[[monddood]]

Fragment of a discussion from User talk:Rua

I'm not changing anything, I'm making it consistent. By having the pronunciation in the same position whether there is one etymology section or many. To do it any other way would be inconsistent.

CodeCat17:20, 4 August 2016

You're making the new entries inconsistent with the millions of existing entries that do it the other way.

BTW if there are multiple etymologies with different pronunciations, the pronunciation has to go under the etymology in any case, so it's not like you can always have the pronunciation first.

Benwing2 (talk)18:07, 4 August 2016

I already mentioned that above. But there's a big difference: nesting. In the case here, there is just one pronunciation for the whole entry, and I am arguing that it should be located above the etymology in all cases where it applies to the whole entry, just like we already do with Alternative forms.

CodeCat18:10, 4 August 2016

FWIW, what CodeCat describes here is what we do for certain Japanese entries, such as せんし (senshi, with multiple pronunciations) or せいたん (seitan, with just one pronunciation for all terms with this reading). I know there are examples too where we have a top-level Pronunciation that applies to multiple terms with distinct and explicit Etymology sections (as opposed to implicit etymologies for the two examples here), but I cannot think of any at the moment.

‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig19:29, 4 August 2016
 

You haven't responded at all to the most basic issue: That you're making your new entries inconsistent with all the existing entries. Imagine if everyone decided to do things their own way, the way you've done it; how much would you like that?

Benwing2 (talk)23:24, 4 August 2016