User:Aml9x/Evaluate an Article

Forensic anthropology
(Provide a link to the article here.)

This is what I want to do with my career in the future. It is a very well written article.
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

== The lead section provides a good introduction to what Forensic Anthropology is. It doesn't explain what the sections are going to be, but it has a little something from most of them in the lead. The content itself is very well balanced. There is information about basically everything in the field and not one section has too much information in it. The tone is also good. It is professional and concise. It is very well cited as well. There is over a total of 60 citations in the whole article from reputable sources. The article contains multiple pictures that contribute well to the understanding of the field. The article itself is labeled in good shape, which I agree with. If I were to edit this, I would say that there are multiple notable Forensic Anthropologists that are left out. ==

(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.)