.121.231 11:45, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

text: SCART has nothing to do with SECAM or PAL, it is just a standard for connectors and controllers. In times when remote controllers were wired, SCART was a cool feature to control a TV, but who cares now? Also, in times when computer tape streamers were expensive, a VHS with SCART connector could work as an inexpensive tape streamer, fully controlled from a computer and recording whopping 2GB of data onto one VHS cassette. AFAIK, SCART was never modified for digital, so it is a dead standard now. In some Russian TVs and VCRs SCART was used, in other it was not used. It was never part of SECAM standard. Mikus (talk) 23:26, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

text: I'm from Catalonia/Spain. I only want to add that as of Jan 1 2009 all DVDs, DVB decoders set-top-boxes, TVs, VHS recorders (very rare now) and game consoles have the SCART connector, it is very widely used. It surely does not have nothing to do with SECAM because we have the PAL standard. Hope it helps a little.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.19.238.93 (talk) 23:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: SECAM crap? you jealous!

message: According to this article, Greece uses the SECAM-B&G standard.  However, according to the 2005 edition of the WRTH, Greece uses the PAL-B&G standard, not the SECAM-B&G standard.  Is it right to assume that Greece made the transition from SECAM to PAL? -Daniel Blanchette 17:17, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Greece is among the countries who migrated from SECAM to PAL. The process has been finished some time ago, they're all PAL now. Anorak2 08:55, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with a country mentioned 

message: I think the paragraph about dot crawl in SECAM is technically inaccurate and generally misleading. I wrote it originally (mea culpa), anonymously, together with many other parts of this article, but made wrong guesses. When I started feeling something is fishy about this stuff, I was hoping someone more qualified would correct this, but it has been almost 2 years now. If this article is supposed to become GA-class, this should be fixed.
In my current opinion SECAM is even worse at dot crawl than PAL or NTSC. I think that the complex FM spectrum prevents any miraculous comb-style intermixing of the baseband luminance signal and of the chrominance subcarriers. (BTW, the article should finally say that SECAM uses different sub-carrier frequencies for Red and Blue signals.) The old books I have do discuss the interference of both signals, and say how SECAM uses tricks to minimize the visual impact (I forgot the details since, the books are burried somewhere currently after my recent move; the presence of 2 different subcarrier frequencies might be part of that scheme). But I am not sure if this was really implemented this way, because it might not work so well. So I am afraid that in real implementations, if a color signal is transmitted, a SECAM receiver will simply cut out the top of the spectrum to get the luminance undisturbed. For B&W this is not necessary. I wonder what happens at the transmitter. I guess that the top of the luminance does not need cutting there, as the FM chrominance subcarrier is not that easily disturbed.
PAL lovers, do not rejoice too soon! I am not sure SECAM is actually worse than PAL here as far as broadcast TV is concerned. Given that PAL receivers do not have comb-filters in general, they also must plainly cut out the high-frequencies or just display the dot-crawl.
BTW, if one carefully observes the classic Philips PM5544 test pattern in PAL and SECAM versions, one can notice that the series of vertical line patterns which go denser and denser from left to right, and which allows to appreciate the horizontal resolution of the receiver is different. In SECAM, after the middle point, it goes less dense again.
That SECAM is unable to play the comb-filter trick, might be a major reason why DVD players do not output it. Indeed, whatever tricks are used, it will not offer better horizontal resolution on DVD than than on broadcast, while with PAL/NTSC and a comb-filter, one might hope to "go to 11" more easily. But then it is easier and better to just use RGB signals.
Additionally, someone has speculated that the introduction of SCART in France (compulsory for sets sold after January 1981, or maybe already January 1980), and especially the presence of RGB input had something to do with the fact that the frequency modulation of SECAM is problematic with set-top boxes. SCART has been devised around the same time as the Antiope teletext system. People probably noticed it was hard to take a SECAM signal, decode teletext and insert it back into the color signal (for subtitles) before giving it to the TV set. So they considered passing the SECAM signal unchanged but have the "fast switching" feature in SCART to insert RGB areas here and there. Adam Mirowski 16:19, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can't say much about the frequency considerations, but one obvious drawback concerning cross-luminance is that the SECAM carrier is always at full amplitude and thus causes distortion in all regions of the image, whereas in PAL and NTSC its amplitude is reduced to zero in non-coloured regions of the image, and therefore crosstalk is reduced. I remember watching SECAM signals on East German television, they used to completely switch off the SECAM carrier (the switching was visible) when showing black&white movies for this reason. Anorak2 18:41, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember these transitions as well, but only because the "tint" of the image changed, rather than because the image was less distorted. Yesterday, I tried to visually compare two versions of a cable channel, one in SECAM, the other one digital, transmitted as RGB to the TV set. This was on a live talk-show, with a very good picture, and on a classic TV set, without any kind of digital processing, 100 Hz, etc, which can alter the picture. It appears that dot crawl is indeed visible in SECAM, along edges, but only when objects move, so it is akin to motion blur. Once people stop moving significantly, it becomes invisible and the image is not very different from the RGB signal which of course has never any problem. I still need to compare with the PAL signal generated by the set-top box instead of RGB and maybe with the SECAM signal the box can only generate on the "VCR" SCART socket. Adam Mirowski 14:45, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "SECAM has no [[dot crawl]]" nonsense 

message: I could be great to have more information on Monochrome systems : B G H, L L', D K, ...
:Maybe, but not in an article on a specific colour system. 20.133.0.13 (talk) 07:26, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monochrome Systems 

message: this article lacks sources, contains oriented sections (original francophobe searches about facetious english acronyms: come on, only the british speak english in europe, so don't try to generalize the old english perfidy to "other euro coutries"), titles like "why SECAM in France" etc are stupid: WHY NOT? its like the french had to use NTSC. Louis Augustin Le Prince invented motion picture film (long before Thomas Edison) and the Frères Lumière invented theaters, so the french were able to create their own system. also the french article about SECAM insists on Mitterand's role, while the english article focus on de gaulle. the french wanted to be independent from the US (cultural/economic) imperialism but were in the same time ennemies of the russian. the section reads like the french were with the chinese and the russian together against the american, this is historically false and an anglo-american view instead. the french were (and still are under chirac) against the us hegemony but they were allies against the communists (last evidence is the 1st vietnam war involving the french). the forementionned sections need to be neutralized and sourced. Paris By Night 16:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding the "why": it can be costly and inefficient to develop one's own original technology (but there can be some strong benefits at the end). Regarding the Russians: Business is business. It is important for a country to export, products, technology, culture, whatever. Look at all the trading done by democratic countries with commies and dictatorships. Only specific stuff is embargoed. Adam Mirowski 15:44, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: pov

message: Union of Myanmar is coloured on the map as having SECAM standard, but in the text it is stated that it is having PAL standard. Not sure which exactly which is true, but either the map or the text (both for PAL and SECAM) should be changed.
cheerio
minidoc —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.99.203.19 (talk) 12:17, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change of Map 

message: Whatever the technical reasons (EBU-related?) for not listing them there, most lay readers will be looking for Libya, Morocco and Tunisia under "Africa", not under "Europe". A similar problem applies to Syria, which again is not in Europe. Either the countries should be listed under their "layperson's understanding" region, or, if they're left where they are, there needs to be much, much better explaining of why in the section itself. 86.143.52.241 01:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, the country listing is rather weird. Among other things, why would Ukraine and Mongolia be placed in Eurasia, whereas the former is fully in Europe, while the latter is fully in Asia. And Bulgaria is quite clearly not in Central Europe. Humanophage 20:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Another oddity is the remark for France simulcast in PAL (ADSL). What does that mean? France certainly doesn't broadcast PAL terrestrially. "ADSL" could refer to IPTV. If so that isn't PAL either as it's a digital format. Anorak2 07:34, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unhelpful country listing 

message: The Soviets experimented with "SECAM 4" (NIR) in the late sixties before deciding to stick with the inferior but widely established "SECAM 3". There is more on SECAM on the German Wikipedia page on SECAM (see here)but I dont have enough German to make sense of it :-(
Anyone know what SECAM 1 and 2 were (819 line experimental versions perhaps ??) ?80.229.222.48 06:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: SECAM 3 and SECAM 4 (NIR)

message: The para about color signal insertion appears inaccurate - it's a superimposed carrier, not in "empty space". Needs fixing, you can rm tag after that. --Janke | Talk 08:55, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the template.  That section could be written a lot more clearly, but the point being made is correct.  The "empty space" being referred to is the space in the frequency domain between the harmonics of the line scan rate (frequency shifted up to start at the carrier frequency).  Because of the line rate repetitive nature of a television signal, the greater part of the transmitted power is in these harmonics and the space in between has very little signal.  Similarly, the colour information has peaks and troughs of power occuring at the same frequency spacing.  However, because there is a free choice of the exact frequency of the colour sub-carrier, it can be arranged that the peaks of the chroma signal lie exactly in the troughs of the luminance signal and vice versa.  This requirement translates to the colour sub-carrier frequency must be an odd number of half line frequencies which explains why colour sub-carrier frequencies are always a strange unhandy inexact number.  Of course, this is not unique to SECAM, the NTSC and PAL systems did the same trick, so it cannot be held up as an advantage of SECAM over other systems.  The original concept was that luminance and chroma would be separated with comb filters which vastly reduce the artefacts of composite video systems, but this was not taken up by manufacturers prior to the digital age because it was found to be too expensive with the technology available to television manufacturers at the time. SpinningSpark 00:12, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Color carrier 

message: This article says that SECAM stands for séquentiel couleur à mémoire. What about all the sources, going back decades, that say it stands for système électronique couleur avec memoire?
President Lethe (talk) 19:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What SECAM stands for 

message: Various countries (mostly former Eastern bloc but elsewhere too) migrated from SECAM to PAL particularly during the 1990's. Was this always for technical reasons or did politics play a role and were there not protests from owners of oler (SECAM only) sets who could now only watch in B&W ? 84.13.206.199 (talk) 00:54, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Countries which migrated from SECAM to PAL

message: Uhm, anyone notice that the image on the top left is either wrong, or has the wrong caption (PAL)?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.139.196.68 (talk) 09:34, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong image 

message: If you consider not the VHS machines but only the recorded tapes as such - is then MESECAM the same as PAL?
What I mean is: if you put a PAL VHS tape in a MESECAM VHS machine (that's set to MESECAM mode), would you get a correct color playback on a SECAM TV set? Also, if you put a MESECAM VHS tape in a PAL machine (that's set to PAL mode if applicable), would you get a correct color playback on a PAL TV set?
Thanks for clarifying this! -- 92.226.89.102 (talk) 00:29, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the MESECAM VHS format for recording SECAM is not directly compatible with PAL equipment, although some PAL VHS machines - particularly those made by Panasonic (e.g. the F55 and F77) - were "unofficially" MESECAM compliant. In other words, although there was no mention of MESECAM on the machine (i.e. under the VHS symbol) or in its manual, it would nonetheless record in MESECAM from a SECAM source, and play back correctly to a SECAM compatible TV set. Nick Cooper (talk) 11:28, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  MESECAM VHS tapes the same as PAL tapes? 

message: Venezuela never used SECAM standards in color television. From the beginnings of TV in my country, TV stations only could broadcast in the N-Monochrome Standard (625 lines, 50 Hz and frequency bands for TV broadcasting in All-America). Then, the mains frequency was 50 Hz. In the period 1963-1968, the mains frequency was changed to 60 Hz and the monochrome standard changed to M Standard, in consequence. The first experimental color TV broadcastings in my country began in 1969. Later, the Venezuela government adopted the NTSC-M color standard by its compatibility with the old programs recorded in monochrome and the TV set introduced via smuggling for some users.
--Ramjar (talk) 03:50, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted mentions about Venezuela 

message: This insertion is possible because the spectrum of the monochrome TV signal is not continuous (for most typical video content), hence empty space exists which can be utilized. This typical lack of continuity results from the discrete nature of the signal, which is divided into frames and lines. (Strictly speaking, monochrome video does use the full spectrum, if arbitrary and unconstrained movement of subjects and/or cameras is permitted. Therefore, all of these color systems compromise luma quality to some extent in exchange for the addition of color—i.e. all of these color signals look worse at some time or other than they would if the color signal were absent.) 
This lengthy explanation confuses me, so I suspect it does others as well. Perhaps it can be simplified?
I was under the impression that the frequency was related to resolution. That is, higher frequency components of the signal represent smaller features on the display, or at least more rapid change of those features along a given horizontal line. Is that correct?
If so, it would see that this statement could be simplified this way:
"The original frequency allocation for each channel of monochrome TV signal provides considerable bandwidth. On most television sets of the era, the highest frequency portions of this signal, corresponding to rapid changes in intensity (and thus resolution), cannot be displayed due to limitations of the hardware.
Color systems take advantage of this by using these high-frequency portions of the channel to send the color signal instead of additional luminescence. On a black and white television this results in a slight randomization of the signal, but on most sets this is too small to be seen. On a color set, this information is extracted into separate circuitry and used to decode the color signal."
Maury Markowitz (talk) 21:01, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can this be simplified? 

message: China never used SECAM in formal broadcasting, you can google it simply, and both of China and former Yugoslavia adopted PAL. please stop adding them to this article without sources, otherwise they'll need to be removed again. --Corchorifolius (talk) 14:17, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added to the article an official source for SECAM users in the late 1990s (Recommendation ITU-R BT.470-6 - Conventional Television Systems, Appendix 1 To Annex 1). China and Yugoslavia are listed as PAL. 4throck (talk) 14:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: What about replacing it with CCIR Rep.624-3 (1986)? which was the report file before the migration to PAL. Corchorifolius (talk) 09:35, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the reference! I think it's best to mention both reports, the article will be more complete that way. 4throck (talk) 12:00, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced contents about China and former Yugoslavia 

message: Is any instance of SECAM  usage in following countries that removed in from the Countries and territories that use SECAM section are true or false?: Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, Lebanon and Liberia. HarmonZach (talk) 00:25, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some SECAM countries