A credible status decision needs a timeline that separates when a claim appeared, when its source changed and when a reviewer actually checked it.
Separate the important dates
Record first publication, visible modification, technical observation and editorial review as different events.
Combining those dates into one updated label hides whether the Mars Market claim itself changed.
Order evidence before interpreting it
Place source notices, redirects, certificate events and archived copies in chronological order.
A clear sequence helps distinguish a planned migration from an unsupported address appearing later.
Resolve conflicting timestamps
Compare visible dates with structured data, response headers and sitemap lastmod values.
When signals disagree, document the mismatch instead of selecting the newest date automatically.
Avoid artificial freshness
A date that changes every day without a content revision is not meaningful verification evidence.
Require a documented change before treating a refreshed timestamp as a new review.
Publish a bounded conclusion
State which period the evidence covers and which later events would require another assessment.
Time-bounded wording prevents a past Mars Market URL review from becoming a permanent claim.