The result was delete. — Cirt ( talk) 00:10, 30 June 2011 (UTC) reply
Article does not appear to be linked from the main article on Mars, and appears to be a redundant 'lost' article. The majority of the content is written in a much more encyclopedic fashion in the "Mars" and "Geology of Mars" articles. In addition, the article creator states that "Mars was probably home to Martians" that "matched or advanced the mental capabilities of humans". While the article contains references, the majority of them are for minor, obvious points and not for the main claims being made. Very few edits, aside from minor changes, have been made by other users. Given the patently false claims being made by the principal author and editor of the article, it brings the entire content into question. ShadowChaser ( talk) 14:29, 22 June 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Cirt ( talk) 00:10, 30 June 2011 (UTC) reply
Article does not appear to be linked from the main article on Mars, and appears to be a redundant 'lost' article. The majority of the content is written in a much more encyclopedic fashion in the "Mars" and "Geology of Mars" articles. In addition, the article creator states that "Mars was probably home to Martians" that "matched or advanced the mental capabilities of humans". While the article contains references, the majority of them are for minor, obvious points and not for the main claims being made. Very few edits, aside from minor changes, have been made by other users. Given the patently false claims being made by the principal author and editor of the article, it brings the entire content into question. ShadowChaser ( talk) 14:29, 22 June 2011 (UTC) reply