Talk:Chronic pulmonary aspergillosis

Fungi Low‑importance

	Fungi portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fungi, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fungi on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FungiWikipedia:WikiProject FungiTemplate:WikiProject FungiFungi articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted because... --GTAtherton (talk) 16:37, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the required note at the bottom of the originating page - I am the copyright holder http://www.aspergillus.org.uk/aspergillomaframeset.html

GTAtherton (talk) 16:37, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article was written by staff at the National Aspergillosis Centre (www.nationalaspergillosiscentre.org) and covers a major area of it's specialisation. The medical area's of the Aspergillus Website (www.aspergillus.org.uk) are also written by staff members who specialise in this field, including several of those used as references on the aspergillosis page. eg Prof Denning, Dr Paul Bowyer and we work closely with most of the other mentioned authors.

The aspergillosis article is good but is brief and needs expanding - we are in an excellent position to do that so will look at improving aspergillosis and improving separate pages on CPA, ABPA, SAFS. CPA & SAFS are relatively new descriptions of conditions which we strongly support so I feel they need to be included. It will be interesting to see what others may contribute.

The aspergillus website is the major resource on some of these subjects so linking out to some of its pages is appropriate, not least for the extensive patients support facilities we provide free of charge - this is a great way for very sick people to find us.

Thanks

Dr G Atherton — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.2.151.215 (talk) 09:41, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

gvhf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.178.62.31 (talk) 13:56, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Chronic pulmonary aspergillosis. 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:

Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.aspergillus.org.uk/aspergillosis.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110904131628/http://www.aspergillus.org.uk/abpa.htm to http://www.aspergillus.org.uk/abpa.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110904131655/http://www.aspergillus.org.uk/aspergilloma.htm to http://www.aspergillus.org.uk/aspergilloma.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110702022015/http://www.aspergillus.org.uk/safs.htm to http://www.aspergillus.org.uk/safs.htm

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) 23:43, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Major revision

Looking to revamp this article in light of the required changes, and with respect to new review articles on the topic. Current status seems to have this article as poorly sourced, but the core sources are review articles by key figures in the field. I am happy to build around them, alongside new articles (e.g. the UpToDate published in April this year - by Denning DW). Any help much appreciated. --—Cyclonenim | Chat 16:14, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]