User:Asp2181/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Ai (chimpanzee)

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 it seems interesting. Animal cognitive studies interest me a bit so I wanted to read an article that related to this topic. My initial impression was that it wasn't as lengthy as I thought it was going to be. There was some information in there that surprised me but had me wanting 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.)

The lead section contained concise and ample amount of detail. It allowed the introduction to give the reader the needed background for the basis of the article itself. This article does a good job at being neutral with no positions on being against or for the study. Personally, it made it easier to read since there was no preconceived bias. Overall, the article felt underwhelming maybe even a bit lackluster. I feel that the group and living quarters section shouldn't have been in the article as it didn't provide any relevance. Whereas, the art section lacked detail about the art Ai made in her lifetime and how it was possible for her to do so. The Ai project section was good and went into details about some of the specifics of the Ai project. However, since there is talk of KUPRI a lot, maybe there could've been a separate section on KUPRI or at least a citation to an article about the group. There was no background information on the group so it made it hard to understand who this group was and what their mission was with Ai.