User:Seabuntin/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Mesophile

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it relates to a topic we learned about in Microbiology class. This article is important because it describes a class of microbes that grow in moderate temperatures, which is where most humans will be spending time. Thus, mesophiles are an important class of microbes with great relevance to humans. My preliminary impression of it is that is it relatively brief overall and lacks in-depth detail.

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.)

The lead section does define the topic and provide a concise overview, and there is an introductory sentence that provides a concise description of mesophiles. The lead includes a brief description for most but not all of the article's major sections. The lead is very concise. Most of the content in the article is relevant, but some sentences focus on thermophiles rather than mesophiles. The habitat section is too brief and only mentions two specific habitats of mesophiles when there are likely many more. The article appears to be neutral and unbiased--however, the statement "the most evident explanation" could be construed as a slight bias. The links seem to work, and most of the facts are backed up by sources--however, there are no citations in the habitat section. Most of the sources are current, but there is a source from before 2000. The article is concise and easy to read. The article does not include any images that enhance understanding. There is very little discussion regarding the article on the Talk page, and its status is Start. The strengths of the article are that it is brief, concise, and easy to read, but the article is underdeveloped and could use more robust citations and additional relevant information.