Talk:Rosé's child

Need for this article
The more I think about it, does this kid really need to be counted as a character? I mean, he's a plot point at best. Not that I'm casting my judgment already, but still...would it be more thorough to keep this page around, just for completeness' sake? CorbeauKarasu 23:00, May 22, 2010 (UTC)

I really don't think this should be a page. Its an incredibly minor character.. and not really even a character at that. Just my opinion, though. Final word is up to you. But on that note, I noticed in the page they mention something about Rose's /kids/? There's nothing that implies those are hers.. or that she even had more than one. Especially when you consider the fact they look nothing like her. Nub888 03:23, May 23, 2010 (UTC)

You're right. It's probably more a case of her caring for a bunch of village kids than her considering them her children. CorbeauKarasu 03:27, May 23, 2010 (UTC)

If we keep this article, make it at least ten times shorter... Kiadony 05:46, May 23, 2010 (UTC)

What happened to that past notion of removing this? I still don't think it's necessary at all. It's just a baby; it doesn't do anything worth mentioning at all.

"Rose had a baby from rape" followed by a picture on the Rose page should more than cover this, I think. Tommy-Vercetti 22:34, July 19, 2011 (UTC)


 * The debate as to what is in scope vs. what isn't continues. BrokenSphere  (Talk) 22:48, July 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * ^CK said it best right at the very top:
 * "This child isn't even a character, it's a plot device"
 * Why does it even need a page?Tommy-Vercetti 22:58, July 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * Why does it even need a page?Tommy-Vercetti 22:58, July 19, 2011 (UTC)


 * Those are your words, paraphrasing above. Look again at what was said by whom.  So now it seems that we are wondering if a person, vs. something like an object, piece of technology, or something intangible which appears in the 2003 series is a character or not.


 * Is this the only discrete character who functions as a plot device? There are none who are named running around?  At all?


 * Now would it make a difference if this covered all 3 kids and was titled Rose's children? Would it make a difference if they had shown up in the 2009 series?   BrokenSphere  (Talk) 05:38, July 20, 2011 (UTC)

Rename?
The child is past the baby stage in the movie. Wouldn't Rosé's child be a better title? BrokenSphere (Talk) 22:01, July 18, 2011 (UTC)

Here's my sentiment regarding Rose's baby:

"Who the hell cares?"

I'm so sick of this character. It's not important, it doesn't matter all. We could call it "Rose's tumor" and it would still be accurate. Tommy-Vercetti 22:08, July 18, 2011 (UTC)


 * I've quoted this before:
 * "Full Metal Alchemist(FMA) is a free reference website to everything Full Metal Alchemist (anime,manga,video games, cards, etc.). Its intention is to be an easy reference source for anything Fullmetal."
 * As experienced as you are with this wiki, and this may be a separate issue, I am not seeing why you are still having trouble with this. If you think it doesn't belong, why not propose a deletion or merge into Rose's article? BrokenSphere  (Talk) 22:30, July 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * I understand that much, but I believe "Rose's child" immediately re-directs to the page anyway, so it's not worth fretting over. It's a throwaway character and its page isn't worth renaming. Trust me, anyone who comes here looking for the kid (and believe me, there are way too many) seems to always find it just fine.Tommy-Vercetti 22:40, July 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, I just checked. "Rose's child" doesn't redirect, so I would suggest at least that much, but I don't think it's worth renaming.Tommy-Vercetti 22:41, July 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, I just checked. "Rose's child" doesn't redirect, so I would suggest at least that much, but I don't think it's worth renaming.Tommy-Vercetti 22:41, July 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, I just checked. "Rose's child" doesn't redirect, so I would suggest at least that much, but I don't think it's worth renaming.Tommy-Vercetti 22:41, July 18, 2011 (UTC)


 * I think I was one of those people who was looking for this article myself.


 * What hasn't been mentioned is that for the 2003 series, Rose presumably can't be the Holy Mother without a child, so it does play a role. BrokenSphere  (Talk) 23:06, July 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Like CK said above^
 * That makes it literally a plot device, not a character.Tommy-Vercetti 23:20, July 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * That makes it literally a plot device, not a character.Tommy-Vercetti 23:20, July 18, 2011 (UTC)