The result was keep. Consensus seems to be that the uncertainties that exist about these plantets can be addressed in the article and are not a reason to delete it. Sandstein 17:45, 30 December 2011 (UTC) reply
For none of these exoplanets sufficient evidence exists that they are in fact terrestial. If one checks the individual sources, there are at most plausability evaluations from the calculated density. The list contains no confirmed cases and only speculation, which makes it misleading. Hekerui ( talk) 22:22, 22 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Consensus seems to be that the uncertainties that exist about these plantets can be addressed in the article and are not a reason to delete it. Sandstein 17:45, 30 December 2011 (UTC) reply
For none of these exoplanets sufficient evidence exists that they are in fact terrestial. If one checks the individual sources, there are at most plausability evaluations from the calculated density. The list contains no confirmed cases and only speculation, which makes it misleading. Hekerui ( talk) 22:22, 22 December 2011 (UTC) reply