Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia/Pronunciation task force/Archive 1

Well, I might be interesting in helping, but, like 99.99999% of the world, IPA is gibberish to me. I will not support its addition in any form, and yet for some reason you require it for a spoken pronunciation. Why is that? Is there another similar project with a less political purpose that I could help? Gigs (talk) 17:53, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

IPA is the standard in linguistics because it is scientific, complete (enough), and far less embroiled in parochialism. It is very good that WP uses the IPA and the standard is being increasingly adopted by dictionaries. -Craig Pemberton 00:25, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The hover tips provided by {{IPAc-en}} (which describe the pronunciation of each symbol), along with the audio pronunciations produced by the people here, do an excellent job of overcoming the limitations of IPA. Dcoetzee 11:56, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Request for plain pronunciation

I'm just looking for a page that gives a template to request a plain-old text pronunciation, but all I can seem to find is this page. If such a thing exists, could someone put a link in the see also section? If it does not, could someone make note of that fact near the top of this page? Regards -Craig Pemberton 00:25, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Plain-text pronunciations are permitted according to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Pronunciation#Other_transcription_systems but only in addition to IPA pronunciations. Currently there is no way I am aware of to request a plain-text pronunciation, nor any consistent system for producing them. Dcoetzee 11:56, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

To update, the WP:MOS currently has Template:Respell (REE-spehl) for use as a secondary transcription to Template:IPAc-en (In my head: /ˌaɪˌpiːˌeɪˌsiːˈɪŋ/) if requested in an article. There is also Template:USdict (US dict: yū·ĕs·dĭkt), but as the name implies the symbols are only really used in U.S. and Canadian dictionaries and elementary schools.

Note to the prior comment thread btw that most IPA standards are readily readable by almost every Latin-transcribed language in the world except English (due to its Great Vowel Shift, which inconveniently occurred after its first mass literary printings and without a subsequent spelling reform that e.g. Spanish enforced). For starters, you know even a small amount of any other European language then IPA shouldn't scare you. Many of their "special" symbols (e.g. "ɔ,ɤ,ǂ,ǁ,ɵ") are now used in many modern Latin transcription systems of indigenous and non-IE languages that replace several sloppy or careless 19th-century attempts made by European industrialists. SamuelRiv (talk) 16:11, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Partnership with Google to use their pronunciation audio

Google already scrapes Wikipedia for data to display in its sidebar (example). Ostensibly, they asked permission to do this and/or are using it under the license terms. Surely Wikipedia can do the same with the audio pronunciation widget that Google includes in the dictionary boxes of their definition pages (example)—which for the record is superior to Wikipedia’s audio widgets because it does not require changing the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Synetech (talk • contribs) 14:02, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

A better audio player is needed

Currently, when we add an audio file, it uses TimedMediaHandler, which adds a huge player interface. This is useless for pronunciations.
So instead, the Audio template is used, which just adds a link to the direct file. It's better, but not user friendly at all. And it's really annoying when there are multiple pronunciations, like on Esperanto#Simple_phrases.

SoundManager2Button seems nice, why not improve it slightly - add the .ogg (and other formats) support already included by the project - and use it on Wikimedia? The RedBurn (ϕ) 10:44, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Forvo

Just a suggestion, couldn't we make use of the pronunciations in Forvo? Forvo provides the pronunciations with CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 license.--Joseph 12:50, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Last week I had the same idea and found your post today! 🙂 Unfortunately, I think Wikimedia Commons requires files with CC BY-SA 3.0 (without NC restrictions) license.-- Saung Tadashi (talk) 02:13, 11 January 2019 (UTC)