This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Comics: DC Comics Mid‑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 articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by DC Comics work group. Fictional characters This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters 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.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Khaos, The picture emphasises the size of the corps. As it stands the picture seems too small.

Increasing the size to 300px should make it a bit more visible (and the point of the thumbnail is that one can always click on it to see the bigger picture), but there is still no good reason for centering it on the article page. --khaosworks 20:07, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

I've combined these two entries as it turns out they are one and the same rank and title. As describe, the rank and title are introduced in TotGLC #1, in issue #3 Hal Jordan is offered the Crimson Mantle of Command, this is what the Honor Guard are shown to wear, what they are in fact offering him is the rank of Honor Guard and leadership of the Corps.

I may be wrong, but I thought that the 24 hour charge on the rings were a thing of the past. If so references should be updated.--A Parallax View 22:57, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that is just for Kyle Raynor's (Ion) ring.Arcayne 01:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They are a thing of the past. I believe they just need to keep power battery near by in pocket dimension, discovered by Kronos. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.60.90.22 (talk) 01:12, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering, does the Corps have backup Lanterns assigned to high population sectors like 2814? In other words, do Jordan and Stewart currently have backups?--kchishol1970 01:52, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stewart is Jordan's backup, Jordan is sector 2814.1, Stewart is 2814.2, Kyle was Ion, he might be 2814.3, Guy is GL#1 or honor gaurd 1, the comic was great until Jordan returned (the whole return was a great story, but Jordan is a mass murder (zero hour) and should have stayed the Specter to pay for his sins) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.163.4.128 (talk) 15:54, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is worth mentioning how the Corps is currently jailing Superboy Prime. --waffle iron ^talk 17:30, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I think it is something of universal note, at least in DC.--A Parallax View 22:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Like LEGION and Darkstars. --Basique 20:29, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done! --Hemlock Martinis 00:14, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is the word "intergalactic" actually used in these comics? If so, it belongs here, but I've noticed that lately lots of idiots use that word without understanding it: they think that what is seen in Star Wars and Star Trek is intergalactic travel. You'd think any 12-year-old would understand the difference and those who don't could never learn how to tie their shoes and speak in complete sentences, but some of these people are actually functioning adults who've graduated from college. Frightening. Michael Hardy 21:37, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a space ranger. What do you think "intergalactic" mean for all the idiots who might be reading this? --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 21:39, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Believe it or not, "inter-galactic" (or other variations on the spelling) has been used in comics (and fiction) for a rather long time. Space Ranger, that ChrisGriswold alluded to above is an excellent example. As for the GLC, consider that each of the 3600 sectors is comprised of many galaxies, you may realise why the term has been used (and often). If you're truly looking for more examples, and not just venting an opinion, feel free to ask. - jc37 04:06, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would imagine that this has become commonplace because it was such back in the days when comics were written pre-spaceflight. Interstellar was just as big a term as intergalactic both in relative distance to the 1950's and 1960's nomenclature as well as terminology; both meant the same thing - Very Far Away. I think that eventually, the language will catch up to the mean educational level and we will find something else to find issue with, like you know - that whole Power Battery Thing and skin-tight costumes that show neither packages nor cameltoes.

Also, intergalactic just sounds sexier and more exotic than interstellar or intra-stellar. :DArcayne 04:41, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to point out that the new Green Lantern Corps comics do use the term "intergalactic". a partial quote from Green Lantern Corps #1: "The best and brightest serve proudly as members of the intergalactic peacekeepers known as the Green Lantern Corps". So the comics do use the term intergalactic. 70.17.150.74 04:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

while done and dusted just want to point out that in it's own media the termenology does allow much to be desired. in comics they normally refer to having multiple galaxies in a sector but have divided up the universe(?) into 3600 pieces for this intergalatic is correct. in others like movies/cartoon series, and other heroes comics they say they cut up the galaxy and neirbhouring galaxies are home to other notorius factions. in the later intergalactic does sound incorrect but at least the division of the zones is more plausable considering they have forgotten zones in a universe that has bet cut into a circle (seriously how can that even work? i did not see this 1degree slice over here?). so it depends on which media as to the term being correct or used like startrek to explain solar systems in 1 galaxy.152.91.9.153 (talk) 05:38, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In Green Lantern Corps #7 and #8, a new branch of the Green Lantern Corps called the "Green Lantern Corpse" is introduced, it's an elite black ops branch of the Lanterns. They don't use Power Rings, but instead swallow power disks that give them all of a rings powers for a limited time, exept that instead of green energy, it is purple. Shouldn't the "Green Lantern Corpse" be mentioned in the article? 151.203.160.62 21:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added the info. 151.203.160.62 22:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am no expert, but the Lensman stuff needs citations. It currently runs the risk of ORArcayne 02:01, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the italicized text:

In the early days of the Universe, natives of the overpopulated planet Maltus (sometimes spelled Malthus as a possible reference to famous overpopulation author Thomas Malthus) evolved into immortals of great power.

as it has remained unsourced. I put it here in case it can later be sourced. As well, I will readjust the sentence to reflect the possible spelling dfference. Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 14:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:GLWeapons.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:54, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Guardians by Igle.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:29, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With the recent influx of information on the new universes of the post IC multiverse and Green Lanterns being promanent in a lot of major storylines with series like Countdown Arena and the Sinestro Corps War, I propose we expand to include all we know. Let alone the Sinestro Corps mention added to this article, I propose we expand the article to cover all of the alternate universes Green Lantern Corps and related/similar groups we know to be in continuity. The Star Saphire group being generated right now might then also warrant a mention if the Sinestro Corps has. The mention of other colors in the spectrum such as Red lanterns references as well as Wildstorms blue ones might warrant mention as well.

Likely a simple blurb in this article for the basic premises for different groups and the universes they exist in would be a start, and the originating stories they came from to start with. Later, add individual pages for expanded information as it comes in along with how they tie in to the primary New Earth GLC. I do agree with Arcayne on editing out my earlier editions of the other universe groups. The structure of everything might require a brand new page, under some heading to be determined here soon first. But, most pages of characters make note of alternate versions from other universes, media or in the case of DC, defunct universes. Let alone frequent mentions of homages. There aren't many verifiable connections between the current organizations to New Earth though beyond the fact they are for all intents and purposes alternate versions of the same organization or variations thereof. Thats why I'm starting this to discuss the future of this section. I was suprised as any when the Earth-3 Green Lantern Corpse was mentioned in the preview Countdown 31 pages released. The fact more crosses, mentions and such are my motivation for adding them in the first place. The fact there is still another major GL storyline coming up AFTER Final Crisis as mentioned in many interviews seems all of this stuff might just tie in in the future. It has been mentioned it is the culmination of a lot of these long running arcs, Rainbow batteries, alternates and so forth. LMWanderer 01:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am thinking that - and this is just an idea - that these other groups should be written as stand-alone articles, and linked to this article via either categories (fictional law-enforcement agencies, etc.). The problem I see with tying them in here is that adding the information here means that you have to explain who the group is, and then explain their connection to the GLC, which comes too close to OR by synthesis to not get tagged and/or removed. If there are other articles on these other agencies, with citations noting the inspiration/connection to the GLC, they can be tied in a lot more effectively, wouldn't you think? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 02:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Duck dodgers 2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 15:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• "You've go to keep them separated!" One is a description of a limited series, the other is fictional group. Though connected, it is unnecessary to merge to two. -66.109.248.114 (talk) 01:20, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep separate Agreed. Nightscream (talk) 14:40, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should we make a seperate page for the Alpha Lanterns? Herro440 (talk) 19:17, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it ever gets large enough to justify splitting it off. Right now it isn't, and it doesn't look like it will be. - J Greb (talk) 19:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't there something about the Manhunters final atrocity being a massacre of some sort in the Vega system? This isn't mentioned in either this or the Manhunter article, but I have a strong feeling I've read this somewhere. Fellow nerds, help me out! 130.240.217.145 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 18:53, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb (talk) 16:39, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Under the Disciplinary Action that the Guardians would impose on the Green Lanterns that broke the laws of the book of Oa, shouldnt the Actions be defined more thoroughly than just a name? Also, since Superman Prime had escaped, wouldnt it be prudent to remove "Prime Duty" under that list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.83.30.53 (talk) 22:36, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image Image:Sinestro corps gather.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:52, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

this ---> Image:GlCv2.jpg or ---> Image:Green_Lantern_Corps.jpg

First off, "vote" is a poor choice of terms. At best this is an attempt to show a reason to change the image or see if there is a consensus for the change.

Having said that... Is there a particular reason to remove the current sourced and FURed image and replace it with the newer, loosely source one showing a slightly different cast set?

- J Greb (talk) 00:39, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1] you dont need to over-analyze it, i wanted to make that change but instead of starting a revert war with you i did this, big deal.

2] i care very much for the visual presentation of wikipedia

3] u speak about sources but how much do you really care for this comic? my new image illustrates more characters which may spark the interest of user visiting this article for the first time

4] still if you dont agree yet, we should add both images in the article

Retroqqq (talk) 01:21, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you're responding to point raised on your user talk page. But the few general points you raise:

Take a look at WP:NFCC if you're looking to create a more visual presentation. This is a policy section and is expanded on at WP:NFC. And yes: images do get deleted for not being fully cited.

You've mentioned that you found the image on Comicvine, that's a good start. But is it something that DC published or is it fan art or a composite? You ask if I care about the comic. Yes, I do. And that means that I care that we do right by the people that actually own the characters and the art.

As for adding both images see NFCC policy point 3 - We can't add redundant images, and that's what it would be.

- J Greb (talk) 01:52, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As this B-Class article has yet to receive a review, it has been rated as C-Class. If you disagree and would like to request an assesment, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment and list the article. Hiding T 14:11, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't sector 2 the home of the Reach (Blue Beetle), and therefore off limits to the Guardians? --68.45.218.70 (talk) 18:12, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Even though the formatting of this particular portion of the Blackest Night section is very nice, I propose that its inclusion in this article is totally unnecessary and that it should be deleted.

• Firstly, among the four tagged issues at the top of the article is the page resembling a fan site. This is probably an area of the article that led to that tag. In an encyclopedic entry on the Green Lantern Corps, one should probably find information focusing on that Corps. If it's appropriate to describe their relationship to other Corps within the text or mention other Corps in plot descriptions, then that's one thing. It's another to include a lengthy list of bullets that is so detailed as to include an oath... that is not an oath for the Green Lantern Corps. More to the point, one of the bullets is for the Green Lantern Corps themselves. That seems a little bizarre.
• Second, the section on Blackest Night should probably only describe how the event effects the Corps in the DC Universe, depicts them within the plotline, and relates to the real world perception/reception of the Green Lanterns. The section begins with a link to the separate Blackest Night article. That would be the place for a description of the overall event. Interestingly, a list of the different Corps also exists in that article.
• Third, though the section does include links to the main articles for each of the other Corps, all of this information should probably stay in those articles (as it pertains to them, not to the Green Lanterns).
• Fourth, and perhaps most importantly, (as the tag implies) this information can be found in other articles that are more appropriate houses for it. The Blackest Night article has a similar (though more concise) list resembling this one, Power ring (DC Comics) has a more detailed one than this, and Emotional spectrum also lists out the eight Corps in the introductory paragraph for the article. Including the information here is not only not appropriate for the article's topic in terms of an encyclopedia, but redundant in terms of its appearance on Wikipedia in general.

In that same vein, Hybrid Lanterns should probably also go. It's information that only pertains to Hal Jordan. Since he's the only Lantern to belong to two Corps at once, it should go to his main article. What information isn't about him is about Larfleeze... who isn't a Green Lantern at all. One might argue the resurrection of deceased Green Lanterns in the Blackest Night event as Black Lanterns, however those issues are not released yet and they may not be hybrid lanterns when they are. They may very well just be Black Lanterns. Hooliganb (talk) 02:32, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I feel it need to return to where it was suitatble, I think this should remain in it original area! —Preceding unsigned comment added by BLACKMYSTECHRANGER (talk • contribs) 09:11, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It might be helpful to the discussion if you explained why you feel that way. Hooliganb (talk) 16:47, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In an effort to reflect minimal use, for fair-use of the images, I've started to trim images, primarily those duplicated. Removed have been the guardian image, Sinestro Corps, and Power Ring. Please continue to see where we can trim images, to better reflect best practices. -Sharp962 (talk) 16:21, 3 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]

In Green Lantern Corps #40 a hologram of the Guardian spelled out the chain of succession according to the laws of Oa for the first time: First the Guardians, then the Clarissi (Salaak), then the Illustres (Kyle and Guy, the Honor Guard). This needs to be added somewhere, though I don't know where is the best fit 96.231.69.3 (talk) 00:56, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From the article: "In an attempt to redeem himself after his actions as Parallax, Hal Jordan sacrificed his life reigniting the sun, whereupon Oa and the Central Power Battery were completely rebuilt by the physical manifestation of Jordan’s dying will channeled through his old friend and confidant Thomas Kalmaku. [...] Hal Jordan, upon learning the truth about Parallax, separated himself from it and was reborn as a Green Lantern once again." Someone should write something about his resurrection, I would think. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.213.189.150 (talk) 12:53, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is the article supposed to be focused on the fictional history of the Green Lantern Corps, as a comic entity, or on the three volumes of the Green Lantern Corps book (one of which as a retitle of the second Green Lantern title)? This article features a Bibliography section which lists pretty much every limited and ongoing series related to the GLC that isn't simply titled Green Latern, even though that book is highly relevant to the GLC mythos. I'd suspect an article with based around a book would feature a "Publication history" section. Just want to start up a discussion. It seems as if the article is a mix of many topics which could potentially be split off into various articles. || Tako (talk) 15:18, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is a common problem I've seen with some comic book articles. I think a good handling is with Batman which is about the character and Batman (comic book) which is about the series. In this case, a content split would be in order to have Green Lantern Corps relate to the team and Green Lantern Corps (comic book) could be devoted to the comic book series titled Green Lantern Crops. --Odie5533 (talk) 01:29, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'd rather see this have a massive plot-ectomy first and refocused similar to Batman or Superman, though with the PH for the actual magazines. - J Greb (talk) 01:45, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Green Lantern Corps. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101024225516/http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=27854 to http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=27854

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 23:34, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Green Lantern Corps. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090630194706/http://www.dccomics.com/dcu/graphic_novels/?gn=5221 to http://dccomics.com/dcu/graphic_novels/?gn=5221
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090421030600/http://www.dccomics.com/dcu/graphic_novels/?gn=7152 to http://dccomics.com/dcu/graphic_novels/?gn=7152
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090630062901/http://www.dccomics.com/dcu/graphic_novels/?gn=8190 to http://dccomics.com/dcu/graphic_novels/?gn=8190
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090630054931/http://www.dccomics.com/dcu/graphic_novels/?gn=10461 to http://dccomics.com/dcu/graphic_novels/?gn=10461
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090611214713/http://www.dccomics.com/dcu/graphic_novels/?gn=11744 to http://dccomics.com/dcu/graphic_novels/?gn=11744
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081222014956/http://alankistler.squarespace.com/journal/2008/9/5/alan-kistlers-history-of-the-green-lantern-part-1.html to http://alankistler.squarespace.com/journal/2008/9/5/alan-kistlers-history-of-the-green-lantern-part-1.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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 11:35, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Green Lantern Corps. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090306052858/http://www.dccomics.com/dcu/graphic_novels/?gn=10923 to http://dccomics.com/dcu/graphic_novels/?gn=10923

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 12:34, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]