Voting on: Removing SAMPA and X-SAMPA pronunciation markup from the wikitext of Pronunciation sections. Thus, deleting Template:X-SAMPA, and modifying WT:ELE accordingly, so that entering SAMPA or X-SAMPA into the wikitext of Pronunciation sections shall no longer be allowed. Producing SAMPA or X-SAMPA markup for the reader to see automatically from the IPA markup present in wikitext, such as using a template, shall still be allowed.
Rationale: there is no visible demand for SAMPA and X-SAMPA transcriptions. Since these transcriptions are equivalent to and easily derived from IPA transcriptions, they are effectively superfluous in entries. The voters only vote on the proposed action, not on the rationale.
Supportif either (i) we can somehow confirm that nobody (statistically significant) wants to see SAMPA at all, or (ii) we introduce a process/mechanism that will automatically produce the SAMPA from the IPA (possibly requiring a further click?). I do think IPA should be the primary one, and we should not store SAMPA in a separate, unsynchronised way. Equinox◑ 18:19, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
One can’t prove a negative. But no one is asking for SAMPA or using it. I have found only one arguable request in the history of Wiktionary, but I don’t think the requestor actually meant SAMPA. There is no demand for (X-)SAMPA. —MichaelZ. 2013-10-27 18:39 z
Support I hate SAMPA's guts. --Vahag (talk) 18:21, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Support per Vahag. --WikiTiki89 19:14, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Support No one wants this. —MichaelZ. 2013-10-27 18:40 z
Support. It is possible to automatically create X-SAMPA from IPA with Lua (Module:IPA), but there is no reason to do so as no one seems to need it. In the rare occasion that a user would actually want X-SAMPA, there is a gadget for that somewhere (see fr:MediaWiki:Gadget-APIversXSAMPA.js). Dakdada (talk) 10:35, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Of course. That is exactly what gadgets are for :) Dakdada (talk) 12:22, 28 October 2013 (UTC)