Talk:Richie Rich (character)

	Comics portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by United States 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

So what exactly does he do in the comics?

Runs around solving crimes, going on wild adventures, defeating communism, what?

-G

See B., oh, and this is for talking about the article itself. Don't worry. Common newbie's mistake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.138.7.148 (talk) 00:32, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So, let's phrase the original command as "The article should mention what Richie Rich does, rather than force us to wildly speculate if he runs around solving crimes, going on wild adventures, defeating communism, what?"

Richie Rich tv movie??

Didn't Richie Rich have a made-for-tv movie sometime in the mid 1980's? I recall watching possibly a Sunday night feature (maybe an hour long) when I was a young teen that introduced me to Richie Rich and sparked my interest for it. Does anyone else have any recognition of this??

Some of the RR comics I have contain advertisements for a Richie Rich TV show. That's as much as I know about it.--76.2.44.243 13:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Richierich-comic.jpg

Image:Richierich-comic.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 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 05:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually - It WAS stated in several comic books that Regina and Vanessa are SISTERS; My family owned several footlockers of Harvey Comics from the 1960's to 1980's...— Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.114.58.46 (talk) 18:42, January 30, 2009

Ravenette?

His snobby ravenette girlfriend ? What does ravenette mean ? 2001:44B8:3102:BB00:40D8:FE2E:3B0D:99E (talk) 10:22, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A woman with very dark hair, specifically the colour of a raven's feathers.--Auric talk 12:03, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 October 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:22, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

– Clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the name "Richie Rich". Most everything else on the disambiguation page is named after the original comics and I'm going to hazard a guess as to say the nicknamed people are likely inspired by it too. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 19:45, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, good idea. -- Toughpigs (talk) 19:59, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What about the TV and movie versions? The fact that the topics of other articles are derived from or inspired by one is not a basis for primary topic. Some evidence that the topic is "highly likely...to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term" and that it has greater "long-term significance". Pageview stats cast doubt on the former. — AjaxSmack 00:50, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say this incarnation has more longterm significance. The movie gets more views, but the movie was clearly based on and came after the comic book version. It just wouldn't make sense to put the 1994 movie on the same level of primariness as the 1953 character that came long before it and inspired it._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 11:27, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. It's not clear: over time the film has 3x the views of anything else [1]. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:16, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as the (comics) article focuses on the print run primarily. If someone were to draft a more general franchise overview to act as a WP:CONCEPTDAB, I'd support that at primary per examples at WP:NCCOMICS#Publications and other media types. -- Netoholic @ 19:42, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Alternate proposal split Richie Rich (comics) → Richie Rich (character) to avoid confusion between the character and comic (Oinkers42) (talk) 04:15, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@(Oinkers42): That isn't really much of a split. If you made a character article, you'd be able to take very little content from this article. I wouldn't oppose it, but it doesn't require debate either, you can be WP:BOLD and make it if you want._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 16:05, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Infobox image

I have moved the cover for the last issue into the infobox and removed the first edition cover. There is no justification for two non-free covers (WP:NFCC#3a), and the final cover provides a better illustration of Richie Rich in his typical clothing / look. -- Whpq (talk) 15:39, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Whpq: If there's just going to be one cover there, then I think that the first issue is more significant than the last issue. I understand your point that the costume is more recognizable on the final issue's cover, but by then it was a last gasp, and that specific cover is no more significant than any other random cover published over the years. I'd like to switch the picture in the infobox back to the first issue, which is more interesting historically. What do you think? — Toughpigs (talk) 15:52, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is no sourced discussion about either the first nor last cover, so I don't see either as having any more significance over the other. The look the of character is something that should be illustrated so I am still in favour of the last cover. -- Whpq (talk) 16:14, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for your response. — Toughpigs (talk) 16:23, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]