User:Ancient Gazebo/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Political satire.

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose it because political satire is something that is interesting to me and it is important for helping analyze a culture and its perspective on the ruling classes. My first impression of the article was that it was a rather brief, but still detailed overview of political satire throughout history in various countries.

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.)

I believe everything mentioned is relevant to the topic. All the information seems valid and not out of date. One thing that sticks out to me though, is that in the United States section, even though it's under the 19th and 20th century heading, it calls out articles from the 21st century before having a section dedicated to both the 20th and 21st century. I felt as if the tone was neutral and unbiased throughout my reading, and I don't feel as if any viewpoints were under or over represented.

The links to the citations work, and the sources do support the article. The sources seem as if they're neutral from the ones I checked, though some supposed facts still need citations, such as regarding Ali Farzat's printing license.

The talk page consists of varying conversations. Some being copyright issues, sections that need to be expanded, and even one saying that the satire listed is dangerous to Joe Biden for some reason. This article is part of the Wikiprojects for Politics and Comedy. Both rate it as start-class.