User:Kdirr2023/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Mixotroph

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose to evaluate this article because I enjoy studying zooplankton, and many marine microzooplankton are mixotrophs. This article is valuable beyond my simple interest in the topic, as this classification encompasses many different families of organisms and would be of interest to biologists and ecologists across numerous fields. Many species of plants, animals, and microorganisms are mixotrophs, and this lifestyle/energy strategy shapes many aspects of their morphology and behavior. My preliminary impression of this article was that it was clearly written and contained many citations and links, giving the impression that it was well supported and researched.

Evaluate the article
The lead is well composed, with a strong introductory sentence defining the term mixotroph broadly. The paragraph then transitions to setup more specific types of mixotrophy and mixotrophs that will be discussed in further detail later in the Wikipedia article. This section is fairly concise and keeps the discussion to only information that will be covered in the article itself. The article has 20 citations, and most of these sources, if not all, have been published in peer-reviewed journals in the last twenty years. The content of the article is overall examples and summary, so the information provided is missing some information that can be filled in easily by following the contained links to more specific articles. The article doesn't deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps, however, it holds value as an article in the fact that it centralizes and ties together many different articles related to the broad topic of mixotrophy. The article is neutral and does not express opinions or attempt to persuade, maintaining a professional tone. It is also well organized, leading with an overview, transitioning into a descriptive list of mixotrophy types, and then outlining the major groups of organisms that contain mixotrophic species. These sections also contain images with detailed descriptions and proper citations. These images are not only pictures of organisms; numerous charts breaking down mixotroph classifications and detailing feeding pathways are also included. The only edit mentioned on the Talk page is removing "micro-" from micro-organism in the original mixotroph definition because over half of the examples used and mixotrophs discussed in more detail were multicellular, eukaryotic organisms. It seemed to be a mistake by the author and the edit was not controversial. The article is rated as C-Class, and this is likely due to some missing information that the article appears to seek through linking other related articles. It may also be a result of a few earlier sources used that need updating. Overall, the article was well-written and contained many reputable sources, but needs a little more attention to clean it up and fill in gaps without relying upon other authors.

~