Talk:contêm

@Sarilho1 Hi there. If you encounter a problem with the pronunciation generated by {{pt-IPA}}, it's really not a good idea to disable it and add in manual pronunciation like you did. Instead, please ping me so I can fix the module, which will fix it in all places used by {{pt-IPA}}. In this case, what was the issue? The module generates identical EP pronunciation to the manual stuff you added, the only difference I can see being that it also adds Central and Southern Portugal pronunciations (which maybe are wrong, but in that case, the correct thing to do is fix those pronuns or disable them using |style=br,gpt or by specifying |gpt=+). Benwing2 (talk) 05:51, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Benwing2 I remove it because the automatic pronunciation is generating nasal diphthongs for European Portuguese dialects which I can't find any source for. Similarly, I removed the module in cases where it continues to return in European Portuguese phonetic transcriptions (e.g.: vermelho). I don't see why it's a bad idea to disable it in cases it it's working unproperly or is not sufficient, though. In fact, assuming the module should be the only way to add pronunciation is actually the bad idea here. That's too restrictive and can lead to propagation of errors. - Sarilho1 (talk) 09:48, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Sarilho1 The problem with adding more and more manual pronunciations is that they're inevitably inconsistent with each other and full of mistakes. This was exactly what happened before with the manually-added pronunciations for Portuguese. We should avoid manual pronuns as much as possible; that doesn't mean never use them, but only in exceptional circumstances, and whenever you have something that repeats in several places, that should be handled by the module. For example, there are several words ending in '-êm' and you've gone and added the same manual pronun to each one (which is error-prone) when we could just remove the particular styles (non-General EP) that we don't have sources for. Also, once again whenever you find such an issue, please ping me; otherwise there's no way I can correct mistakes in the module except by finding out these changes randomly, since I don't stalk your changes. Also what is the issue with vermelho? Again whatever the issue is here, there are several such similar words and it is better to fix the module than hack around it; just disabling the EP pronunciation entirely is a bit like using a hacksaw when a scalpel is called for. Benwing2 (talk) 10:09, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Benwing2 I personally find it better to disable the EP pronunciation entirely when it's faulty than to fine-tune the parameters to correct it (like write contém as contãe). My main problem with the module is that the rules that it is following are not clear to the community. We have Appendix:Portuguese pronunciation but the module often ignores it. I concede that the page is outdated, but I've tried to update it, remove contradictions, and include sources to make sure that it can at least serve as standard for pronunciations, phonemic and phonetic, that the community can consult and/or dispute, instead of having individual users ping you and wait for you to make the decisions. The problem with vermelho is one of those: it returns the phonetic transcription IPA^(key): , but it's not clear why it uses when it is not used for any other EP diphthong. - Sarilho1 (talk) 11:28, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply