This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Television High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Cartoon Network Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cartoon Network, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to Cartoon Network on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Cartoon NetworkWikipedia:WikiProject Cartoon NetworkTemplate:WikiProject Cartoon NetworkCartoon Network Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. 2010s This article is within the scope of WikiProject 2010s, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2010s on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.2010sWikipedia:WikiProject 2010sTemplate:WikiProject 2010s2010s Animation: American / Television / Warner Bros. Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the American animation work group (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by the Animated television work group (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by the Warner Bros. Animation work group (assessed as Mid-importance). Comics: DC Comics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by DC Comics work group.

Archives

1, 2

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 365 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 5.

Template:Annual readership

Ok, so every time I read this I have an issue with the main team list. Red Arrow never officially joins the team-he more acts as a liaison member, utilizing the team as his POC since he believes the League to be infiltrated. Zatanna is the closest to being a main member, although by comparison to the other 6 she gets the least amount of plot/screen time...and Rocket was on the S1 team for a grand total of two episodes. When we next see her it's post time-skip with her in the League and engaged. None of the promotional material for the show feature her as a main-team member (the comics and I believe Legacy are a different story, but they seem to be treated as separate here).

Knowing this, shouldn't they be removed from that section? Speedy has the best argument to remain as he was central to the S1 plot, and both girls can certainly be mentioned in the opening paragraph...but sections devoted them should stay on the characters page.

Just my two cents.Axslayer33 (talk) 18:35, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Young Justice (TV series). Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.marketwatch.com/story/warner-bros-consumer-products-dc-comics-and-mattel-ring-in-intergalactic-offerings-for-green-lantern-2010-06-04?

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:44, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard rumors that Young Justice aired on Toonami on Adult Swim. Is that true?68.67.109.78 (talk) 03:40, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Young Justice (TV series). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.youngjusticelegacy.com/overview/hero
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.marketwatch.com/story/warner-bros-consumer-products-dc-comics-and-mattel-ring-in-intergalactic-offerings-for-green-lantern-2010-06-04
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101223112413/http://www.cartoonnetwork.com/tv_shows/youngjustice/index.html to http://www.cartoonnetwork.com/tv_shows/youngjustice/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:45, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As a fan of comics I may be just whining here, but the TV series has explicitly moved against the idea of a speed force existing in this universe which is a big deal. Would it be possible or worth adding that knowledge to this page? Bgrus22 (talk) 09:33, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Sebastian, please discuss your bold edit here User 86 10 25 197 (talk) 14:29, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully, I believe you are failing to understand the proper application of Bold, Revert, and Discuss; I would suggest that you take a moment and revisit that page, focusing your attention on WP:BRD-NOT.

I've now had to remove the 'Crossovers' section twice. Those reverting it have offered the explanation that 'gee, this has been in place for a while and no one had a problem with it before' (which is a terrible excuse), or that the sections are 'relevant and noteworthy' (they aren't).

We have all come across incorrect or improper bits in an article that have been there for years; we still remove them when we find them. The offered excuse for its existence is not equivalent to its relevance. Secondly, something is relevant because it is noteworthy. As in, there is a reference noting not only the existence of such a crossover, but that it has value. Not even one reliable source noting the importance of these 'crossover events' has been provided. The excuse that it looks purty is not encyclopedic. It is a trivial collection of cruft compiled by editors who have forgotten that their opinions are not citable and their preferences do not make it to a live article.

I know that comes across as harsh, but the plain truth is that we do not add ANYTHING to Wikipedia that is not explicitly sourced to a notable reference. Provide those, and the material stays. Until then, out it goes. I will be tagging the info as needing citation; I would suggest that they not be removed until they are sourced. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 15:01, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]