As mentioned on the Discord server when this idea was thrown around there, and as mentioned in the recent comment made, pronunciation should not be at the very bottom of entries as that's one of the main reasons why people consult an online dictionary, especially for English. Almost all other major English dictionaries that track pronunciation put it at the very top, and if we're aiming for aligning ourselves with them, then we should do the same. It doesn't have to be the same way that it's been done to this point; there are options like the way that fr.wikt places it, where it's in the headword line, as seen here: bonjour. However, putting it at the bottom, especially after Descendants and Translations seems rather counterintuitive to me, if "Pronunciation is prioritized over Etymology because it is more useful to the average user." Also, it needs to be addressed how entries where there's an overarching pronunciation section for multiple etymologies/entries would be handled, as under the proposed rule, they'd either come at the very bottom under everything or there'd be significant repetition. The Production section for Sign Language entries should also be mentioned. Overall though, this vote seemed more directed towards moving the placement of the etymology section, so not exactly sure why pronunciation was moved as well without that much discussion. AG202 (talk) 19:45, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Comment In this proposal, Etymology and Pronunciation are after Translations. To my knowledge, this policy would put Wiktionary at variance with all other English dictionaries, because 'Pronunciation' always comes first. Comparison: See “Klingon, n.”, in Lexico, Dictionary.com; Oxford University Press, 2019–2022.. In this Oxford dictionary entry, 'Pronunciation' is directly below the title of the entry and the definitions are after that, followed by an 'Origin' section. I would say that if anything in Wiktionary were to be moved, it would be the 'Etymology' section, but I wouldn't put it below 'Translations' since 'Etymology' is more closely related to the subject of the actual entry than any translations of a term would be. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 18:23, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Would you propose a "Pronunciation 1/2/3" system? Queenofnortheast (talk) 17:19, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
@Ultimateria i think Alternative forms should be added to Derived terms, Related terms, Descendants, and Translations sections will become level 3 headers, in case a word with alternative form(s) has more than 2 parts of speech. eg. hindi word सांवादिक whiche is both noun and adjective can be written as साम्वादिक also — Svārtava • 16:08, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
Just repeating a point I've made elsewhere: every other major dictionary (print or online) packs its definitions into paragraphs, which save space and work well on small mobile phones etc. This vote discusses the juggling of headers, and each header still takes an entire line (big waste of space). In the longer term we need to discuss not having headers that eat up a full line each. Obviously that will have major ramifications on link anchors, collapsible citations, etc. and won't be easy, but I think it has to be addressed... Equinox ◑ 20:06, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
I see that, in the provided mockup, sections such as ‘Derived terms’ and ‘Translations’ are subordinate to the ‘Etymology’ section — not just occurring after it, but being deeper by one header level. Is this intentional? I would guess not from the description of changes given on the vote page itself, but if it is, is there some reason to prefer doing it that way? — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 04:43, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Since nobody can agree on this stuff: perhaps we should focus on APIs, and encourage casual developers to create their own "formatters" that could present entry data in different ways. And then: survival of the fittest. Equinox ◑ 21:53, 27 August 2021 (UTC)