Is there any concrete(sp?) proof of where Ritchie caught his Pokémon? --Manga-in-a-bottle 11:29, 26 October 2007 (UT
- not really he never actually states it and people dont really do that in the anime. sparky may have been a pokemon he caught since ash got his pikachu from prof oak through special circumstances(being late lol )RovingTrainer 13:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
- And how exactly is how he caught Pikachu relevant to this page? TheBlazikenMaster 17:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
- it is because some might think sparky was his first Ritchie
- Also not to mention but we do not know when Ritchie caught Zippo , he could have been one of the trainers from pallet who started with charmander and so it would be at most 222 episodes as a charmander , but we dont know that so it should be 143+ ..its not like he caught zippo at episode EP080 right before he met ash so il fix thatRitchie
- it is because some might think sparky was his first Ritchie
instead of scratch it should be slash Ritchie
Rename?
I would like to question the name of this article. The fact that Zippo's manga counterpart is actually a Charizard named Charley throws the whole thing into confusion. I think "Ritchie's Chameleon" would be a better name for this page, although its still inaccurate because the manga version of a Charizard. Does the anime trump the manga or...? Toon Ganondorf (t c) 13:29, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
- Zippo has more of a role than it did in the manga, if Charley did more then this would be a manga page, the manga section would come first and it would have the manga day, however ETP in a manga of the anime so in this case the anime dose trump the manga.Diamond Lanturn CodeName: 05308 13:33, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
- It might be too much of a stretch to call them counterparts worth justifying their combination into one article, I think. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 13:38, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
- In the original Japanese version, it retains its nickname of Zippo, however, in the VIZ Media English translation, it is renamed to Charley.
- It might be too much of a stretch to call them counterparts worth justifying their combination into one article, I think. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 13:38, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
- Sounds reasonable then. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 23:49, 3 December 2011 (UTC)