Talk:Justice League

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
WikiProject Comics This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Edit the article attached to this page or discuss it at the project talk page. Help with current tasks, or visit the notice board.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. Please explain the rating here.
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Justice League article.

Contents

[edit] Miscellaneous

I'm watching you do the membership list.... will you divide the JLI into the JLA and the JLE? You may even wish to mention the Justice League Antarctica - David Stewart 10:09, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Yes, I think dividing the list makes sense -- I just wish there was a way to make columns next to each other. BTW, I should note that I called "Black Canary" by that name instead of "Black Canary II" because there was no clear delineation between "mother and daughter" since, of course, the mother-daughter relationship was a retcon, and it was the original Black Canary who joined the JLA in the late '60s. --Kaijan 10:16, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Good list. You might wish to add the Formerly Known as Justice League membership (I have mentioned the title in the history). - David Stewart 09:18, 22 Aug 2003 (UTC)
"You may even wish to mention the Justice League Antarctica." No, we don't. We really, really don't. Trekphiler 08:47, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

I am changing the so-called correction of Firestorm to Firestar. I am doing this as Firestorm is a far more notable and longterm member (and character) than Firestar who is a secondary Firestorm character and recent member only. :Scottbeck 06:31, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Could someone remove that idiotic "Pi is 3.14, so deal!" line?

If anybody cares, in JLA 4, GA is first new addition, according to Daniels' DC Comics. Trekphiler 10:53, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Extraneous links

I'm going to work over the entire article and edit out the extraneous links. I for one don't like looking at a blue word every other sentence it's rather disconcerting. If people really want to look up Detroit, and etc they can just type it into the search thing over on the left of the page. Whispering 00:37, 24 November 2005 (UTC) disambiguation link repair (You can help!)

I disagree. My point is sometimes what makes you look up for something is exactly the fact the word is right there in blue, just a click away. This is what Wikipedia is about. Lesfer ☎ 02:30, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sentence

In 1999, storytellers Mark Waid, Brian Augustyn, and Barry Kitson re-tooled and expanded the Secret Origins origin with the miniseries JLA: Year One.

Anyone know what to do with this sentence it's kinda just hanging in the middle of nothing. Whispering 01:19, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Story arcs, miniseries, sagas

Do we really have to give detailed plot synopsis? I think we should focus on main points and leave detailed descriptions for articles concerning these stories itselves. Lesfer ☎ 13:07, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] JLI

"Occasional slant"? Did you read any of those stories? They were routinely insane. That's why they were so funny. Only when they got into the extreme self-referencing toward the end (IMNSHO...) did it get "excessive". (BTW, I've read & bought 'em all.) Trekphiler 09:43, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Spoilers

I'm moving the Spoiler tag up: it seems odd to have the spoiler warning where there's just been a description of many JL stories, but before the current arc.

[edit] History

JLI 19 (p19, panel 4) made history: Bats makes a joke. Trekphiler 08:49, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Only if you were brought up on the current/recent version of Batman, I suppose---the pre-Crisis Bats actually had a sense of humor (along with a real personality/actual emotions beyond "angry jerk" and "less angry jerk", but I digress ... ;-) ). Anthony Dean 02:25, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Never a fan of either, just his JLI apps. Discovering Dark Claw, tho, I nearly bust a gut laughing... Trekphiler 10:51, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Awards section

I removed the various nominess ("top votegetter") stuff that the poster seems to be plastering on this and every other comics-related page; just being nominated for a fan-based award IMO doesn't seem important enough to merit including (esp. with so many such awards). Anthony Dean 02:25, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

You have a point, clearly. And I clearly agree that the CBGs have a LOT of names listed in their various awards. I get the impression that in the lists I have anything that got even 1% of the vote is listed. However, I am entering them in award by award (CBG, Eisner, Harvey, etc.), and it may well be that some of them will prove to be possibly "noteworthy" later, or at least relevant to additional awards which may be received from some of the others. I'm thinking here of a situation where it might be the case that, for example, Story X won the Eisner Award (for example), was perhaps nominated (?) for the Harvey, and was a votegetter for the CBG Award. That might be justified as perhaps significant. And I apologize if I am putting in too many in your opinion. I would welcome any response. And I should also note that in the cases of creators (as opposed to storylines) the standard format I intend to use will probably be "Person X WON awards X, Y, and Z, and was nominated for X three/four/five/whatever times." Also, I'm curious as to whether you would think that such should be included only if they receive a certain "threshold" of votes, which might be higher than the 1% which seems to be the basis of the list I have. Would you object to the inclusion of any which (for example) got 5% or more, or the top 5 or 10 from the list, or something like that. Any response would be welcome. Thank you. Badbilltucker 15:27, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

See my response to your post to my user talk page; basic sentiment of me (and from what I've seen, others) is that only awards that were actually *won* should be listed, not nominees. Anthony Dean 01:53, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. Only awards won. Honestly, nominations for fan-based awards means nothing IMO. Lesfer 18:25, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

Justice League of America → Justice League – Page was moved from latter without a reason. The page discusses all Justice Leagues of the past, not all of which were named Justice League of America.

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
  • Support - There have been many iterations of the league (Justice League Antarctica, anyone?), and concievably they might deserve their own articles, but it's better as just one considering how similar they all are. --waffle iron 04:57, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments

I would like to point out a few similarly named articles: Titans (comics), Outsiders (comics), and Avengers (comics), all of which encompass the multiple incarnations of the team in their names. KramarDanIkabu 05:02, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] sweet new 'justice' image

you guys see this yet? think we can find a place for it? Exvicious 04:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

How about Justice (DC Comics) article? —Lesfer (talk/@) 15:08, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New Justice League

I'm not sure how to add photos or new sections but the Sequart page has a great new picture (composed apparently of the 2 alternate covers) of just about every major gun and most former (and living) members of the JLA with a hand (character unseen) holding invitations. Because the three big guns are in the picture, I can only assume this is the One Year Later JLA and not Luthor's version. Someone who knows more about the editing should consider adding this to the entry. Here's the link http://www.sequart.com/news/index.php?story=1158.

Note also - Booster Gold, Elongated Man and the Question are depicted suggesting that none of them will die during the 52 event. Also of note is that the Martian Manhunter is not seen (and may be the hand holding invitations - though miscolored to hide his identity?)

This image is merely a teaser. Note that the original Aquaman is there as well as the late Tempest, Karate Kid from the Legion of Super-Heroes and Kyle Rayner as Green Lantern instead of Ion. —Lesfer (talk/@) 23:16, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Actually, it's cover art. Two variants split it in half. One cover with Green Lantern and Green Arrow in prominence, the other with Batman and Superman in prominence. 71.112.65.153 04:29, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Also, the "real" cover has... Red Arrow (Probably Arsenal)?

[edit] New picture

I love the new team picture, JLA1.jpg, but we need to get some licensing information on that picture. Does anyone know what it's from? It's obviously promotional art of some sort. --Chris Griswold 12:57, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

It's the almagamated cover from the new Brad Meltzer series, released through Newsarama. Check out DC Comics.com in the August releases: Justice League of America #1. #0 comes out on the 19th of this month. CmdrClow 05:19, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Oops, wrong post. CmdrClow 05:20, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Page numbers

Do we really need these in bibliography? It just seems overkill. --Chris Griswold 19:20, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I totally agree. —Lesfer (talk/@) 20:44, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article is shaping up

It's nice to see this article actually becoming something. Editors continue to better the article with their contributions. --Chris Griswold 22:03, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Yep, but we need to verify the veracity on some info. —Lesfer (talk/@) 20:22, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About the merge

I don't think Paladin656 (talk • contribs) is aware of the article size issue. —Lesfer (talk/@) 22:53, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't aware that Wiki Had a size limit on articles? Paladin656 16:53, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

It's recommended that articles be around/no larger than 32k in size. This is to accomodate slow connections/computers that take a long time to load even a small page. CovenantD 17:17, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
So it's clear why this is not a good idea. —Lesfer (talk/@) 21:23, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
What merge? --Chris Griswold 23:03, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
No merge, I didn't know about the size recommendations. =/ Paladin656 03:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Navbox Guidelines

Please follow this link Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/templates/navboxes to join in on the discussion . --Basique 12:13, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New Membership

"In issue #1, published in August 2006, Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman initially select Green Lantern (Hal Jordan), Black Canary, Arsenal, and Power Girl as members of the reformed Justice League. Only Black Canary, Hal Jordan, and Arsenal are shown accepting."

We need to make sure we're not making guesses about the story. We've only seen the Big 3 vote in Hal and Power Girl. Anything beyond that is an assumption. The Hal, Black Canary and Aresnal subplot is seperate from the membership votes, so BC and Roy have not been voted in yet. --Lex 18:47, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

No, it's pretty clear that Hal and Dina came to take Roy with them. This isn't an assumption, it's something the text strongly implies through Green Arrow's reaction. What else might he have meant by proud and also feeling left out? --Chris Griswold (☏) 20:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but those three are going to check in on Red Tornado's wife. It has nothing to do with League membership... yet. --Lex 20:40, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
You have completely convinced me. Because of Green Arrow's reaction, I misread it as "I'm not in the League but Roy is." You were wright. I was wrong. --Chris Griswold (☏) 22:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I see someone reverted my edit, but I still stand by it. We've only seeing the votes on Hal, Power Girl and Supergirl. No where in the book is membership offered and accepted by anyone. Hal, Black Canary and Arsenal are going to visit Red Tornado's wife. Ollie feels left out of the usual Hal-Ollie-Dinah group. --Lex 21:09, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree 100% with Lex. The big three are still sitting at a table discussing membership - no one else has been called. The other events with Hal and others are happening simultaneously to the story. In fact, outside this comic issue, Power Girl has been touted by DC as going to be part of the reformed JSA. No memberships have yet been offered or accepted; it's just three heroes debating on who they will approach.--SilentJustice 21:41, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm also with Lex. They are not shown accepting invitations, but grouping. —Lesfer (t/c/@) 22:03, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

It's pretty clear that Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman are on the team, given they're putting it together. WesleyDodds 05:19, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

LIES! --Chris Griswold (☏) 06:04, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
I appreciate whomever it was who edited this section stating that there was no need for a page by page, HOWEVER, I must point out that the summary they replaced the text with is wrong. There is no documentation that Batman et. al. offered membership to Black Canary or Arsenal. Their names were never even mentioned. Now, we may assume that is what's going to happen since we know the spoilers that they end up on the team, but until it happens in a documented form, we should be careful not to treat assumptions as facts.--SilentJustice 21:40, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Wait, how do we know spoilers that are undocumented? Are you talking about the cover that shows Arsenal, Hawkgirl, Hal Jordan, Black Canary, Red Tornado, Black Lightning, Vixen, Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman on it? Or do you have something else? --Chris Griswold (☏) 22:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
I assume that's what they're using because people keep insisting that Black Canary and Arsenal have been selected as members but they haven't even been discussed. We must keep in mind that THAT spolier cover is not the official one and could reflect a line-up that has since been changed.--SilentJustice 23:39, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] JLA Classified

I don't think we need a split. This is a matter of creating a JLA Classified article and add a link in here. Just as other related series -- eg. Super Buddies and Justice (DC Comics). Simple as that. —Lesfer (t/c/@) 19:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Isn't that what a split is? --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 01:03, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
As an anthology series, I'd think any major revelations would belong either in the main JLA article or for the individual characters (such as Power Girl's backstory in JSA Classified). I'm skeptical there's enough cohesiveness in JLA Classified to warrant its own article. HalJor 17:39, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
I agree. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 20:49, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
I disagree. I think JLA Classified needs its own article page to help explain to any new readers (i.e. me) what's going on, especially since the series is up to twenty-seven issues already (as of Sept. 2006). If JSA Classified is expected to have their own article page (the link is red in the JSA main article page), then perhaps JLA Classified should as well. ~Tina 21:41, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
What's going on is whatever the currect arc is. Sor far, there have been at least three arcs 4 issues and under. Thanks for pointing out the JSA:Classified link. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 22:03, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
You're welcome. If no one agrees that JLA Classified should have its own article page (a la Justice), then maybe the section should supply more details, plus specifying the fact that it is an "unofficial" Elseworlds series. ~Tina 23:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
How is it unofficially an Elseworlds series? --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 01:55, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
It's not in the DCU continuity, I think, and yet it doesn't have an Elsewords seal.~Tina 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
The "not in continuity" thing is debatable depending on the story. The Super Buddies arc may or may not be in continuity. Most of the rest of the stories should be in continuity, yet take place sometime in the League's past. Besides, I think DC has retired the Elseworlds seal. - Lex 04:49, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Why is it not in continuity? --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 05:32, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

JLA Classified is in official continuity. The stories take place somewhere in the team's past. —Lesfer (t/c/@) 05:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] JLA sales

I'm curious as to what's being looked for regarding the citation tag for the statement that JLA was DC's best-selling title at the time. I distinctly recall looking at the sales charts during Grant Morrison's run and JLA would be the highest-charting DC book. I hope this doesn't mean that we have to cite multiple sales charts. WesleyDodds 11:32, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 52

Should there be a part about the short lived Justice League in 52?

It consisted of Firestorm, Ambush Bug, Firehawk, Super-Chief and Bulleteer. They tried recruiting Green Arrow through an old JLA communicator, but he said no, and said he'll take the communicator back next week. ~Dave 12:12, 21st October 2006 (UTC)

To me, it doesn't seem important enough to be mentioned in this article... though it was fun to see in the comic. Mentioning their line-up in List of Justice League members is good enough, but we shouldn't clog up this article with the rosters that only lasted one issue. - Lex 22:14, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My recent overhaul of the article

Before anybody goes and reverts the page, since someone is bound too, I'd like for that person to come here and defend the previous version of the page. First off, my changes:

  • The title boxes: These were really quite necessary, as this article isn't just about the group, its also about the series.
  • The placing of 'the origin' at the end of the publication history rather than at the front: I found that an analysis of the team's origin would better fit at the end than it would in the beginning. Heck, if a fictional history section is created, it would actually be best suited over there.
  • Removal of the JLA #115 cover: Really unnecessary picture that added nothing.
  • Insertion of trivia into article: A single bulleted point that fit perfectly in the article, so why not?
  • Change of headers: Again, it's not just a group page, it's a series page. It isn't about being OYL, it's about there being a second volume of the JLofA. Also, the mini was not called "Super Buddies", it was called "Formerly Known as the Justice League".
  • Awards and bibliography before other media: A seemingly logical thing to me, since the article is still about the comic, and the awards and bibliography pertain to the comic, and should therefore preceed the other media.
  • Division of "see also": Clearer so that people can exactly find what they're looking for.

I hope that makes why I made my changes clear. I know I didn't go through consensus or anything, but I was being bold. If I've come off smug or condescending, it was not intentional, I'm just afraid this page will now be needlessly reverted. Kusonaga 14:51, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] regarding the long header in origins section

Vague? How is it vague? The article is about Justice League, so the origins' section has to be about the Justice League... —Lesfer (t/c/@) 15:55, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but it doesn't specify exactly what aspect it would be the origin of. Stating it as "Various origins of the Justice League" immediately makes it clear that we are talking about the group as opposed to the title. If other editors however agree that it is unnecessary to denote "of the Justice League", I won't fight its removal. Kusonaga 16:09, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] smallville Justice league

I was wondering if it was ok if these image could be put on the page http://myspace-774.vo.llnwd.net/01532/47/72/1532042774_m.jpg —supermike

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../j/u/s/Talk%7EJustice_League_ba85.html"