User:LE2003/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Forensic psychology

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose this article because I am interested in forensic psychology and want to learn more.

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.)\

Lead section- The lead section is short and to the point, but gives the general idea of the article and the definition of forensic psych.

Content- The content is relevant, describing the history, schooling requirements, and job outlook of forensic psychologists. The content is up to date and relevant to the topic.

Tone- The article is fact based and remains neutral. There is no persuasion.

Sources- The sources I clicked on are up to date and relevant to the topic. They also all worked when i went to their website. I believe that all of the sources are good reliable sources.

Organization- I thought the organization helped the reader understand forensic psychology more. The article flowed and putting the history of it right after the introduction was a good way to build knowledge on the subject.

Pictures- the only picture included is a picture of the book "On the witness stand" This is relevant because it pertains to forensic psych and it is well captioned.

Talk- The only discussion on the talk page is one editor asking if it would be a good idea to add an overview of the subtopics in the introduction. Another person responds saying that is a good idea.

Overall- This articles status is that it is on the wiki education foundation supported cause. The strengths are that it is very information packed and well organized but one weakness is that it is so much information it can be overwhelming.