User:70.79.152.100/sandbox

Assignment 1

After analyzing the Wikipedia page on heterotrophs I found all references that are included to be appropriate. That being said the portion of the Wikipedia article outlining the definition of a chemoautotroph or a photoautotroph should be cited. The material in the article is relevant to the article topic and there is no information that I thought did not belong in a Wikipedia article. Due to it being difficult to have a position on heterotrophy there were no claims or statements that were biased towards any certain position as the majority of the page is made up of definition. There are no points that are over-represented but I do find that due to the lack of organization in the page some topics feel as though they are under-represented. I would have designed the page to have the definition of heterotrophs at the start along with the history of the term, then outline the difference between heterotrophy and autotrophy, then I would outline the difference between photo and chemical heterotrophy. There are some definitions that need to be clarified and held consistent throughout the entire article, specifically that heterotrophy and autotrophy outline where the organism receives its carbon from, while "chemo" or photo" outlines where the organism receives energy to complete cellular processes from. There are conversations started on the talk page, one that I focused on was the conversation regarding the flow chart on the page it is not a good resource and is inaccurate.

245 words

~

Assignment 2

For my Wikipedia article, I am choosing the obligate aerobe page. I choose this page as the information regarding cellular respiration, oxidative stress is limited and the ecological role of obligate aerobes is completely absent. The citations in the article are satisfactory, but ideally the main definition of an obligate aerobe should not be from an online database but rather from an introductory text. The citations include the relevant hyperlinks, but more citations regarding an obligate aerobes role in ecosystems could be used. That being said, there is a missing citation for the figure provided in the text. There is no evident bias, as it is difficult to express a position on a page regarding a definition. The absence of a section speaking on the ecological role of obligate aerobes is what I would like to focus on for my edits. I would like to add a piece speaking on the most abundant obligate aerobe, cyanobacteria and their role in the world’s ecosystem. In addition to writing on cyanobacteria, I would like to outline the diversity that makes up the obligate aerobe group, ranging from cyanobacteria to plants and finally humans themselves. There are existing examples on the page as it lists a few aerobic bacteria and that yeasts, fungi and algae are obligate aerobes but there is no information on the interaction between all of those group and no focus on the diversity in the group. The absence of organization in the article is also an area of concern. I would aim to take the existing single paragraph and divide it into obligate aerobes means of cellular respiration, effects of oxidative stress, their ecological role and examples of obligate aerobes. Changing the organization in this article is important as I feel that information on Wikipedia should be well organized to focus the reader’s attention on one topic beginning from being slightly vague with a definition, then increasing in detailed information finally with finishing on example organisms that make up the group.

332 words

~