User:Mic Goodwill/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Burkholderia - Wikipedia

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it is a bacteria type that looked interesting. This bacteria matters because it causes deadly diseases in horses and some worry that it could potentially be modified into a biological weapon. I thought this article was interesting, but a lot of information was packed into the lead section and the rest of the article did not relate to the lead section in any way.

Evaluate the article
Lead: Beginning with the lead section, the beginning had a lot of interesting information, and I understood a lot about the significance on the topic due to how it was written. However, maybe due to the total length of the article, the lead section did not really relate to the major sections of the article presented afterwards. I think overall the lead section is overly detailed, where some of the information could be included in a separate section other than the lead.

Content: The content section looks great! The content is up-to-date (as far as I know) and it all seemed like relevant information.

Tone: It's very difficult to bias a microbiology topic, and the wiki-author seemed to not put a bias and remained neutral in tone.

Sources: As for sources, one uncited section did worry me. The wiki-author states "Due to their antibiotic resistance and the high mortality rate from their associated diseases, B. mallei and B. pseudomallei are considered to be potential biological warfare agents, targeting livestock and humans." They did link the articles about these bacteria, but I found it unnecessary to include in the lead section if this was the case. Maybe have a section of "Notable species of Burkholderia" instead and cite sources there? The links work.

Organization: Writing style was fine, and the organization seemed to follow formats similar to other bacterial species.

Images: The image chosen appears to be of the most relevant species of this bacteria, so I think it was a good choice. it follows wikipedia's rules.

Talk Page: No talking on the talks pages, and it is part of the Wikipedia Microbiology Project.

Impressions: Overall, I think this was a well-developed article. It has well-organized information that all seems relevant. However, I believe making the lead section more concise would be helpful, and especially outlining the most heavily researched Burkholderia bacteria would benefit this article.