User:WolfgangMueller1/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
DNA origami

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
BC this is an important technology to me

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 is very good and meets all goals

the content is good, albeit outdated as it lacks any references beyond 2015. there are one or two minor errors, though.

while the viewpoints are mostly neutral, it can easily be seen that the authors wanted to include one or two particular papers that have little need to be present but are given a good amount of space on the article

the sources are very good and all are academic sources, mainly from nature or similar

the article is well written and organized

the article lacks figures and images and the two present pictures I would not label as the most necessary for the topic

the only thing on the talk page is a silly discussion of whether to give credit to rothemund or seeman. Rothemund is the sole inventor, although his work is based on the overall field of DNA nanotech invented by seeman. Seeman gives credit to Rothemund for the specific method in a review.

the article is, in my opinion, not complete. Its strength lies in that it is very well written, but its weakness is definitely that it lacks content. There is only an overview and applications, but several important historical inventions in the field are not mentioned. The article could be improved by an addition of a history section, as well as updated applications. I think the critical topic of limitations is also missing, especially that on buffers. It is well developed but short and out of date and is not complete