User talk:Hkope

Welcome!

Hello, Hkope, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Josh Milburn (talk) 17:10, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Didymascella thujina

Hi Hkope! Welcome to Wikipedia- it's always great to have an expert contributing. The article's looking very good; with a bit of shaping so that it matches up with Wikipedia's various style expectations (and I'm happy to do that) I think we could look towards a nomination at good article candidates, potentially leading on to featured article candidates, if you're interested. I'm gradually working my way through the article and making fixes as I go; you can see my progress over at User:J Milburn/sandbox. Basically, I'm tweaking the text so that it matches up with the usual level of detail included in Wikipedia articles, adjusting the formatting, introducing wikilinks and putting the references into footnotes. Do let me know if there's anything I can help with. Josh Milburn (talk) 01:28, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've finished what I was doing now; feel free to take a look at the article and see what you think. I'll have a think about what the next step might be for the article, and contact some other editors who may be interested in taking a look. I have two questions; first, I referenced the line "in younger (<4 years of age) western red cedar trees that growth and yield can be affected by cedar leaf blight" to Kope and Trotter 1998b; you had referenced it to Burdekin 1969, which I can only assume was a mistake. If I've gone wrong here, please let me know. Second, I wouldn't change your reference formatting without permission, but, on Wikipedia, we generally italicise journal and book names. Would you object to do me making this change to the article? (Again- if I can be any help as you learn to navigate Wikipedia, please do let me know.) Josh Milburn (talk) 02:29, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Josh, first, thank you for your kind compliments on the article, this disease is one of my favourites. Also, thank you for the tweaking and other changes that brings the article into the various style expectations of Wikipedia.

A question - Within the article there are numerous words or statements that could be linked to other article in Wikipedia, i.e., growing degree day, etc. Should this be done or would it end up with too many links in the article?

The change that you made by referencing Kope and Trotter 1998b for the '< 4 years of age' statement is correct one. Thank you.

I wasn`t sure what the format was for journals and book, or if abbreviations were used for journal titles, so I left the long titles in place, therby thinking it would make it easier for others to search out the original articles. If you do change the references to italics, that will be fine by me.

And finally, I`m flattered that you think the article could merit a `good` article and-or a featured` article. I`d be pleased with either designation. And if I can do anything to help, please let me know. Hkope (talk) 18:34, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Harry[reply]

Oh dear! I`ve made a change that I can't correct. Reference 76 shouldn`t be, not sure what I did to make this appear! And thus there should only be 76 total references.

Also, references 54 and 74 are exactly the same. Reference 74 can be removed and where it occurs in the article it should be linked to reference 54.Hkope (talk) 19:17, 6 September 2016 (UTC)harry[reply]