User:Ceelle21/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Art Institute of Chicago

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I am familiar with the Art Institute of Chicago and have visited many times. It's one of my favorite museums and I really admire the artwork they exhibit and the fact that Chicago has a world renowned museum, and Chicago is right in my backyard. It has been a staple in my life since I was a kid.

Evaluate the article
Lead: effectively provides summary of the rest of the wikipedia article. Mentions history, number of visitors, the permanent collection, conservation efforts, and exhibitions.

Content: includes different sections related to the museum: history, collection [overview], architecture, collection highlights, governance, and a small pop culture section. I would say generally these sections are fairly well balanced. The biggest note I have is wondering why the collection [overview] and Selections from the Collection are separated by the Architecture section. That is a bit inconsistent in my opinion. If the Collection [overview] and Selections from the Collection sections were combined they would take up the majority of the article. However, because this is an article about an art museum that feels normal to me. Content is up to date especially with mention of COVID-19 visitor numbers. I think that if whoever is editing this page has the time, including a separate or adding to the pop culture section more information about how visitors to the museum have increased since 2020, that would be useful information to mention and keep the visitor information consistent if it's key to note. I would say established museums are something that is not necessarily underrepresented on Wikipedia.

Tone: Lots of factual information is found within the article and does not seem biased.

Sources: There are 72 different sources laid out with varying dates associated with them. Some sources are as recent as 2021.

Talk page: Lots of interesting and good discussion happening. As recent as April 22 someone mentioned in the talk page that mentioning unionization might be an important subject to include in the article.

My overall impression is that the article is well researched and has a lot of good sources to point to. It seems that edits are continuing to happen and there was a large conversation in the talk page about picture deletion and all the details that come with that. I am impressed by the quality of the writing and citations as well as not shying away from controversy as that is a subtopic in one of the sections.