God, I love the Wikipedia and wish I could and will endeavor to support it much more than I currently do. This is the first time I've used the Wiktionary and you may have won me from thefreedictionary.com.
BUT could you abandon the iPA pronunciation guide system? There are so many other languages I'd rather learn than that one. How many of your readers really benefit from it. GOT to be way less than 1 percent. Time-magazine the pronunciations, or do them the way they did in [most of?] the old dictionaries. I've always hated Time, way worse written than virtually all of what I read in the Wikipedia. But I always loved their common sense way of getting pronunciation across. Yes, now you'll have to customize pronunciations guides for specific languages and maybe even dialects, like American and British. (Not for long: the Brits'll come around soon enough.) I won't be using your publications any less for failure to make this change. I love your organization and this is my way of showing it.
IPA really isn't that hard in my opinion. I'm still learning it just by reading Wiktionary entries and from other sources. It's not a language, it's a way of 'encoding'. The problem with ad-hoc systems is they're not universal, if I were to write delivery as di-liv-e-ri, an American English speaker might interpret it to a British English speaker, or to a French speaker, an Arabic speaker, and so on. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:38, 3 June 2011 (UTC)