I see that the Encyclopedia mythica has been cited as a source. Several Scandinavians, User:Haukurth, User:Salleman, User:Io and myself have identified bogus information taken from that site on Norse mythology, and removed it from Wikipedia.--Wiglaf 19:13, 2 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

I've been checking the article source and it is more or less ok. Better than Mari (Basque) article (but worse than my own Mari (godess) one). I mostly doubt what says of the sickle being her symbol (first time I read that) or the fussion with Santa Marina only (the most widely accepted synchretism is with Virgin Mary). --Sugaar 19:45, 5 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

I would say absolutely YES. Obviously Mari (Basque) and Mari (Godess) are the same character: Mari, the Basque Godess. Anbotoko Mari is just a local variant of the same mythological character.

Yet the base article should be my own creation Mari (godess) as I can assure that it is pretty much accurate, while Mari (Basque) is a very poor article with many innacuracies.

--Sugaar 19:33, 5 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

The affirmation that Mari was godess of ancient Iberians is marely speculative. I have never read such thing. As far as we can say Mari is just a Basque divinity (the main one) and, while it may have been related to other pre-Roman pantheons, we simply don't know it.

Lurbira, as mentioned by Error in that article talk page, is no divinity. Only Ama Lur, probably a modern creation, has some meaning there. For the sake of seriousness (both of Wikipedia and Basque Mythology knowledge), both articles Mari (Basque) and Lurbira should be deleted. --Sugaar 19:56, 5 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Please look at Anbotoko Mari Judgesurreal777 00:57, 10 March 2006 (UTC)Reply