Are the listings of Superman, Batman, Flash, and Justice League really necessary? None have been central to the GL story. In addition, when we look at the templates for Batman or Superman, both of these characters do not list allies, as the characters/mythos/supporting characters are strong enough to exist with out drawing from the greater DC universe, which I feel is also the case for GL. —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 20:14, August 21, 2007 (UTC).

Since Hal Jordan, Kyle Rayner, John Stewart, and Guy Gardner have all been JLA members (and since Jordan is currently) it is relevant. Batman, Superman and Flash are three heroes in particular that are closer to the 2814 Lanterns than others, especially Batman and Flash. 08:53, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Superman, Batman, Flash, and the Justice league are all very important to the Green Lantern story line. They all played key roles in various story lines which have a Green Lantern character as a central role (Zero Hour, Hero Quest, Ion Saga, Final Night, etc). They played just as important role in the stories as the Lanterns themselves. Also characters like the Flash and Green Arrow were both considered close friends to Hal Jordan and Kyle Rayner at different points.Cpesacreta 07:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I am not trying to marginalize the significance of the relationship of Superman, Batman and the Flashes with any of the GL's, but those relationships while interesting and adding dimension to the DC universe are not exclusive to the Green Lantern stories. None of those characters, with the exception of Green Arrow, have a supporting role in the regular series or GLA Corps (guest stars and cameoes do not count as supporting roles). Under both your arguments, it would make more sense to list simply the Justice League, rather than those characters individually; however in doing so questions of the Detroit and Europe Justice Leagues (which included no GL's) point to the fact that while significant, GL's are not necessary to the Justice League story. In short, look at the other comic character templates: Batman and Superman don't appear on eachother's templates; Spidey's doe not have the Hulk or Wolverine on them. As it stands the template is more fanboy than encylopedia. 01:38, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Absolutely. Green Lantern's friendship with those characters is a subset of his membership in the JLA but these characters have not been introduced nor developed in the GL series. The only one to have had a development in the GL series is Green Arrow (during the O'Neil/Adams years). --Leocomix 08:53, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Actually, Wally West made numerous developmental appearances in Green Lantern when Kyle Rayner was the Lantern of focus. If you include any other members of the JLA, it would be West. They were also shown as close friends in the Grant Morrison JLA run. --CmdrClow 06:53, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Don't think so. Flash had its own series all along while Green Arrow was a co-feature with GL. Flash's main development was in his own series. GA's development when he was a co-feature was in the GL/GA. Plus GL and GA lived together while Flash and GL only met for crossovers or guest appearances. The special friendship between Flashes and GLs deserves mention in their respective articles but not in a GLtemplate. Simply put Flash is not and never will be part of the GL universe. Reading a Flash article will teach you next to nothing about GL, so why put it there? Ifthere had been a regular co-feature (like Batman/Superman in World's Finest, Green lantern/Green Arrow, Power Man/Iron Fist) instead of the Brave and the Bold mini I might think dfferently.--Leocomix 07:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
By developmental, I meant in terms of relationship between Kyle and Wally, not character development. They were regularly featured as antagonists and then partners in Grant Morrison's JLA run. The seeds for their very friendship were planted in Morrison's first JLA arc, New World Order. It's all in the pages. --CmdrClow 01:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Rann Thanagar War and Superman-Prime

Rann Thanagar War is not a GL storyline. While Kyle, Killawog and Jade appear and it, and Jade dies that story does not center on GL's or their mythos. This would be stating that the massive Crisis on Infinite Earths storyline is a Flash or Supergirl story. A good storyline, but not GL storyline. Generally GL stories, appear in the pages GL books or feature the characters in primary (not supporting) roles. In short, leave the RTWar out of the template. 23:36, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

No. Because of the significance on the GL Corps and cast of characters, as well as the story directly tying into the events of Green Lantern Corps: Recharge, it counts as a significant story in the GL category. Just because a story is set in the whole of the DCU, doesn't make it's nobility towards a certain cast limited. If we go by your logic, then we should also remove The Final Night. It was a DCU story as well, but also happened to include the death of Hal Jordan and his becoming the Spectre. No, RT War has a place in the template (as does Final Night). If you want to create contributions of merit, I suggest registering a username with Wikipedia. --CmdrClow 01:04, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
The primary point of the Final Night story was the death of Hal Jordan, which was stated in solicitations and is clearly implied in the title. Jade's death, however meaningful, was secondary to the storyline; in addition, Jade's death, as a supporting character, can not carry nearly the same level of weight as Jordan's. Further, Sinestro, Parallax and the Cyborg all have established histories against the Corps, that to this point Prime has not. I would not be opposed to the removal of Cyborg (I thought that the destruction of Coast City meritted his inclusion). I have adjusted the discussion point to include Prime. Finally, whether I choose to log on or not, does not change the vality of my edits and argument. 22:33, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
You're missing his point. He's not placing Jade's death in the same league as Jordan's. He's simply saying that because the RT War had Rayner and Kilowog playing an important role, and because Jade's death directly influenced Kyle, it makes it a worthy entry. Prime now has an established history against the Corps as a Herald of the Anti-Monitor. He's a pretty fierce member of the Sinestro Corps, and that is why he belongs. -- 23:51, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
I think I get the point, I just don't agree. The role of Kilawog and Kyle, we're supporting, not starring roles. The focus of the story was not on the GL corp, but the cosmic war and it's lead-in to the Crisis. I wholly agree that SBP is fierce and really cool, but until he doesn't something of merit in the series besides sit on a planet, I don't agree with him as a "major villian." Ferocity and coolness aside, what has SBP done to a GL character to that makes him a major villian (destroyed a city, killed a girlfriend or been a regular adversary for over a decade), notarity and fan appeal does raise the characters significance in the greater publication history of Green Lanterns. 02:34, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Geoff Johns

Removing Geoff Johns as a significant creator is just wrong. Without Johns we wouldn't have any of the mythos revived, as well as all of this new stuff like the fear anomaly, the Guardians now being of two sexes, 2 members of the Corps for each sector, Rebirth, Corps: Recharge, the new monthly, or Hal Jordan returned. He has a place there. --CmdrClow 03:24, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Revival does not equate to creation. Parallax was never in any incarnation a Green Lantern. Emotional manifestions are not Green Lanterns. Johns is a great writer, but he is not a creator. 20:20, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
It's not just revival, it's significant revision as well as additions to the mythos. You're selling his contributions to GL way too short. Besides, your overlooking his creations for Recharge, and very significant revisions to the emotional manifestations that are only present in GL stories. --CmdrClow 23:43, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Geoff Johns is responsible for a ton of the mythos involved with GL, and especially Hal. He definitely deserves to be listed. In fact, he created a lot of things GL-related. The Sinestro Corps, the Alpha Lanterns, the other types of Corps...and then there are the numerous retcons.Cubzrule (talk) 19:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
To a degree that's bunk. Yes, he has revisited a lot of things other writers added. And yes, he has added some things. But those together don't reach the subjective "tons", and in many ways the revisited stuff out weighs the new.
Johns is the current writer, that in no way justifies including him as a creator of the titular characters (Scott, Jordan, Gardner, Stewart, and Rayner). Doing so is a POV push. - J Greb (talk) 22:56, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Johns created many new Lantern characters (read Sinestro Corps Secret Files) including the now standing iterations of Ion and Parallax, Most of the Sinestro Corps characters (Arkillo, Karu-Sil, etc.) as well as being the architect of current stories. Your POV is that Johns hasn't adequately created for Green Lantern. That's completely bhunk. --CmdrClow (talk) 23:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

(dedent ←)

Re-read my post and position Clow — it isn't based on an unstated quantity of contributed supporting characters, plot elements, or stories. It is based on asking "Is this writer or artist credited with creating one of the 5 titular characters?" That is an objective criteria for a section labeled "Creators", and it is one that when asked of Johns is answered as "No".

If the section were labeled "Contributors", then yes, Johns should be included. But so should all the writers and artists that have worked on Green Lantern series and strips. Neutral point of view, remember. We as editors would not have the luxury of picking who gets excluded from such a list since any criteria for that becomes either subjective or arbitrary. An example of this is the reason given when Banks was replaced with Johns:

"Didn't have nearly as much of an impact on the GL mythos."

Being the artist that help create one of the titular characters (Rayner) didn't have a great impact? In whose opinion?

That being said, there is a place for an article list for the other writers and artists in the same vein as List of Batman creators which would be appended in the same way to this 'box as that list is to {{Batman}}.

- J Greb (talk) 14:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The fact is that as Green Lantern has stood for the past five years is completely under the guiding hand of Johns. Creation of the Sinestro Corps, Alpha Lanterns, "Cowgirl," the rebirth of the Corps, Parallax and Ion (as we now know them), Sayd, and other aforementioned creations constitutes Johns as a significant architect for the Green Lantern mythos. Selling his creations short because he didn't originally create Jordan, Rayner, Stewart, or Gardner is a big mistake. GL cannot be compared to Batman, as his mythos have stayed relatively consistent for the past sixty years. Green Lantern's have definitely not. --CmdrClow (talk) 23:00, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
4 1/4 years but over 41 issues (less than 4 years worth), don't over state it as hyperbole weakens your point.
And yes, the Green Lantern stories can be compared to Batman, or Superman, or any other — A singular concept for the focal hero was created, generally by one or two people, as well as the initial story run and an initial set of supporting characters and foes. The initial creator(s) moved on and other writers and artists came in and contributed new stories including added cast members and foes created for those stories. Case in point: Dennis O'Neil contributed Ra's al Ghul to the Batman stories, yes he created what has become a fixture of the Batman continuity, but that doesn't make him a "creator" of Batman. In the same way, Johns has contributed stories, including characters and concepts that may become fixtures, to continuity started by John Broome (since Johns has focused blatantly or not on Jordan). But that does not mean that he created the core character or concept.
As a side note or two —
  1. Assuming that Johns' story is crystal balling, predicting that say, the Sinestro Corps will still be a factor in Green Lantern stories if they still being published 5, 10, 15 or more years from now.
  2. A lot of What Johns has done is tweaking. Examples: naming a Guardian, running with elements left dangling such as both male and female Guardians, using old stories as a spring board such as the prophecy from "Tygers", and re-working old plot elements into new ones like the Anti-Green Lantern Corps.
- J Greb (talk) 01:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Approximation is not hyperbole. You're just being pedantic. Just an observation. --CmdrClow (talk) 07:57, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
What Johns' has accomplished in a reinventing of concepts that are currently accepted as the established characterizations of established characters (i.e. Parallax, Ion, etc). His name is notable and this persistence towards removing him from the template betrays a POV push in and of itself. I'm joining those above which support Johns' inclusion, since consensus can change despite how some 24/7 ComProjectors may desire to be the case.Netkinetic (t/c/@) 03:49, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
By turning his "tweaks" into fully fleshed concepts in continuity, they are creations. And on a loose basis GL might be compared to Superman and Batman, but you know that their worlds are completely different and GL's status has fluctuated far more than Batman's or Superman's. If we were having this discussion in the mid nineties about Ron Marz, then we would be doubting whether or not to include him on the template. There's no way anyone could've known that Kyle would still be significant player in GL. But, in addition to all of the machinations Johns has added to the mythos, he also helped create Sodam Yat. Also, you're moving beyond the point that you removed Johns from the template without consensus. Also, the wrong version is currently being protected. --CmdrClow (talk) 02:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Johns may not be a "creator" per se, having not actually "created" any of the Big 4, but his impact on the character, the mythos and the franchise has been the equal or better than many of the others actual "creators". I support his inclusion. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 03:48, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

"Impact on characters" is a subject view. We can say who are the creators, but to say "he is so good at using past material that he's just like a creator," has not measurable standards. Consensus can change, but in this circumstance there was a clear dialogue in regards to style and format on this talk page, which came to the consensus using exclusivly the creators, well over a mth ago. To change that format would need a discussion, due to contentious nature of this topic, which clearly is a no consesnus looking at the editors (a no change). - (talk) 18:22, 21 February 2008 (UTC).
Where is this clear dialogue? It's not on this talk page that I can see. And looking at this current discussion, the vast majority of editors seem to support his inclusion. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 00:40, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. I will say again that I support the inclusion of Geoff Johns in the Green Lantern template. --CmdrClow (talk) 01:45, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
2 sections below, the formatting discussion. - (talk) 14:20, 23 February 2008 (UTC).

Geoff Johns does not warrant inclusion because he did not create any of the series protagonists (Scott, Jordan, Stewart, Gardner, Rayner). That's what the list of creators is suppsoed to refer to. WesleyDodds (talk) 00:50, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Based on a personal set of guidelines by one user. No, not good enough. Johns warrants inclusion. --CmdrClow (talk) 01:04, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
No, it's based on the idea that only the creators are listed, not all notable writers/artists. From that objective viewpoint, he does not belong. If the section where about notable writers/artists, that would be different. WesleyDodds (talk) 01:21, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
The reason that those creators are there specifically is because of the the personal guidelines in the first place, so your point isn't valid. Look at the edit logs, different names were there before. --CmdrClow (talk) 08:47, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
It's still a valid point; it says "Creators", not "writers and artists with long Green Lantern runs". It's also how similar character templates are treated. Honestly, I'd prefer it stripped back to just Nodell and Finger, since they created the Green Lantern concept as a whole. But either way I see no reason to list Johns. If Johns, then why not O'Neil? WesleyDodds (talk) 09:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
The guidlines were not established by one user they were established by discussion stemming from the comicsproject talk page, notice board talk page, discussion on this page, precidence from established navbox's (Batman, Superman) and consensus by the multiple editors that contributed. I have enjoyed Johns current works, and believe that he would be nice contribution to a "Prominent writers of GL" article, similar to Batman's "notable contributors" and a link could be provided there (this would also provide inclusion for Winick amongst others). - (talk) 19:39, 24 February 2008 (UTC).
Okay then. --CmdrClow (talk) 07:39, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
CmdrClow, would you be interested in starting this article List of Green Lantern creators? Your vestment in Johns and GL works would make you a good candidate, 2 great resourses may be List of Batman creators recent admin Doczilla, who helped provide a lot of structure and format to the Bats list. - (talk) 22:52, 27 February 2008 (UTC).
Sure, I'll do it. --CmdrClow (talk) 07:49, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Done, feel free to add to it. --CmdrClow (talk) 08:12, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
I've unprotected the page. Thanks to all who (positively) contributed. - jc37 03:25, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you! - (talk) 04:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC).

Due to the continuing development of the GL mythos, I've now changed my mind regarding Johns. He redefined Parallax and Ion, created the Alpha Lanterns, the Sinestro Corps, the Red Lantern Corps and will create Orange, Blue and Black Corps as well. By the same premise, I don't think O'Neil and Adams as brilliant and ground breaking as they are should be listed as creators. By creator should be meant the creator of the characters or of most of the mythos (i.e. Claremont is a creator of Wolverine) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leocomix (talkcontribs) 15:19, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

There has been extensive discussion since October, with the resolve that the Johns would be incorportated under "contributors." Johns is a great writer, and I appreciate his work, but Johns is not a creator, in the same regards that Claremont is the creator of Wolverine. Both are great and strong contributors to the genre, but not creators (this does not diminish the worth or notability of the contributions), but for purpose of presention on this navbox and consistency for all comic navbox's is relagated to "contributors." Please refrain from a reinsertion of Johns, as there have been multiple discussion all of which ended with hime being left off the list. - (talk) 22:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC).
I realise what you say. But time has gone by and the contributions of Johns are so numerous, so intrinsic to the GL mythos, that he has gone beyond being a mere contributor. I, too, was against his inclusion earlier but he's has now created more than some other listed creators. Currently we have o'Neil and Adams listed as creators though they never created the featured Green Lantern character. So either they get removed with Marz and Banks or Johns gets added. O'Neil, Adams, Marz and Banks after all just continued the work of Broome. Without a valid objection provided, I'll reinsert Johns and not "refrain" from it. It's not a point of "multiple discussion" but of being encyclopedic and having exacting criteria. Not only that but there is at least a big part of the editors supporting his inclusion. You didn't explain how Johns'case is different than Claremont's. --Leocomix (talk) 21:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

And by the way, the criteria of creating the 5 main characters isn't objective, for instance Gardner and Stewart started as secondary characters and are still supporting characters. Since Broome created a Green Lantern Corps and a tradition of a Green Lantern replacing another, O'Neil and Marz are only contributors in that they added members to the corps. --Leocomix (talk) 21:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

The discussion came to consesnus less than two weeks ago. Stewart was featured as the main GL in the core title in 80's and feature in his own GL spin-off title in the 90's, created by O'Neil and Adams, point to the inclusion as both as creators of a Green Lantern. I understand your interest and enthusiasm for Johns, but in regards to his inclusion this discussed in depth, on multilpe occassion with the same conclusion that he is not a contributor. - (talk) 21:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC).

Alan Moore

Would it make sense to add Alan Moore as one of the creators? He (and Dave Gibbons) did after have a big hand in creating Mogo, among other things. Umbralcorax 17:45, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

It might be something to consider, but then again Moore didn't do these huge wholesale changes like Geoff Johns or Ron Marz have done. My first instinct would be no, but we'd have to see. --CmdrClow 07:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Obsidian - Thomas Kalmaku - Air Wave.... I will add Alan Moore & Dave Gibbons. Retroqqq (talk) 01:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


This template is a mess.

Retroqqq (talk) 15:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Many of the "creators" are not creators, but have contributed to GL stories. I would recommend a subsection or article be created similar to Bat-man's List of Batman creators#Notable contributors, for the works of Johns, Moore, and Gibbons and link added to the box. With precidence of navbox's of Batman, Superman, Iron Man, Captain America, Wonder Woman, Shazam, and Flash no other navbox ennumerates their important contributors as creators (creating a GL should not be considered creating Green Lanterns). Similarly, I suggest that the "GL Corps" section be removed and a fifth addition "Other Green Lanterns" be added with a link to List of Green Lanterns. I would suggest that Sinestro Corps be merged in with Villians and the members left to the link of the Corps (until the specific character establishes him or herself outside the confines or the SC against the GL's). That would leave the villian inclusion of Sinestro, Manhunters, Mogul and Cyborg. Once again, I would suggest the removal of Rann-Thanagar. - (talk) 23:19, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
A few things:
  • Since this 'box is covering a "legacy" character, the "Creators" section is going to be a bit larger than most like 'boxes. Realistically we're dealing with 5 primary characters: Scott, Jordan, Gardner, Stewart, and Rayner (publication order). The creator(s) for each, in publication order should be in the box. That gives: "Bill Finger • Martin Nodell • John Broome • Gil Kane • Dennis O'Neil • Neal Adams • Ron Marz • Darryl Banks". Moore and Johns are among a lot of other writers and artists that have contributed. If needed some thing along the lines of List of Batman creators should be written and added.
  • The "Green Lantern" section is fine the way it is... though the header should not link to the list.
  • The "Green Lantern Corps" section is large, and that can't really be helped. I would suggest separating it into 3 sub-sections though, without heads. Basically the Guardians, then the GLs, limiting it to the characters that served as primary focal characters in various series, then "other" stuff. This yields:
    • Guardians of the Universe • Ganthet • Sayd
    • Abin Sur • Arisia • Boodikka • Ch'p • Green Man • Gnort • Isamot Kol • Katma Tui • Kilowog • Mogo • Salaak • Sodam Yat • Soranik Natu • Stel • Tomar-Re • Tomar-Tu • Vath Sarn • List of Green Lanterns
    • Ion • The Corps
  • Supporting characters looks fine.
  • Enemies is also going to be fairly large, even holding it to the signature foes. I would roll the Sinestro Corps into this though, again resulting in three lines:
    • Non-Sinestro corps characters
    • Sinestro Corps
    • Sinestro Corps characters
  • Notable stories" likely should be changed to "Stroylines" as has been done with the other 'boxes.
The rest looks good. - J Greb (talk) 00:34, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think mess is quite the right word, it just needs some help. My suggestions-

  • Creators should be only people who created the five main Lanterns. A writer could have contributed to a character, but that is not the same as creating the character. Its kind of the same as the flash template, only creators of characters are listed
  • Green lantern corps should be limited to important/significant ones. There is already a link to the main page, so there is not need to include all of them.
  • Enemies could use some more Golden age ones, but I do not know if there are any other important ones. I seem to remember many golden age villains appearing a few times and then being killed.
  • Sinestro corps merged with enemies and non important ones taken out. Also, superboy prime should be taken out. Sure, he is part of the corps, but he is really not a green lantern villain, per say.
  • Just a overall limit to major characters is all it needs. But there are no real pressing issues. Rhino131 (talk) 02:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Nice ideas Rhino & Greb! I will try some improvements.

Retroqqq (talk) 11:49, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


Here i would like to explain my reasons for the changes I made into this template.

  • For Creators group : The creators for the main earth Green Lanterns only.
  • For Notable Contributors group : Individuals whose work had a significant impact on Green Lantern books or created notable GL characters.
  • For Guardians of the Universe group : Guardians are not Green Lantern , they got lost in there with all the other Green lanterns.
  • For Green Lantern Corps group : Almost the same as before.
  • For Ion group : The current host for the ION entity (this could change if needed) . He is not exactly just a Green Lantern and also got lost in there like the Guardians of the Universe .

Retroqqq (talk) 13:23, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


I'll say now that I just don't care who is or isn't included in the template.

1.) The page is now protected from editing, work it out on the talk page please.

2.) I see another accusation of fascism rather than the assumption of good faith, and that person gets a 48 hour block.

Thank you. - jc37 05:09, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


It's clearly been worked out on the talk page, the Geoff Johns section above shows a consensus of editors support Johns' inclusion. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 00:42, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
In undoing your addition, I was merely suggesting that by joining the discussion, perhaps you may have chosen to not make the determination of consensus.
That aside, I've posted a notice on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Notice board. (Which probably should have happened long before this.) There is no deadline, and so nothing should be "hurt" if we give this another week of potential discussion. - jc37 11:16, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Yes, take time and discuss it. Make points. Don't waste energy reverting it back and forth. I'm with those who don't care whether Johns is included or not. I understand the arguments on both sides. No, he hasn't created a male Green Lantern from Earth, and it is soon to know whether his contributions will stand the test of time. He has created some things listed in the template like the Sinestro Corps and the Parallax entity, which are pretty darn important. Whether they will or won't withstand the test of time may be irrelevant to this debate when (1) they're already included in the template and yet (2) this argument is not about removing them from the template. Creators of plenty of other things in the template aren't themselves named in there either. Doczilla RAWR! 05:42, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
It appears that there is consensus, and a page to list other notable GL contributors. Could the page be unblocked to incorporate that page link, left unblocked now that consensus has been reached? - (talk) 23:29, 28 February 2008 (UTC).
It's unprotected. - jc37 03:25, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you! - (talk) 04:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC).


Fatility is listed under a general villain but she is a member of the Sinestro Corps and should be moved. I'm obviously not an administrator and can't make that change (talk) 13:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Even an administrator should leave that alone while discussion is in progress. It's not like that's a typo which needs fixed. Doczilla RAWR! 05:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Discussion? The Sinestro Corps page lists her as a member....Her own page lists her as a member....Discussion? (talk) 04:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
She has a well established history as a GL villian prior to the Corps. The Comics Project tries to reflect character outside of the context of their current presentation, due to that she is better utilized as a general villain. - (talk) 22:03, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


Effigy was one of the major Kyle Rayner-era villains/rogues and I think he should be included here under enemies. Naytchrboy (talk) 23:08, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


I think we should talk about splitting this template.

The biggest problem is that the Alan Scott Green Lantern and related characters have interacted with Hal Jordan et al.

Perhaps the easiest split (and what would definitely cut down the size) Would be to split all interplanetary info, such as Green Lantern (and other) Corps-themed information.

Other ideas welcome. - jc37 00:41, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.