Talk:Eddy de Pretto

“we generally don't link professions”
This edit by User:Ss112 removed two links in the infobox. It’s true that we don’t do it in the article text for fear of filling the text with too many links, but I don’t see it as a problem in an infobox, which is generally full of links anyway. Why link anything there? —☸ Moilleadóir ☎ 08:13, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Apologies & access dates
Apologies to User:Ss112 if my edit summary came off as excessively snarky, but it really feels a little like you’re just collecting edits. I started translating this article because it was pathetically stumpy and it’s main content wasn’t even proper English, which annoyed me. I have slightly regretted starting on it (especially since I had eye surgery on Monday) and after working for quite a bit on the last edit, really wanted to save it and go have my dinner. So yes, I breached etiquette by overwriting your edit instead of incorporating it, but I was not in the right frame of mind to do the right thing at the time.

Re: access dates. I personally have not checked all these references so it would be dishonest of me to change the dates on them. I also don’t have any particular reason to mistrust French Wikipedia editors any more than Anglophone ones. The French and English citation templates are very similar, but there are a bunch of differences between them and, being an odious enough task in itself, it seems reasonable to stick to translating those and the month names. There are bots out there that check references and update access dates, so I don’t feel like that’s essential work.

Similarly, I have generally kept/translated/checked links which I expect someone else will remove if they don’t fit in with English Wikipedia guidelines. I’d prefer to keep the red-link to Comme un boomerang though as a I have a vague plan to translate that article too. —☸ Moilleadóir ☎ 03:34, 12 April 2018 (UTC)