User:Mikframe/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Microbial Loop

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose this article because it was one of the topics under microbiology that I recognized from a previous course related to marine microbiology. I believe it is a prominent process necessary for the transfer of inorganic carbon and other nutrients from the

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Lead section

The lead section is concise and provides a good overview of the topic. However, the first sentence provides a description of the microbial loop in the marine setting rather that providing a broader definition of the term. This is mentioned in the talk tab. The lead section also includes information that is not in the article, such as who coined the term.

Content

The articles content is relevant to the subject.

Tone and Balance

The article is written from fairly neutral perspective.

Sources and References

There are numerous paragraphs which are not cited. The citations used are up to date (some as recent as 2020) and the links are functional. The section on land ecosystems is most thoroughly cited.

Organization and writing quality

The material is written very clearly and professionally and the sections are split up in a coherent manner.

Images and Media

The article includes images that are appropriate to the subject matter. The first image is not clearly described. It rather provides a definition of the aquatic microbial loop rather than describing the relevance of the image and it's components. Although it's relevance can be inferred.

Talk page discussion

The talk page includes a comment suggesting the lead section's uses defines the microbial loop by it's aquatic process, rather than a broader definition.

The talk page concordantly to what was discussed in class. Although one section was not signed by it's author.

The article is rated as a start-class.

Overall impression

The page provides a basic understanding of the topic. The first sentence of the lead section may mislead readers into thinking the microbial loop is a solely aquatic process.

The article is well written but lacks thorough citation.

The description of the first image could be more descriptive.