Jump to content

Talk:Chichester, Pennsylvania

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

pron

[edit]

So, is it CHYE-chester or chye-CHEST-er? — kwami (talk) 07:29, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently the former, according to the editor who kept reverting the discussion tags. — kwami (talk) 00:54, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In cases of good-faith disagreement, dispute tags should be left in place, and the disagreement brought to the article talk page. So I'm restoring the dispute tags. [Actually, the page has been protected, so I haven't been able to make the edit.]

I've had a look at the arguments on Kwamikagami's talk page, and it appears that MarcusHookPa is misunderstanding Kwamikagami's concerns, and not responding to them adequately. I agree with Kwamikagami that equal primary stress on the first and second syllable is highly unlikely.

MarcusHookPa, this is not about U.S. vs. U.K. pronunciation. What is likely happening here is that your IPA transcription of the name is not an accurate reflection even of your own pronunciation of it. It would be best if we could discuss what the pronunciation actually is calmly, and then see how to transcribe it.

The Merriam-Webster gives the following pronunciations for Winchester: \ˈwin-ˌches-tər\ and \ˈwin-chəs-tər\. In IPA, these would be \ˈwɪnˌtʃɛs.tər\ and \ˈwɪn.tʃəs.tər\.

If Chichester has a broadly similar pronunciation to the most common American pronunciation of Winchester, then it will have primary stress on the first syllable and secondary stress on the second (although it's possible authorities would disagree about whether transcribing the secondary stress would be required). We are not talking about the British pronunciation of Chichester, which would be more like the second pronunciation of Winchester. Ucbear (talk) 05:10, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than a "dubious" tag, a "citation needed" tag for the pronunciation given would be a reasonable compromise between the two editors involved in the dispute here; per our standards of no original research and verifiability, it is important that information at Wikipedia be sourced and accurate. After a reasonable period of time in which editors are given a chance to find verification, unsourced statements can be removed. Since it's the weekend, I'd say four days is enough time. — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi] 05:15, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
All right, then I agree with a "citation needed" tag. Should we make a request for a protected edit? Ucbear (talk) 05:27, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the administrator who protected the page has added dispute tags following a request I made to them. Ucbear (talk) 05:33, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MarcusHookPa, is your pronunciation of Chichester essentially different from the way you say Winchester? Ucbear (talk) 05:42, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We are normally willing to accept an editor's word for the pronunciation of local place names, given how difficult it can be to verify them in print and how quickly a spurious pronunciation will generally be caught by other local editors. Marcus objected that a 'cn' tag is not required for other articles, and he's right as far as that goes; my objection was only that it appeared to contain a transcription error. As for stress marks, we don't transcribe 2ary stress the way Webster's does, where it often isn't actually stress but just a way to mark unstressed but unreduced vowels, but rather the way the OED does, where it is a redundant symbol for (normal) stress. That is, we use '2ary' stress before 1ary, but not after. — kwami (talk) 06:29, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This dispute is too trivial to keep the article protected over it. We have one editor here who is evidently trying to get his (non-expert but presumably correct) information about the local pronunciation across, but lacks the technical grasp of IPA to understand that the transcription he uses doesn't technically convey what he thinks it conveys. If I understand correctly what MarkusHookPa was trying to say on Kwami's talk page, he wants to make sure that the first syllable "Chi-" is pronounced wit /aɪ/, and the second isn't reduced to /ə/ but has a full /ɛ/ vowel ("ches-", as if pronounced as a standalone word). He seems to feel that the only way to render that second fact is by describing the syllable as stressed, giving two separate primary stress marks. Kwami is rightly pointing out that this is technically the wrong way of conveying this information. There can only be one primary stress, and that, as Markus has indeed confirmed himself, is on the first (Markus said "The stress is on the first syllable, CHI-ches-ter"). Thus, /ˈtʃaɪtʃɛstər/ appears to be the correct transcription. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:26, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise; Kwamikagami's suggested transcription is the correct transcription for the pronunciation MarcusHookPa suggests. Everyone's in agreement here! Knepflerle (talk) 11:25, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • As I noted on the ANI thread currently open on this subject, this isn't the first time that Kwamikagami has edit warred over the pronunciation of a town's name. Kwamikagami was taken to ANI previously for edit warring and misuse of admin tools. The latter not a case in this account, but edit warring is. While MarcusHookPa's actions may be bad, Kwamikagami has a history of edit warring of the pronunciation's of towns and will edit war to make sure his pronunciation is the "right" one. Clearly something needs to be done to both users. I recommend a 3RR block for both. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 09:18, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
NeutralHomer (ironic name!), I know you're on a vendetta, but restoring discussion tags against deletion is not an "edit war". Edit wars are over content, and reverting vandalism is specifically excluded from 3RR. I have also not changed the pronunciation (I wouldn't know what to change it to), merely requested that a bad transcription be clarified. Yes, I've been cleaning up the IPA. That's a good thing. If you would prefer to do it (there are only 30,000 or so articles to cover), be my guest. — kwami (talk) 16:35, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Chichester, Pennsylvania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:24, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chichester,_Pennsylvania&oldid=1200839732"