Template talk:IPA

CSS selectors for language's normal writing system but not IPA

I don't know how I hadn't noticed this yet in more than a year, but the -Latn-fonipa-suffixed lang attribute in this template is causing me problems when I've applied a CSS rule to language-tagged text. I get Hebrew-script-appropriate fonts applied to a Hebrew IPA transcription in Gal Gadot because I use the selector :lang(he) in my personal stylesheet that captures lang="he-Latn-fonipa as well as lang="he". :lang(he-Hebr) doesn't capture lang="he-Latn-fonipa, but it also doesn't capture lang="he". I guess :lang(he):not(:lang(he-Latn)) or :lang("*-Latn") { /* set font-family and other styles to default here */ } might work, but I don't have the time to try right now. Any other solutions to avoid selecting IPA text when trying to style a language's normal writing system? — Eru·tuon 10:51, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

@Erutuon: :lang(he):not(:lang(\*-Latn)). Hope I'm not too late! Nardog (talk) 15:11, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, that works. Firefox automatically converts :lang("*-Latn") to :lang(\*-Latn). — Eru·tuon 16:30, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

Turn off links, broken?

Is there a way to turn off links to the language explanation page? I thought link=no would do it, but it does nothing. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 05:36, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

As explained in the documentation, |link= concerns the linking of the language label in the guide-linking mode. Sounds like what you're looking for is the basic mode. See the first section of the documentation. Nardog (talk) 10:41, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

[1]

Feel like it should be made possible to disable the link in this template. I don't get why that doesn't seem to be an option; such linking features are standard in many other templates. I know you're suggesting the infobox be changed. I'm not necessarily opposed to that, but I don't see why linking should be mandatory for IPa. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 08:32, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

See MOS:PRON for why. The linking signals us that the conventions laid out in the linked key underlie the transcription, and we don't turn off the link just because they're repeated (which you may propose we do, but it would be a huge burden on editors to maintain it when transcriptions are removed, moved around, etc.). Nardog (talk) 08:45, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

but it would be a huge burden on editors to maintain it when transcriptions are removed, moved around, etc. I don't really think this explains why the option to remove the link should be completely denied. I think it does possibly functionally violate MOS:REPEATLINK to have these links display every single time. Links being able to be disabled is, again, very standard for other similar templates.

Even if we don't try to enforce that users disable repeat IPA links, we should at least give them the option to be able to do so. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 08:51, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

If no approval here, may move to an RFC and based off that potentially submit edit req grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 20:22, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm not saying I disagree with you, but just to explain the existing situation: We repeat links to keys in transcriptions because they are in a way specially sanctioned WP:EGG links. DUPLINK says to avoid repeating links to articles because (per EGG) it should be obvious from the text where they lead (or would if linked). The links to keys are cross-namespace and aren't obvious. Nardog (talk) 04:00, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

I could maybe see an argument for that, but I can also envision fair arguments where editors may feel a reader [edit:] would be able to pronounce a bit of IPA without wouldn't benefit from a repeated key. For example maybe in a linguistics article that implicitly assumes basic competence in IPA. I think there's probably more examples too. I'm sure that hypothetical I gave is debatable, but my point is that it is debatable; in case a discussion concludes a link being repeated is not needed I'd rather the option be available to disable the link. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 04:28, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Another example: if there's a listing of with multiple different valid IPA pronunciations for a word, like Word, ipa1, ipa2, ipa3, ipa4, and it's obvious those IPAs are from the same language, is it really helpful to have all 4 ipas link to the same page right next to each other?

Again, regardless of what position you take, there are likely fair arguments on both sides, which to me suggests we should have an option to disable links just in case. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 21:48, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

if there's a listing of with multiple different valid IPA pronunciations for a word, like Word, ipa1, ipa2, ipa3, ipa4

If they're inline like this, you can put them all in the same template:

Word [ipa1, ipa2, ipa3, ipa4]

As opposed to

Word [ipa1], [ipa2], [ipa3], [ipa4]

Of course, this wouldn't work in the case of, say, a bulleted list, e.g.

Word

• [ipa1]
• [ipa2]
• [ipa3]
• [ipa4]

However, the end result is that each transcription is linked, so same difference IMHO.

— W.andrea (talk) 22:33, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Also consider tables with separate cells. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 01:03, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Should I start an RFC or maybe a 3O? I'd like to get this resolved so can format articles accordingly grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 22:50, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 20 June 2025

I wanted to request the addition of other codes for the Quechua category, as more specification is needed. For now, the codes for quz (Cuzco Quechua), quy (Ayacucho Quechua), qwc (Classical Quechua), qwh (Huaylas Quechua), as well as qu-ancash for Ancash Quechua, qu-wanka for Wanka Quechua and qu-sbolivia for South Bolivian Quechua would suffice. Thanks very much in advance :) SantiChau23 (talk) 10:39, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 20 June 2025 b

i have permission to edit but no longer know which submodule defines our fonts

the Gentium fonts have been merged - could we list plain 'Gentium' first nd 'Gentium plus' etc after that? — kwami (talk) 02:47, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. No fonts are defined for the IPA class on this wiki. Nardog (talk) 03:14, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

i can't do that without knowing what the code is, and i can't know that without knowing where the code is

from the behavior of our IPA templates, it would appear that support has not kept up with the gentium update

if the IPA class doesn't select fonts, what does it do — kwami (talk) 03:27, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

You can just not use {{edit template-protected}}.

It allows users to select fonts for IPA. This wiki hasn't set a font stack for the class for almost a decade. Nardog (talk) 02:14, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

RfC: add option to disable link to IPA help page?

This template, {{IPA}}, currently does not have an option to disable links to relevant IPA help pages. For example, {{IPA|fr|asdf|}} → [asdf]. The link goes to Help:IPA/French and the link cannot be disabled. Should there be an option to disable such links?

For context, see this thread above. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 21:34, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

@Nardog: Pinging other party to orig convo just in case. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 21:43, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Effectively, the way to disable the link is just don't specify the language: {{IPA|[asdf]}} → [asdf]. You do have to add square brackets though. This is called basic mode. Nardog already mentioned this in the linked thread:

Sounds like what you're looking for is the basic mode. See the first section of the documentation.

— W.andrea (talk) 22:26, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

I tried doing that for Korean text after Nardog said that, and Nardog undid it and said that the template lang label does more than just produce the label grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 00:07, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

I think Nardog was saying that instead you should remove the IPA link from the infobox itself ({{Infobox Korean name/auto}} in {{Infobox officeholder}}). Personally, I'd change it from Help:IPA/Korean to International Phonetic Alphabet and clarify the docs to say to always use {{IPA|ko|transcription}}. That said, I'm not very familiar with infobox templates. — W.andrea (talk) 00:44, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Right, I saw that suggestion. My concern is not necessarily directly tied to that infobox, it's a general concern.

And either way, por que no los dos? We can both add an option and do this to the infobox (although I disagree that the infobox change you proposed is that necessary) grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 01:23, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

por que no los dos?

Because you can just use basic mode. There's no need to make the template more complicated. — W.andrea (talk) 01:59, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

@Nardog do you have fuller explanation for what specifying lang tag does above basic mode? grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 02:17, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

It adds a language-specific category and generates the label from a list of predefined options, among other things. It's all in the documentation. Nardog (talk) 12:06, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose. The linking is required by MOS:PRON so it's not up to a template talk to decide. But even if that was overturned and DUPLINK was to be applied to transcriptions, it is difficult to see it would be administered correctly as transcriptions are added, removed, or moved around. Nardog (talk) 12:04, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

diacritic error

recently the combining retroflex/right hook diacritic has started displaying as a palatal/left hook, e.g. in the infobox at Voiced retroflex lateral flap. i thought this might be my setup, but my browser displays the IPA template in Gentium font, and Gentium doesn't have this error. — kwami (talk) 22:42, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Bug on mobile

See the first note here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luiz_In%C3%A1cio_Lula_da_Silva, on mobile. We can't see the 🔈 symbol. ~2025-37360-60 (talk) 01:30, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Phonemic vs. phonetic transcription

I'm not sure I did the right thing. I've made this edit but I was forced to switch form a phonemic transcription to a phonetic one, since there's no way to link to IPA for German with slashes.-- Carnby (talk) 17:07, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

The key is phonetic, not phonemic, so you of course were. Nardog (talk) 04:10, 29 April 2026 (UTC)