User talk:206.12.192.24/sandbox

The article titled Prochlorococcus is an interesting and informative article, well written and to the point. The article is about the Cyanobacteria called Prochlorococcus which is by far the most abundant microorganism in the oceans by number. Prochlorococcus is a bacterium that is photosynthetic and extremely productive. Prochlorococcus is highly notable topic and is an important organism in the field of marine research. The Wikipedia article does begin to capture the essence of the organism and its importance, however the article can be improved upon with a few more details. Such as the Ecology section of the article, it doesn’t contain much information and has a sentence that doesn’t need to be there. The sentence “P. ubique is one of the ocean's most abundant microbes dominates the microbial loop” seems unnecessary and the organism P. ubique isn’t mentioned anywhere else in the article and there is no definite connection made between the topic and this particular species. Also, the citation for the above-mentioned sentence isn’t a reliable source, the citation/reference linked is to a radio website called ‘npr’. The section of Ecology can be improved upon by stating and citing actual data and information of the ecology of Prochlorococcus. The information in the article about the role the organism has in carbon sequestration can be expanded upon and properly cited. More information about the roles Prochlorococcus plays within a microbial community, the global climate and oxygen cycles can be put in to tie in all the information for the ecology of this organism. Furthermore, the entire article can be made more understandable with various frames of references such as graphs and world maps showing the distribution and relative abundance of the organism, and also a few pictures or electron micrographs that show and explain the structure and morphology of the Prochlorococcus. The talk page for this article has conversations about some false information about Prochlorococcus being responsible for 50 % of the global oxygen. Instead of the removing this information from the article the writer can correct it and provide the right information (if it exists).

Raaghul1698 (talk) 23:49, 27 September 2017 (UTC)