Talk:Har Gobind Khorana

Change British India to India

Enough of this western authorship of "British India". There is only one India. Please support and maintain this change to just mention India, and not British India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Softwrite (talk • contribs) 14:27, 9 January 2018 (UTC) There is no place for your emotions, keep the facts straight, he was born in British India as opposed to independent partitions. His birth place has to go back to British India. 156.75.247.2 (talk) 16:54, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

This Wikipedia article "Presidencies and provinces of British India" also confirms the name was "British India" at the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodb56 (talk • contribs) 17:05, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Also see this article, including the British India section. Prior to 1947, it was British India. British Raj

Do we need to refer to it as British India in this article? I don't know. Peter K Burian (talk) 23:05, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

He never held Indian nationality. He moved to the UK before Indian independence, and when he returned to the Indian Subcontinent in 1949, he went to Pakistan to look for work, not India. He then left again for the West. He was thus never actually a national of either the Dominion or Republic of India. It’s not even clear he ever stepped foot in any part of what is modern day India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1012:B01E:3213:F0FD:A96:FB8A:AED6 (talk) 05:24, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Untitled

He is Indian and we are proud to be Indian. Please stop changing history. (He was born in India he has a birth certificate from India not Pakistan) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.81.192.182 (talk) 01:50, 30 January 2012 (UTC) He was born prior to the partition.

Dr Khorana was an Indian national who became a US citizen by naturalization. My father MK Roy was a diplomat with the Indian Embassy in Stockholm at the time and was asked by the Government of India to host him during his Nobel Prize visit, which he did. Dr Khorana was keen to tell my father he had not wished to give up Indian nationality but had done so reluctantly after facing too many trials and tribulations in India trying to do his research. A photo with my father in Stockholm during his prize visit is placed here at Twitter today https://twitter.com/subyroy/status/950675873992097792 Drsubrotoroy (talk) 13:08, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Please note that photo with Indians, do no make anyone Indian. You may seen many Indian actors and politicians pictures with many people from difference origin. However, reading the article itself.... it is mentioned in "personal life" that he studied in Multan, Pakistan and after Ph.D came back to Pakistan and remain there until 1949 and then returned to England as he was unable to find a job. By the way, his contribution was for whole of humanity therefore, Pakistani or falsely Indian origin doesn't make any difference. Pakistani are also proud that they have marvelous neighbors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ali aff (talk • contribs) 21:09, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Untitled

i just wanted to say hi so hi guys!!!!!!! peace out 2018-9-jan!!!!!!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.123.51.82 (talk) 17:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

The University of Wisconsin generally enjoys the support of Wisconsin's citizens and state legislature, but of course there are exceptions, and in the late sixties, during the era of radicalism and student protest, some conservative legislators frequently sniped at the University. Favorite targets were professors who appeared to be frittering away their time on silly research instead of doing what the legislators felt they were paid to do, namely teaching.

Some months after Khorana won the Nobel prize, one state legislator was on a tear, fulminating about "university employees who earn more than the Governor." I wish I could remember which legislator it was. Gordon Roseleip was always going after the University, but I believe it was someone else. Anyway, on television, he sounded off and said, and this is as close to a verbatim quote as three-decade-old-memory permits, "Look at these people! I don't know who they are. For example, who ever heard of this 'Har Gobind Khorana' fellow? What does he do that makes him worth more than the Governor?" Dpbsmith 00:43, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

---

Moved the page from Gobind Khorana to Har Gobind Khorana. The latter gives 1670 Google hits. The former name seems to be exclusive for Wikipedia and related sites only.

Here are some more Google results:

• "h. gobind khorana" - 766
• "hargobind khorana" - 169
• "hargobind khurana" - 121

These will be made redirects sooner or later. Jay 21:20, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Raipur

This article says he was born in Raipur, Pakistan. But the link goes to a Raipur in India. Two other Wikipedia articles say India. The Nobel Prize site says Pakistan. Brutannica 04:37, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I've corrected it link to Raipur, Pakistan. Which are the other two wikipedia articles? Jay (talk) 09:36, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Continuing Vandalism by 72.64.122.196

The person 72.64.122.196 is continuing to vandalize the page by insisting on changing the name of Dr Khorana (adding a "Singh") and so on. DaveBorman 22:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Government College

There is some confusion regarding where he studied for his B Sc degree. He actually studied at Government College Lahore. In those days, it was a college affiliated with University of Punjab. That is, the students graduating from the college got a PU degree. As of 2002, Government College Lahore it self has become an autonomous university by the name of 'GC University, Lahore'. Since, GC itself is prestigious institution, this information MUST be included in this article.

File:HarGobindKhorana 19070.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:HarGobindKhorana 19070.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 8 November 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:45, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Death

The NY Times, Washington Post and other news surces report that H. Gobind Khoran has died on Nov 9th at the age of 89. See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/h-gobind-khorana-biochemist-and-nobel-prize-winner-dies/2011/11/11/gIQAe4rIDN_story.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.41.166.9 (talk) 17:14, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Oddly, any and all mention of Dr. H.G. Khorana's death seems to be omitted from the currently available Wikipedia article about him. I intend to insert the date of his passing in the parentheses which currently contain his date of birth, in the opening sentence of the article. Elysium0820 (talk) 12:32, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

...but the vandalism protection on this article prevents me from inserting his date of death, which, regrettably, will mislead readers into assuming Dr. H.G. Khorana is still living:( Elysium0820 (talk) 12:38, 9 Jan0uary 2018 (UTC)

I added a section on his death today. Peter K. Burian

Khorana would have known there is no "natural causes" of death

Shocking to read such faulty descriptions of the cause of death here, and in the news; especially in the case of this biochemist! Please, he died of cancer or something else specific. Don't insult the man by resorting to unscientific garbage statements like "natural causes". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.85.14.106 (talk) 11:05, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

"Natural causes" is a commonly-accepted definition for death due to illness, and is typically used by those responsible for recording cause of death - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_by_natural_causes 216.68.184.194 (talk) 12:26, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Nationality

The overview saying "pakistani-born" is not quite correct, there was Pakistan at this time. Explaining all of that would seem a bit excessive in the lead, so I am removing everything that would invite discussions over nationality from the lead. Richiez (talk) 11:35, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Who gave you the right to do that sir? He was born in Pakistan, got his schooling, bachelors and masters from Pakistan. You can check the nobelprize.org website for an official history. Please stop changing facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.129.251.17 (talk) 16:19, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

He left the region well before the Pakistan/India split. The main text seems to have the known facts correctly and in better detail, no need to give oversimplified view in the lead. I was searching if he ever declared himself Pakistani or Indian nationality but could not find anything - do you have some source? - Richiez (talk) 21:31, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

As i understand that he has left well before the partition of India and Pakistan. He was born in Lahore, now turned Pakistan. Before the split of these two countries, they remain as one nation, known as India. Should we say that he was born in India? My this question should not be treated as the matter of discussions please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.212.251.189 (talk) 11:04, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

I noted that this was Pre-Partition India. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:55, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Before Independence British ruled parts in both India and Pakistan are called British India. Winnan Tirunallur (talk) 13:02, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

From the article itself..... he was in Pakistan until 1949 (i.e. after partition), meaning when he had choice he opted to remain in Pakistan rather than migrating to remainder of British-India — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ali aff (talk • contribs) 21:16, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

IF this article wants to be historically correct and accurate, it should mention his residence and place of birth as either "British India" (factually correct) or "Pakistan" (geographically correct). He was born in the vicinity of what is modern day Pakistan, and he kept a connection with that part of the world well into the late 1940s, which is after the partition took place. He went to high school in Multan and did his undergraduate studies in Lahore. Both places are not some shanty villages, but actual major metropolises throughout Pakistan's history to this day. I don't understand why modern day India has any connection to this person, when he was clearly never within India's boundaries from the moment he was born to the moment he left for the United States. Nothing against modern day India, but this article should be uniform. Either call him and his place of residence "British Indian" throughout the article or simply "Pakistani". 128.230.163.91 (talk) 03:36, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Interesting. I am Canadian and have no bias at all, although I have visited India and not Pakistan. In Toronto, I have worked with many nice folks from both countries.

Pakistan was created in 1947 as an independent homeland for Indian Muslims.

Anything before 1947 in this article was really part of India at that time, and sure, British India. Yes, it is all now in Pakistan. Since this article, like most biographies is organised in chronological order, not geographic, the fact is that his early years were spent in India. But honestly, I don't see any emphasis on that at all.

For example, the The link to Lahore does lead to an article about the city of Pakistan, since that is where it is located. As does the link to the University of the Punjab, previously in India but in Pakistan now.

So, I agree, call it British India when we do refer to India pre-1947. Peter K Burian (talk) 03:56, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Someone had already made the edit: Har Gobind Khorana was born to Indian parents Shrimati Krishna Krishna Devi Khorana and Shri Ganpat Rai Khorana in Raipur, a village in Punjab, British Occupied India at the time, which later became Pakistan.[9][10] That seems fine to me.

The version at this moment appears fair to both India and Pakistan and it will all make sense to the reader who is not familiar with the history of the area (especially 1947 on). Of course, I don't know if this version will stand or whether it will continue to be revised re: India and Pakistan. Peter K Burian (talk) 04:10, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Not the first to synthesize oligonucleotides

Im pretty sure that Sir Alexander Todd was the first to chemically synthesize a thymidine dimer using the "phosphotriester method" in 1955 ref (Michelson, A.M. & Todd, A.R. Nucleotides. XXXII. Synthesis of a dithymidine dinucleotide containing a 3',5'-internucleotidic linkage. Journal of the Chemical Society, 2632-8 (1955).)

Khorana did work with Todd in 1953, and published a paper, but it was not on the synthesis of nucleotides, but rather on pyrophoaphate synthesis.

He then later, in his own group, published a paper in 1958 regarding the synthesis and study of a thymidine dimer Ref(Gilham, P.T. & Khorana, H.G. Studies on Polynucleotides. I. A New and General Method for the Chemical Synthesis of the C5′-C3′ Internucleotidic Linkage. Syntheses of Deoxyribo-dinucleotides1. Journal of the American Chemical Society 80, 6212-6222 (1958).)

Here is what the Nobel Committee says: https://www.nobelprize.org/educational/medicine/gene-code/history.html

  Solving the Rest of the Puzzle Har Gobind Khorana, at the University of Wisconsin, devised precise and intricate biochemical methods to produce well-defined nucleic acids, long strands of RNA with every nucleotide in exact position. The first one he made was a strand repeating the two nucleotides UCUCUC. This translated into a strand of amino acids, reading serine-leucine-serine-leucine... Synthetic RNA were later used to decipher the rest of the genetic code.

Peter K Burian (talk) 19:03, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

What happened to this man in the missing 30 years?

The article says he was born in 1922, but then suddenly he disappears for 30 years until he reappears when joining the faculty of University of British Columbia in 1952. That's a huge gap that needs filling. Where did he go to school and university etc? Moriori (talk) 19:56, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

If you read the article now, you should not find huge gaps. I added a lot of content, now fully cited. Peter K Burian (talk) 18:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2018

In Section Research work, please change opening sentence "Ribonucleic acid (RNA) with three repeating units..." to "Ribonucleic acid (RNA) with two repeating units..." Thanks 124.168.121.77 (talk) 01:33, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Question: from the article it doesn't look like three is necessarily incorrect, and the source provided is a bit too technical for my expertise. Could you highlight in the source (or provide a different source) which supports the change you want to make? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

And from an scientific article:

  Dr Khorana had shown that a ribonucleic acid (RNA) with three repeating units (UCUCUCU → UCU CUC UCU) produced two alternating amino acids.

http://www.animalresearch.info/en/medical-advances/nobel-prizes/the-role-of-the-genetic-code-protein-synthesis/ But all of this is beyond my scope too due to its complexity.

Peter K Burian (talk) 19:07, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. —MRD2014 ^Talk 00:41, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2018

His son's name was Dave, not Davel. From the link listed already: http://news.mit.edu/2011/obit-khorana-1110 2600:6C50:417F:D887:2D04:6510:9ACA:4F05 (talk) 06:27, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Already done. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:51, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I agree; the article now shows his name as Dave. Peter K Burian (talk) 18:21, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2018

His name in Punjabi is ਹਰ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਖੁਰਾਨਾ 70.16.208.64 (talk) 10:48, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:52, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2018

103.206.105.134 (talk) 11:10, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

veeranjaneyulu and ramanjaneyulu

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Needs Update to Clearly Reflect Subject's Death in 2011

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/14/us/h-gobind-khorana-1968-nobel-winner-for-rna-research-dies.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/science-obituaries/8892230/H-Gobind-Khorana.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/h-gobind-khorana-biochemist-and-nobel-prize-winner-dies/2011/11/11/gIQAe4rIDN_story.html?utm_term=.8df04282077e

https://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/31398/title/Har-Gobind-Khorana-Dies-at-89/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:186:202:348:7987:6B4E:3DE4:3194 (talk) 12:40, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I updated Personal Life about his death and family. What more information is needed?? Peter K Burian (talk) 18:43, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2018

Where the article talks about his marriage, a chunk of the text is almost a direct quote from Dr. Khorana's writing and should be attributed. From Wikipedia article: "Har Gobind Khorana was married in 1952 to Esther Elizabeth Sibler, who is of Swiss origin. Esther brought a consistent sense of purpose into his life at a time when, after six years' absence from the country of his birth, Khorana felt out of place everywhere and at home nowhere."

The quote is quoted in the followng NYT article, though they don't have a specific reference for it: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/14/us/h-gobind-khorana-1968-nobel-winner-for-rna-research-dies.html 170.140.182.106 (talk) 14:18, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Corrected. See my Talk topic about content copied from other sources. I have deleted all of that and replaced it with facts, fully-cited from reliable sources. Peter K Burian (talk) 18:22, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. —MRD2014 ^Talk 00:41, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2018 - Typo in Research Work

Ribonucleic acid (RNA) with three repeating units (UCUCUCU → UCU CUC UCU) produced two alternating amino acids. This, combined with the Nirenberg and Leder experiment, showed that UCU codes for serine and CUC codes for leucine.

--->

Ribonucleic acid (RNA) with two repeating units (UCUCUCU → UCU CUC UCU) produced two alternating amino acids. This, combined with the Nirenberg and Leder experiment, showed that UCU codes for serine and CUC codes for leucine.

Auckerman (talk) 15:10, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

From a scientific article.

Dr Khorana had shown that a ribonucleic acid (RNA) with three repeating units (UCUCUCU → UCU CUC UCU) produced two alternating amino acids. http://www.animalresearch.info/en/medical-advances/nobel-prizes/the-role-of-the-genetic-code-protein-synthesis/ Content such as that should be quoted when requesting a revision, IMHO. But all of this is beyond my scope too due to its complexity. Peter K Burian (talk) 19:14, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply! In the context of the source article,

Independently, Dr Khorana had shown that a ribonucleic acid (RNA) with three repeating units (UCUCUCU → UCU CUC UCU) produced two alternating amino acids. This, combined with the Nirenberg and Leder experiment, showed that UCU codes for Serine and CUC codes for Leucine. He also showed that RNAs with three repeating units (UAC UAC UAC, or ACU ACU ACU, or CUA CUA CUA) produced three different strings of amino acids. RNAs with four repeating units including UAG, UAA, or UGA, produced only dipeptides and tripeptides thus revealing that UAG, UAA and UGA are stop codons.

The first "three" is clearly a typo and should read "two". UC is two units, UAC is three. I am admittedly new to wikipedia, but it seems that if there's a typo in the source material it should be okay for the article not to reflect that.

Here http://www.bio-medicine.org/biology-definition/Har_Gobind_Khorana/ is a source with "two" in the correct place:

RNAs with two repeating units (UCUCUCU → UCU CUC UCU) produced two alternating amino acids. This combined with the Nirenberg and Leder experiment showed that UCU codes for Ser and CUC for Leu.

Auckerman (talk) 15:16, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2018

Under "Born" information, Raipur should be categorized as Pakistan. This town of Raipur, is part of pre-partition Indian subcontinent (when Pakistan and India were one) but after partition once India and Pakistan were separate countries it has never been an Indian town but Pakistani, India did not exist as a independent country before partition in 1947 . The Indian Raipur is a city in Raipur district, the erstwhile capital city of the Indian state of Chhattisgarh

"Born January 9, 1922 Raipur, Punjab, India" Shockchaudry (talk) 15:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I agree. From the current version of the article, fully cited: During a brief period in 1949, he was unable to find a job in his home province of the Punjab, which was by then part of Pakistan. Peter K Burian (talk) 18:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. —MRD2014 ^Talk 00:41, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2018

In Residence section, Mr Khorana is listed having lived in India, United Kingdom and United States. However, Mr Khorana also lived in Switzerland and Canada. These two countries should be added. Kevlangdo (talk) 16:12, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

The personal life section DOES cover Canada and Switzerland; unfortunately, nearly that entire section is copied from a book, Physiology Or Medicine, 1963-1970

edited by Jan Lindsten

  https://books.google.ca/books?id=O5jQ-GRTvPUC&pg=PA370&lpg=PA370&dq=mahan+singh+professor+researcher+Punjab+university&source=bl&ots=vXbrdAsnTG&sig=hrmK6ZPr8wMcH4Q5rHdqtCBFrqw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjcnPChp8vYAhVY1GMKHZTcABUQ6AEIOzAD#v=onepage&q=mahan%20singh%20professor%20researcher%20Punjab%20university&f=false 

Peter K Burian (talk) 16:40, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I deleted content that had been copied from a book. The current content includes facts, all fully cited. Peter K Burian (talk) 18:39, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. —MRD2014 ^Talk 00:41, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Too much of the article is copied from a book

Much of the Personal Life is copied from this book: Physiology Or Medicine, 1963-1970 edited by Jan Lindsten

See https://books.google.ca/books?id=O5jQ-GRTvPUC&pg=PA370&lpg=PA370&dq=mahan+singh+professor+researcher+Punjab+university&source=bl&ots=vXbrdAsnTG&sig=hrmK6ZPr8wMcH4Q5rHdqtCBFrqw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjcnPChp8vYAhVY1GMKHZTcABUQ6AEIOzAD#v=onepage&q=mahan%20singh%20professor%20researcher%20Punjab%20university&f=false

I am trying to paraphrase content to minimize the problem but SO much of that section is directly from the book, that I don't know how to proceed. Peter K Burian (talk) 16:45, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Here is a useful article that could be used when paraphrasing the content about his life. (NOT copying the article) https://www.vox.com/2018/1/9/16862980/google-doodle-har-gobind-khorana-genetics-dna Peter K Burian (talk) 16:58, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Problem solved, for the most part. I deleted most of the content that had been copied from the book and added facts that are now fully cited from sources such as MIT and obituaries in major news media. Peter K Burian (talk) 17:41, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2018

Birth place was in "British India" and not Pakistan( no such country existed back then ) 156.75.247.2 (talk) 16:46, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Agreed;

  From the Personal Life section (fully cited): During a brief period in 1949, he was unable to find a job in his home province of the Punjab, which was by then part of Pakistan.

Peter K Burian (talk) 18:41, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. —MRD2014 ^Talk 00:41, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

google image

in the end of "awards and honors" there is a mention of the google image "ee-letter The illustration depicted his use of thrcombinations to represent the four chemical bases found in RNA" this is not accurate. The image depicts his discovery that three letters of RNA code for each amino acid. source: https://www.nature.com/scitable/definition/genetic-code-13 Es2241 (talk) 16:48, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

OK, then revise a few words of the article to specify the correct information.

The article should state instead: "The image depicts three letter RNA codons to represent his work deciphering the code of RNA and determining which three-letter codon matches which amino acid". source: https://www.nature.com/scitable/definition/genetic-code-13 (I can not make this change myself because the page is locked. someone else has to update this for me) Es2241 (talk) 18:06, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

There are two previous requests for revision (Talk topics) that discuss the accuracy of the RNA statement. Have you read those? Peter K Burian (talk) 19:16, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2018

How is it possible that he apparently studied for and received a Phd. from U. Liverpool during 1945-48 while (at the same time?) studying for and receiving an MS from U. Punjab? Please clarify the timing. 100.2.184.28 (talk) 16:51, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

The article was wrong; he got his only Phd. in the UK. The article is correct now.

   Khorana attended high school in the nearby city of Multan before enrolling in Punjab University, where he received his bachelor’s degree in 1943 and master’s in 1945, both in chemistry and biochemistry. Upon graduating, he received a fellowship from the Indian government to study at the University of Liverpool in the U.K., where he received his PhD in 1948. http://news.mit.edu/2011/obit-khorana-1110

Peter K Burian (talk) 17:24, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. —MRD2014 ^Talk 00:41, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Possible reference for some missing details

I am adding this to the talk page to save and share what looks like a good source for some of the missing details of Har Gobind Khorana and/or his family. It will take me some time to process and assess the information for inclusion in the Wikipedia article.

The three part article published in India Abroad a newspaper based in New York City. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India_Abroad

Part I: Dr Khorana, 'Nobel laureate and one of science's immortals' Part II: Dr Khorana: 'Considerate, most remarkable man' Part III: Dr Khorana: 'A loving father, a caring mentor'

This URL jumps to part III because they added links in part III that jump to parts I and II.

http://www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-dr-khorana-a-loving-father-a-caring-mentor/20111128.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodb56 (talk • contribs) 17:40, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2018

Place of residency should include Pakistan since he was born there. Miyunus (talk) 17:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

No, he was not born in Pakistan. See these sentences from the Personal Life section, all with citations:

  Khorana lived in India until 1945, ... During a brief period in 1949, he was unable to find a job in his home province of the Punjab, which was by then part of Pakistan.

Peter K Burian (talk) 18:38, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. —MRD2014 ^Talk 00:41, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2018

Khorna should be changed to Khorana 24.80.226.255 (talk) 18:06, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes. "Har Gobind Khorana" is the correct spelling. Is there a mistake somewhere in the article? https://www.vox.com/2018/1/9/16862980/google-doodle-har-gobind-khorana-genetics-dna

Peter K Burian (talk) 18:19, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. —MRD2014 ^Talk 00:41, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Raipur WAS in India but now, it is Raipur, Pakistan

Someone keeps changing this but the heading above is correct. See the Raipur, Pakistan article, for example.

AND this book, which confirms that by 1949, the town was in Pakistan. Asian Americans: An Encyclopedia of Social, Cultural, Economic https://books.google.ca/books?id=3AxIAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA653&dq=early+life+har+gobind+khorana&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiNreuXt8vYAhVOxGMKHW7dB10Q6AEILDAB#v=onepage&q=early%20life%20har%20gobind%20khorana&f=false

AND this book Encyclopaedia of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh https://books.google.ca/books?id=eENU_a8c79MC&pg=PA890&dq=Raipur+originally+in+India+and+now+Pakistan&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiew7Tp9MvYAhVB6GMKHad_CHUQ6AEIKTAA#v=onepage&q=Raipur%20originally%20in%20India%20and%20now%20Pakistan&f=false

AND this book Encyclopedia of World Scientists https://books.google.ca/books?id=uPRB-OED1bcC&pg=PA396&dq=Raipur+originally+in+India+and+now+Pakistan&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiew7Tp9MvYAhVB6GMKHad_CHUQ6AEINjAC#v=onepage&q=Raipur%20originally%20in%20India%20and%20now%20Pakistan&f=false

Peter K Burian (talk) 22:18, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

HELP, fix coding re Birth Place

I don't know how this problem suddenly occurred in the infobox

Born January Expression error: Missing operand for *., 1922Expression error: Unexpected > operator Raipur, British India, Punjab, British India

I hope someone can fix it. He was born in Raipur which was then in British India, but by 1949 was part of Pakistan. See Raipur, Pakistan.

I assume that there is some debate about the India/Pakistan aspect but as the previous Talk item indicates, major sources confirm it was in India and then became part of Pakistan.

In any event, at the time of his birth it was part of India. Peter K Burian (talk) 22:33, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

It was subsequently fixed by 71.202.235.29. Thanks, Peter K Burian (talk) 22:35, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

There is still vandalism to this article! Needs protection

We have seen a few issues of vandalism this afternoon, such as this one indicating Iran. In spite of being semi-protected.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Har_Gobind_Khorana&diff=next&oldid=819532939

And this one. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Har_Gobind_Khorana&diff=next&oldid=819531319

So this article definitely needs some protection. @User:Ivanvector, was the protection removed? How can those users be making changes?

Peter K Burian (talk) 22:58, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism

Please protect this article. It has been repeatedly vandalized today owing to the Google Doodle, such as this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Har_Gobind_Khorana&oldid=819558437

tetralophodon

Google's Doodle under "Awards and honors" heading

Can Google's birthday Doodle be considered as an award or honor? As per this Google's url a Doodle is written by a team of engineers and illustrators within Google. They may get ideas from Google's users on the net too. As per the Doodle's page the purpose is to celebrate not to honor. It is not a formal body to honor or award anyone, like for example organisations like Nobel foundation. Further, Google creates doodles for birthday of hip hop music or anniversary of a flower or Google's own birthday. Clearly Google wants to celebrate its birthday and not to honor itself with a doodle. A news reporter reporting doodle honoring Khorana (referred in the page) does not appear to be a valid reason to list this under "Awards and honors" heading here. Can we say "Google's engineers/doodlers awarded Albert Einstein with a doodle"? Can we edit Wiki page on Albert Einstein to add this line along with Nobel prize and Max Planck Medal? At best this can serve as an honor and an advertisement for Doodle itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ganesh H Shankar (talk • contribs) 16:29, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

I disagree with the above rationale. It is an honour to be the featured person in the worldwide Google network! AND the honour was reported by the major news media: TIME, CNN, USA Today, National Public Radio, Newsweek, and numerous others.

See https://www.google.ca/search?source=hp&ei=fcZYWobqMJTQjwOEs57QCA&q=Har+Gobind+Khorana+google+doodle&oq=Har+Gobind+Khorana+google+doodle&gs_l=psy-ab.3..35i39k1.2993.6914.0.7687.18.13.0.0.0.0.492.1780.0j9j4-1.11.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..7.11.2521.6..0.741.hKO4dBZ6ZaU Peter K Burian (talk) 14:32, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

This was the GOOGLE comment about him. People worldwide now know of his achievements. That is an honour whether the content was written by engineers or not!

  Today’s Doodle celebrates Har Gobind Khorana, an Indian-American biochemist whose passion for science started under a tree in the small village of Raipur, India, and grew into Nobel Prize-winning research on nucleotides and genes.

  Dr. Khorana was born in 1922 as the youngest of five children. His father instilled the importance of learning by helping his children to read and write, which wasn’t common for villagers at the time. Scholarships helped propel the budding scientist through his scholastic journey, obtaining his doctorate in organic chemistry in 1948.

  Dr. Khorana conducted research at universities in England, Switzerland, and Canada, and it was at the University of Wisconsin that he and two fellow researchers received the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1968. Together, they discovered that the order of nucleotides in our DNA determines which amino acids are built. These amino acids form proteins, which carry out essential cell functions.

  His accomplishments didn’t stop there. Fewer than five years later, Dr. Khorana made a second scientific breakthrough when he constructed the first synthetic gene. He received a host of awards during his lifetime, including the National Medal of Science.

  Bangalore-based illustrator Rohan Dahotre drew today’s Doodle, which celebrates Dr. Khorana’s pioneering work in understanding our DNA. https://www.google.com/doodles/har-gobind-khoranas-96th-birthday

Peter K Burian (talk) 14:34, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, "celebrates" is the more appropriate word because that is what Doodle is all about according to Google itself. Thanks to Doodle more people are now aware of Khorana's achievements. However, the point is it important to differentiate between "celebration" and "award/honor". Note worthy awards and honors are often peer reviewed by experts in the concerned field before it is bestowed. News reports using the word "honor" in the context of a Doodle is not the correct characterisation of what a Doodle actually is.

I think it is important we take a stand on this before we start listing a Doodle as one more honor (along with other honors like Nobel prize) in Wiki pages of all great people. For example, should we add:

"Doodle honored Einstein on March 14 2003" in Einstein's Wiki Page?

"Doodle honored Sir Isaac Newton on Jan 4, 2010" in Sir Isaac Newton's Wiki Page?

Will these edits enrich these Wiki pages? Back linked Doodle pages typically are not as exhaustive as Wiki pages themselves on the people. I think we will set a wrong precedence with this practice diluting the "Awards and honors" heading in Wiki pages of people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ganesh H Shankar (talk • contribs) 17:26, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

The difference is this: those historical figures have received massive amounts of as well as numerous honours. They are household names, so to speak. There is no need to mention that they were also celebrated by Google

On the other hand, Har Gobind Khorana is a relatively obscure figure. The recognition of his contribution by a worldwide organization is more important, and relevant, in his case. IMHO. Peter K Burian (talk) 17:45, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Are we saying Doodle is an honor to be listed in Wiki pages of people who are not considered household names? Honor is an honor whether it is for Har Gobind Khorana or for Albert Einstein.

Celebrating the event and letting more people know is a great cause served by Doodles. That is not what is contested. If we agree that a Doodle is a celebration event then adding such celebration as an honor under "Awards and honors" heading or selectively adding it based on perceived popularity of the person is very subjective and lacks rigor in my view. I am voicing this as a general concern since we keep seeing such page updates in Wiki quoting a news report. Ganesh H Shankar (talk) 10:45, 14 January 2018 (IST)

Need additional Protection.... Deletion of "Indian"

Earlier today, someone deleted the words Indian and Indian-American because there has been a debate about India/Pakistan in the Talk section.

But there has never been any consensus that important facts like that should be deleted.

The person who deleted it was not an autoconfirmed user, as far as I can tell. The summary after his name showed that he has 43 edits on Wikipedia and so, should not be able to delete content in a semi-protected article.

IF we get consensus that the words Indian and Indian-American should be deleted, fine, but that has not happened.

@User:MRD2014: I know the Protection level has changed from time to time. Is it not currently semi-protected, at least? Thanks, Peter K Burian (talk) 14:23, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

It is now. —MRD2014 ^Talk 15:50, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. There are hundreds of thousands of Users who can edit semi-protected articles, and that is as it should be. The vast majority of edits on this one, however, were by Users who had only edited on Wikipedia on a very few occasions. Aside from the vandalism problems. Peter K Burian (talk) 17:14, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

I think in fairness that Har Gobind Khorana should be considered an AMERICAN, not an Indian and certainly not Pakistani. All of his achievements have been outside of the subcontinent. I therefore implore the moderators not to call him an Indian American or a Pakistani American.

However, it is disingenuous to say that he was born in Pakistan. He was born in British India. There is very little evidence that Khorana returned to Pakistan or ever considered himself a Pakistani. It even says on Nobel's article that he returned to INDIA briefly. (https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/1968/khorana/biographical/) It is also unbelievably unlikely that he or his family would have chosen to remain in Pakistan, especially Punjab after partition.

Since we are unable to find any sources to confirm his citizenship prior to being naturalized as a US citizen or gather any details about his parents and what happened to them, it is only fair to call him an American and nothing else.

I implore the moderators to take action against those who keep trying to vandalise the page and keep changing this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.2.158.122 (talk) 16:57, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

• @Peaceray: Not sure American was removed (WP:ETHNICITY). General consensus has been to include only citizenship in the lead. It is best to just state American in the lead as has been the case with other people who became US citizens (e.g.: Satya Nadella, Indira Nooyi). Sometimes "... [country] born [citizen]" is added when it is notable, but since the country of origin is not clear here it is best left out. Gotitbro (talk) 11:43, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Consider also that Bhagat Singh was born on present-day Pakistan and died in present-day Pakistan before partition. Why does his article say Indian then? The simple reason is that rationally, we can assume that he would have picked India. Also, saying British India is pointless because even in those days, it was known as India. We don't say that someone is from the Fifth French Republic. We just say that they are from France. — Preceding unsigned comment added byF 1.64.230.210 (talk) 09:29, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

1.64.230.210, Bhagat Singh lived from 1907 until 1931. Choudhry Rahmat Ali coined the name Pakistan two years after Singh's death, & the Dominion of Pakistan was established in 1947. Bhagat Singh lived when the area was part of British India, & it would be anachronistic to say he lived in Pakistan. It is more accurate to say that Bhagat Singh was born in Banga, Punjab, British-ruled India (now Punjab, Pakistan) & died in Lahore, Punjab, British India (now Punjab, Pakistan), which is in fact what the article says.

Your example about France is not the same. The bulk of France has been France for over a millenium. The more appropriate comparison would be for people from Alsace-Lorraine which was part of Germany until France annexed it in 1918/1919 after the end of World War I. For example, as per the infobox, Alphonse Antoine was born in Corny-sur-Moselle, Alsace-Lorraine, German Empire.

Peaceray (talk) 21:08, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

In that case, if you really want to be accurate, the way you've written it now sounds wrong. You should write that Har Gobind Khorana was an American biochemist who was born in British India since you are unable to confirm if he ever held Indian citizenship. By the way, his Nobel article (https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/1968/khorana/biographical/) says that he lived in "India" until 1945 and then spent a brief period in "India" until 1949. 1.64.230.210 (talk) 02:58, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

The infobox already says what you suggested, & the Biography section indicates the same information as the Nobel article. I am unsure about your suggestion, as it appears that the article is already incorporated all that. Peaceray (talk) 04:57, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

subsequent research and anticipation of PCR

isnt their a JBC paper with Malcolm Gefter that describes PCR in the discussion ? I always assumed it wasn't noticed cause a) oligos were $$ and b) there wasn't a lot of DNA seq info available, so it wasn't that useful — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.245.17.105 (talk) 12:51, 14 July 2021 (UTC)