User:Morrisse95/Forensic psychology/FormallyTrainedHomunculus Peer Review

General info
Morrise95
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes

 * I think that this case is definitely interesting and relevant, but I do agree with the suggested edit that there should be a bit more explanation as to the relevance of this case to the article overall. This edit reads as a good introduction to the concept of the Standard of Admissability, but it doesn't quite explain to a person unfamiliar to the topic how this concept is relevant to the topic itself. One thing I might suggest is to educate on the concepts themselves and how they relate to the topic, as it does read as a bit jargon-heavy for a passage this size. With a bit of attention to some flow, content explanation, and organization, this section could be a great part of background history about the topic!

Response: I made changes to the article by adding more information regarding the case that brought forth the Daubert standard being used by the U.S. Supreme court. I hope that it is less jargon and more understandable to a person without background knowledge. If there is more that I am missing please let me know!

Thank you for your suggestions it has helped my article.