Carl Sagan

I've polished it up a little, it seems fairly comprehensive and well-written to me. Note that I've done some earlier work on this article as well.—Eloquence 18:26, Mar 9, 2004 (UTC)

• Support. Although, it might be wise to mention that he was a noted author earlier in the article, probably the intro. -- Stewart Adcock 21:50, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
  • You're right - should be better now.—Eloquence
    • Yep, I reiterate my vote. -- Stewart Adcock
• Support. Nice article. Luis Dantas 02:20, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
• Support. It appears that consensus has already been established, but I'll add my vote anyway. Good overview, nice flow. There's room for expansion, but the conciseness is beneficial. A model article on many levels. Fredrik 10:38, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)