User talk:Mikus

Welcome

Hello Mikus, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --Lord Voldemort ^{(Dark Mark)} 19:27, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Aleko

Great to see another fan of this cool car, this is the one of mine (JS's Aleko:-)

Image Tagging Image:AZLK svjatogor.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:AZLK svjatogor.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Longhair 09:27, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Simca 1308.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Simca 1308.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:JVC GZ-MG555.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:JVC GZ-MG555.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 19:15, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Standard Vanguard

Can you provide references for the comparison to the Russian car ? RGCorris (talk) 08:20, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 01:22, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Canon hf100 with memory card.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Canon hf100 with memory card.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 18:00, 10 June 2008 (UTC) --J Milburn (talk) 18:00, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Apologies for not replying, I don't generally watch the IfD pages. Everything you say is correct, and I do apologise if it seems like I have assumed bad faith or offended you in any way. It does look like a rather professional photograph (I guess that is a compliment) and my guess that it was taken from a website was obviously correct- in the vast majority of these cases, the images have just been casually stolen. I have closed the discussion and will remove the deletion notice from the image page in a sec. J Milburn (talk) 21:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Mod tod file format.gif

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Mod tod file format.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sdrtirs (talk) 12:01, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

R-7 (missile)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of R-7 (missile), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: R-7 Semyorka. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 06:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Cut and paste moves

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give R-7 Semyorka a different title by copying its content and pasting it into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is considered undesirable because it splits the page history which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other articles that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Please note that due to naming conventions, the original title would have been preferable, and in most cases it is better to discuss moves before making them. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 08:06, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Aleko 2141.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Aleko 2141.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 23:51, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Image permission problem with Image:Souyz-2-fregat.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Souyz-2-fregat.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the image's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -MBK₀₀₄ 02:53, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Image permission problem with Image:Soyuz-st.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Soyuz-st.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the image's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -MBK₀₀₄ 02:55, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Violation of Wikipedia rules and best practices: Pixel Aspect Ratio

Greetings, Mikus.

I'm calling in to inform you that we are irritated by your constant violation of Wikipedia rules and best practices in Pixel aspect ratio article. Me and my colleagues have worked for weeks to perfect the aforementioned article. While we are open to criticism and appreciate positive editing, you have twice added POV materials to it, disrespected us by initiating an edit war and failed to explain your misbehavior in the talk page. Please kindly report to the talk page and explain yourself. Fleet Command (talk)

We are still awaiting your explanation, Mikus. Please report in and resolve the dispute. I've fixed the link for you to point right to discussion thread. Fleet Command (talk) 07:08, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

HDV introduction

In your February 13th edit of the HDV video format introduction you changed the wording to describe it as an "entry level" format and wrote in your notes "Anything worse than it?". These are subjective comments which do not belong in an impartial discussion of the format, which is widely used for many professional purposes including broadcast television programming. And yes, there are HD variants which are "worse" than HDV, like AVCHD at low bit rates or other low-bandwidth HD solutions. Please refrain from any future edits of the HDV page which reflect a bias against the format relative to other alternatives, especially in the introduction section.Kwshaw1 (talk) 15:46, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Don't get hung up on comments, what counts is actual article content. Sony itself defines HDV as an entry-level HD standard, period. If you want, I can provide a reference. It was the cheapest and the lowest quality HD standard before AVCHD appeared. AVCHD is no worse than HDV, and no better, these are pretty much comparable standards. The fact that HDV is used for broadcast does not change the fact that this is one of the lowest forms of HD. Anything can be used for broadcast if content is interesting. BBC still considers HDV as form of standard definition video, if you did not know. But BBC is snobbish about that and breaks its own rules often. I am not saying that HDV is bad. I never expressed negative opinion about HDV. I own an HDV camera myself and if you have noticed, I made quite a few edits in this article to expand the information on the subject. Please refrain from any future edits of the HDV page which reflect a bias towards the format relative to other alternatives, especially in the introduction section. Also, do not litter the intro with information that is already discussed and linked to in the article body. Mikus (talk) 17:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Insisting on describing HDV as "entry level" seems biased to me, but for the sake of keeping things civil I'll leave that in for now. How Sony describes it for marketing purposes is irrelevant to an impartial definition, and you've also mischaracterized the BBC definition of HDV - which I have researched and corrected previously on the HDV page. And while AVCHD can be better than HDV at high bit rates it is worse at low ones, so with AVCHD you have to know the recording bandwidth to assess the quality level. I find it amusing that you quoted my advice to you about keeping the HDV intro impartial when you're the one using non-neutral terms like "entry level", but I took some of your recommendations into account in revising the text to combine our respective comments. Kwshaw1 (talk) 15:58, 27 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwshaw1 (talk • contribs)

Soyuz-2

In response, I did not revert your edits because I do not like them. There are some policies that you violated with those edits. You can not just simply replace most if not all of the contents of an article with your version and expect that to stand. We work on a consensus-based editing philosophy. Simply put, if you want to make drastic changes to an existing article, you must discuss them first on the talk page with the editors who have and are actively involved with the article. Also, creating an article which closely mirrors or even duplicates the content of another article is also something that is not encouraged, especially since the information on Soyuz-ST could and was easily be integrated into the Soyuz-2 article. And finally, the images that you uploaded were copyrighted and are not permissible for use here. I believe that GW Simulations (talk · contribs) incorporated the cited and verifiable information from your edits into the article as it currently exists. If you have more information you wish to contribute to the article, please make a proposal on the talk page along with liberally citing your verifiable and reliable sources. If you wish to upload images, please be sure that they meet the image use policy. -MBK₀₀₄ 05:19, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Samsung BD-P1200

I have nominated Samsung BD-P1200, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sony BDP-S1. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ejfetters (talk) 14:21, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

This article is not an advertisement like the S1. Quite contrary, this is supposed to be a collection of useful knowledge about the player. Do not even think about deleting it. Mikus (talk) 16:51, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

• Wikipedia is not supposed to be a collection of useful knowledge about the player, the player in itself isn't notable. See WP:NOTCATALOG

Articles for deletion nomination of Canon HV30

I have nominated Canon HV30, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canon DV 012. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ejfetters (talk) 01:26, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Canon HF100

I have nominated Canon HF100, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canon DV 012. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ejfetters (talk) 01:30, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Canon Elura 100

I have nominated Canon Elura 100, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canon DV 012. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ejfetters (talk) 01:34, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mikus. You have new messages at GW Simulations's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

GW… 18:34, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

• Another one --GW… 20:14, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Rocket Science (miniseries)

I saw this article, and it seemed like you wanted to use it as a temporary page to construct the article. If you want a place to use while you construct the article you can create it at your own personal sandbox such as User:Mikus/Sandbox. After you have finished making the article it may then moved into the article space. Feinoha ^{Talk, My master} 21:41, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of A Very English Murder

A tag has been placed on A Very English Murder requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

FYI

RE: Sony BDP-S1

You participated in the first AFD, there is now a third: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sony BDP-S1 (3rd nomination) Please take the time to comment. Ikip (talk) 02:24, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Was it the first one? Ikip (talk) 04:12, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Reverted at f-number again

Mikus, no problem if the material is sourced, but you've put it back again without citing your source, so we can't verify it. Next time, include a citation that shows those numbers, and it will be OK. Dicklyon (talk) 22:46, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. It has nothing to do with what I believe, except that I believe we should stick to policy when editing areas that traditionally accumulate a lot of junk otherwise. Dicklyon (talk) 23:08, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Sprinter-01.jpg

File:Sprinter-01.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Sprinter light rail train.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Sprinter light rail train.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 05:57, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: The New Great Game

Hello Mikus, I basically already wrote what you're asking on the article's talkpage. I moved the quotes to wikiquote:The New Great Game because Wikiquote is a much more suitable place for a collection of quotes than Wikipedia. In Wikipedia, you should only write articles with your own words. Of course, it's perfectly fine to quote reliable sources, but the quotes should be integrated into the prose of your article. If it's just a collection of quotes, it's better to put them at Wikiquote and provide a link to the Wikiquote page in the Wikipedia article. You can see a Wikiquote template containing such link in the Additional Reading section of the article. — Kpalion^(talk) 10:07, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Re: HDV

As previously requested, please try to keep your comments on the HDV page more neutral. For example, the use of the term "non-HD format" may be an accurate reference to some broadcast standards documents, but it's potentially confusing given that HDV *is* an HD recording format whether the BBC and PBS accept it as such or not.

I continue to wonder why you put so much emphasis on the negatives of HDV without posting similar comments for other recording formats like AVCHD - which also doesn't satisfy the BBC and PBS HD standards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwshaw1 (talk • contribs) 14:24, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Notices

January 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add content (particularly if you change facts and figures), as you have to the article DirecTV, please cite a reliable source for the content you're adding or changing. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --hulmem (talk) 01:26, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. Jasmeet_181 (talk) 21:02, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

BBC HD, HD Lite

The BBC is a broadcaster not an service provider/operator. They have reduced the bitrate of BBC HD on Astra 2D themselves, there has never been a reduction in resolution or re-transmition. The BBC does not cite limitations of existing HD video cameras, different shooting style and improved codec as reasons to reduce the bit rate, they say that it is because of the introduction of new transmission encoders.[1] - Jasmeet_181 (talk) 07:35, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

BBC HD has been at 1440x1080 since it began as a trial service, the resolution is within European Broadcasting Union guidelines for HD broadcasts.[2] If you have a source to back up your claim that it has changed, then cite it, the burden of evidence is with you. Yes, I have read the article and some of the things you have said (HD cameras and shooting style) are cited as reasons that the picture may not always be sharp or can give poor results but not why the bitrate has dropped. From one of Andy Quested's own posts "But in this case (and because some of the posts had asked for the results) we did because we were making a comparison between two devices using the same codec through the same path."[3] Negating you claim of new codecs. I don't find comments from the general public to be acceptable sources, I will specifically refer you to this "Posts left by readers may never be used as sources."[4] I see that you've also now added that the BBC wish add more HD channels, what is this other channel? "The BBC is not launching BBC One HD early next year on Freeview - as one newspaper report has suggested."[5] A different platform (digital terrestrial television) and a denial. Admittedly, I am not familiar with the term HD Lite but in this case the source (BBC) has reduced the bitrates by themselves, through an advancement in technology (new transmission encoders), rather than an operator intentionally altering and re-broadcasting the channel at a lower quality. - Jasmeet_181 (talk) 21:02, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Replacing good edits with rubbish

Your edit to the article AVCHD has been reverted. Check with the Panasonic specifications before you replace material with your rubbish.

The HDC-xx700 series camorders support true full HD progressive video recording in 1080/50p in Europe and 1080/60p in the US. The Panasonic specification for the camcorders (now cited from the article) says so and the real camcorders also say so. The video is written at 28 Mbps (double the 17 Mbps for the interlaced format - the data rate would be the same if the progressive were to be encoded into an interlaced frame). The resultant AVCHD format is proprietary to Panasonic.

It would be quite impossible to format 1080/50p or 1080/60p video using a progressive segmented frame technique as it would require the video to be carried in a 1080/100i or 1080/120i signal respectively. Such a signal format does not exist and no display that I am aware of supports it. 86.176.155.137 (talk) 16:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately,it is you that needs to learn about the subject. You claimed that the 1080/50p mode was PsF in your edit summary which it most certainly isn't. Also do not remove citations which are mandatory in wikipedia. I will conceed the point on 1080/24p which obviously has to be PsF. I regard it as a totally pointless format in a camcorder anyway.

86.176.155.137 (talk) 13:23, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Your change reverted and corrected. Rather than correct, you just delete an important point. It didn't strike me as right anyway. Still a totally pointless format in any context.

Quote from your edit summary "50Hz model still uses PsF, 60Hz model uses 24p-in-60i pulldown, just like the previous models." Both statements are quite wrong. You seem hell bent on removing the statement that these camcorder models operate to full the 1080/50p and 1080/60p format (respectively) suggesting that you do not accept it. In which case: produce a valid citation that supports your position and proves that Panasonic know nothing about their own products.86.176.155.137 (talk) 06:51, 8 April 2010 (UTC)