User:JonathanGao02/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
I am evaluating an article about polymerase chain reaction.

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it provides a comprehensive overview of a crucial and inseparable technique employed in biochemistry research, and it is also a technique that I commonly use in my own research internship to determine whether our mice possess a mutated version of a tumor suppressor gene that leads to intestinal tumors and ultimately, colorectal cancer. PCR, especially now with modern technology, matters because it has streamlined the process of manipulating DNA by (1) automating an otherwise lengthy process and (2) allowing researchers to generate an abundance of DNA from minuscule amounts that can be further studied, whether in geology, forensics, or medicine.

For readers that are not familiar with biochemistry techniques like PCR, this article is effective at teaching them how PCR was developed and why it is crucial. In the first three paragraphs, we learn a lot about its purpose, who invented it, what accomplishments the inventor has received, its applications, and how it works. I believe that this article provides a concise overview on the subject.

Evaluate the article
The lead section of this Wikipedia article about PCR provides readers with a general but concise overview of what this process is. In the first paragraph, we get an idea of what the process entails, what it produces, and who invented it. Furthermore, further paragraphs provide a summary of the subtopics that are mentioned in greater detail later in the article, such as the reagents involved, the chain reactions that ensue, and in what areas of science it has been applied towards. While the lead is mostly concise, it is overly detailed in the section about what happens when PCR is subject to thermocycling.

The content of the PCR article is relevant - it discusses the principles and mechanisms underlying it, how one performs it in a lab, the techniques that have evolved from it, how it has helped numerous areas of science, and even ongoing disputes about the patenting rights to Taq polymerase! The content is up-to-date; the sources used to build this article cover a broad range of time, spanning from the early 1980s to the present. Additionally, there is no content that doesn't belong, and this article does not have equity gaps nor does it make any mention of historically underrepresented populations as it is mainly focused on mechanisms, techniques, and applications of a standard benchwork technique.

The article's tone is neutral, with no claims appearing biased or nuanced. Because the article is about PCR, it is remains fairly objective overall - presenting all the information pertinent to the reaction to the reader. However, discussions of PCR and its outcomes under the "Advantages" and "Variations" sections may be less-than-ideal depending on the projects in which they were performed on and on the reviewer's interpretation of the resulting data. For instance, mention of nested PCR being "often more successful" than conventional PCR is amplifying longer DNA fragments may convince readers to believe that the former is preferable than the latter, but to confirm that, more rigorous research that seeks out to compare nested PCR to conventional PCR may be needed.

All facts presented in this article are supported with secondary sources of information that cover a span of time frames, from the 1980s to the present, and cite research from a variety of scientific journals. The links accessed are functional, with many linking out to credible sources, such as federal institutions (i.e. the NIH, US National Library of Medicine), research universities, and journals with high impact factors. There are no statements that require a citation needed, except one statement regarding the early invention of PCR by Kary Mullis needs a page reference.

There are no noticeable grammatical or spelling issues, and overall, it is sectioned off into parts that are easy to follow. The organization of the sections, however, could be better - "History" could go above "Applications" and "Variations" could go above "Advantages". Doing this will make it easier for readers to fully contextualize PCR as if this article were a series of chronological events in time.

Especially for the "Procedure" section, images enhance my understanding of PCR. Because the reaction happens at a microscopic scale, diagrams and graphics help to visualize reactions that would otherwise be difficult to understand. All images have captions that effectively describe what is happening and how they relate back to the sections they have been placed in.

In more recent years, the Talk section mainly consists of requests for clarity and suggestions for further details that could be included. For instance, the most recent entry on 4/5/2022 asks to modify a sentence to make it less ambiguous. One notable discussion was from 2006 in which users talked about who actually invented PCR, with some talking about whether or not the article should attribute Har Gobind Khorana's lab with actually being the first to invent it.

Overall, this Wikipedia article is comprehensive, organized, and well-detailed. It does an effective job at condensing over forty years of history, research, and development into a single page. For a reader who would like to learn about PCR and its usefulness, this page is a good starting point for further in-depth readings regarding that. Strong areas of the article include discussion of the steps involved, principles utilized, and variations on the reaction. However, greater effort could be placed into providing specific examples of how PCR has been an advantage for medicine and research. A thorough review of the "History" section could also be done to acknowledge other researchers who may have also played a part in the development of PCR, rather than place the entire focus on Mullis. Additionally, the article could be updated with a section for how it has been used in COVID-19 detection, as this has been a notable point in time for everyone.