This is a set of alternate ‘spelling systems’ for the English language, and the basis of my own romanization systems.

Note: This article is old and there is a high chance I’ll rework it at some point. I believe that E7 is quite useful (to me and otherwise) but that it’s a bit weird. It’s possible a completely separate article will be made with the new name instead.
I’ll add that I don’t know what the 7 is supposed to be. I picked the name completely by random, so it seems I was thinking of the number 7 at the time.
One of the primary uses of English-7 – which may or may not appear on this wiki – is that it can be used to differentiate regular definitions of words from my weird personal definitions, thus helping preserve clarity. IE, the difference in meaning between conscript and conscript (cùnskript) might be significant enough that a new spelling may be useful for it.
The other primary use of E7, which is partially visible on some pages, is to help clarify pronunciation of certain words. Although the IPA may be seen as more useful in this regard…I don’t think so. This is because the IPA is much harder to write (and thus there’s a much higher chance I’ll just stop doing it) and because E7 is focused on English pronunciation. So…the approximate pronunciation of a foreign word in English is best represented with E7. I think. I hope.

Second Note: The above-mentioned rework is likely to coincide with me finishing the Tengwar article.

Third Note: One other reason for the rework is that I don’t really agree with myself anymore on a few points. I do think that I went about a more phonemic English spelling correctly…I just disagree on how some things are represented. For example, while I like the diaeresis (◌̈) as a diacritic…I’m not sure the use I chose for it is the smartest (for marking diphthongs). I do use it for that in my other constructed languages, but it’s something I’m possibly going to abandon. Though what I’d use the diaeresis for otherwise I don’t know.

Fourth Note: I had the idea of using E7 more regularly, but that may have to wait until I rework it. For example, since I’ve started spelling ‘through’ as ‘thru’, I realized it could be written as ‘thrú’ instead…since that’s more correct per my own rules.

A long time ago, I had started working on a personal project. The project’s goal was to recreate the English language from scratch, so I could learn to understand it better, among other reasons. This project…was very very stupid…so I abandoned it soon afterwards.
However, I had created an alternative spelling system during this project. It was intended to be more phonetic and regular. Interestingly, while the personal project was abandoned, I continued to work on the spelling systems. This is what I’m sharing here.
The project was called ‘English-7’ and since this is a completely different thing now, I plan to rename it at some point…but it’s alright for now.

These are the tables for the consonants and vowels in the English language, represented using the IPA. While I think it is accurate, I can’t be sure.
The following sections explain the use of particular letters in more detail.

Here things get a bit complicated, as I’ve created several different spelling systems. Unfortunately, due to my general incompetence, I don’t know if there are 2 or 3.
The reasons behind creating multiple systems will become more clear.

This is a purely phonemic system.
I’ve forgotten why I originally created it, but it eventually settled into a way to write words out phonetically, without relying on the IPA (which doesn’t look very good).
The other system(s) rely on this one, and I use it as a kind of ‘standard’ romanization for my conlangs (WIP).

I variously made use of a few alternate letters, especially for the digraphs. However, the letters I tried using didn’t look all that great.
I’ve become aware that there’s a bit of a problem in representing the vowels /ʊ/ and /ʌ/. I will attempt to fix this at some point. I believe I have fixed it.

This was initially 2 separate systems that I ended up merging. This was because both ended up having the same result most of the time.
The Regular system is more complex than the P/A, this is mostly for æsthetic reasons.
As far as I can tell, the system is usable but still incomplete. ‘Incomplete’ meaning ‘not ideal.’

Unless a rule here directly contradicts a previously established rule, you should assume that the rules of P/A apply.

This might be the last system. It is even less complete than R. This one is meant to resemble English as closely as possible, while still being somewhat ‘regular.'
The rules are effectively the same as R, but additional rules are added to remove diacritics and stuff for æsthetics.
As it’s incomplete, I don’t believe it can actually be comfortably used.

• It should be kept in mind that I’m not a professional linguist. Most of my knowledge comes from a combination of disconnected sources.