Talk:Simba and Nala's cub

Origin section

Isn't the "Origin" section way too long? It's nearly an essay is size. ;P —Kaimi (talk) 12:31, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, origin sections are meant to be concise summaries- no more than a paragraph or two long. Feel free to condense or rewrite it. TheFifteenthMember 13:50, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

I only watched the first The Lion King so I'm afraid that my tries to keep it short and to the point would be in terrible. I think I'll let someone more knowledgable do this.—Kaimi (talk) 14:22, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Hahaha... ^_^; I'm sorry, that's my bad. I'm detailed when I do my summaries. I tried not to make too long, but I ended making it long in spite of that. But I don't know how to condense it into smaller size without leaving out the important points in the plot. :P--NinjaSheik 19:38, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

I have tried to cut it down as best as I could. If someone can do better, by all means do so. Origin sections are not meant to detail the full movie- hence the Wikipedia links. A good origin section for a main character, movie wise, would be Hercules. Not sure if this is of any help, but I'll leave it here. Xion4ever 23:02, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, I did most of the Origins sections when I was off during my holidays in college. I'm still on summer break, and I finished reading some books I wanted to read over the summer, so I'll go and look back on them and see what I can do.--NinjaSheik 03:48, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Not Kiara

Eternal Nothingness XIII - You have to be strong. Strength of heart will carry you through the hardest of trials. TALK - What I do, I do for friendship. — 19:32, 12 July 2014 (UTC) I don't believe this is Kiara... If you look closely at the end of The Lion King, Simba's child looks just like Simba did when he was first presented by Rafiki at the opening of the film, thus Simba's child in The Lion King, which the events in the Pride Lands in KHII are based off of, would be male. It could just be my own misconception, but Kiara looks much different than the cub in The Lion King and KHII both facially, color-wise, et cetera (the lion cub in The Lion King also has much more pronounced scruffiness on the tip of its head than Kiara does, at least to me; this is typical of male lion cubs in The Lion King to designate them from female cubs, like Nala). Here are some images for the sake of comparison: Young Simba Simba's Child (The Lion King) Young Kiara (The Lion King II: Simba's Pride) Notice how similar young SImba and his child in The Lion King look. Obviously The Lion King II uses a different coloring and art style than The Lion King, but something about the young Kiara just screams "girl" to me, whereas I can't see the lion cub from The Lion King any other way but as a male, given the identical appearance (overall) to Simba when he was that age. I personally find dubbing this article "Kiara" to be a bit too speculative and presumptuous, when the character in question wasn't even named in KHII. Yes, anyone who knows The Lion King II can say that Simba has one child with Nala, and that is Kiara. However, in terms of Kingdom Hearts, this is conjecture. As stated once by KrytenKoro on another article's talk page, "This Wiki doesn't deal in conjecture." I would like to suggest renaming this article "Simba's Child" or something along those lines. That way, we can overlook the uncertainty and the spontaneous sex change of this lion cub. I know there's some strange "backstory" or "fan-franchise" regarding The Lion King that deals with Scar's childhood, other children of Simba, et cetera, but I think that's taking things a little too far to suggest that "What if the child from The Lion King and Kiara are two different cubs?" EDIT 19:35, 12 July 2014 (UTC) - Looking at the "Kiara" render, it does look a lot like young Kiara does...man this is confusing. Just because it looks like Kiara doesn't mean it is; The Lion King is what KHII is based on, not the sequel.

Considering the whole thing we had with Shark, I think it's perfectly reasonable to rename this "Simba's child". --Neumannz, The Dark Falcon 05:46, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. If it's not named in Kingdom Hearts as "Kiara", it's not okay to assume so or call it that here. - Eternal Nothingness XIII 14:27, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Sounds fine to me. I'm assuming we're safe to move then? Xion4ever 17:47, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Does that mean we have to remove the Origins section, too? I worked really hard on it. T _ T--NinjaSheik 19:27, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

No, the origin section is still needed. However, the page needs to be rewritten under the examples on Shark and Maleficent's Raven. So, the opening line of the origin section would be something like: "Simba's child, known as Kiara ref, originates from the The Lion King and its sequel The Lion King II." Xion4ever 19:49, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Except, saying the child is known as Kiara is the same as accepting the "assumption" of having the article named Kiara. The same is true if we keep the origin, it's accepting that the child is Kiara, which we're supposedly rejecting on the basis that there's no proof in the games that it's actually Kiara. I don't think it's necessary to move it. After all, Kingdom Hearts builds on the Disney universe, it doesn't recreate it. There's nothing wrong with leaving it as Kiara because it's a safely-accepted fact. It might get more confusing and weird to deny that it's Kiara, even if there's nothing in the actual games that says it is. KeybladeSpyMaster 23:31, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Needs to be merged into Pride Lands or renamed "Simba and Nala's cub"

The kana, as far as I can tell, are fake."We're werewolves, not swearwolves." (KrytenKoro) 13:25, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Wouldn't "Unnamed Lion Cub" be a better fit? I mean, we don't technically know that she or he is Simba's real child. I'm half-joking, by the way.User:Raitomidnight555/Sig 19:52, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

I agree with with merging into the Pride Lands page, as this is how we usually deal with characters who only made cameo appearances and/or mentioned in the franchise, but have no plot relevance to the games itself.--NinjaSheik 20:40, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

I agree with NinjaSheik. The appearance is very minor, so it doesn't really deserve its own page. TheSilentHero 21:44, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Bump. Everyone is in agreement, then?--NinjaSheik 19:38, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

I think so. I'm curious what the reasoning was for making this page in the first page. KeybladeSpyMaster 04:28, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

I made it as a redirect, I think based on the file name? I'm not certain."We're werewolves, not swearwolves." (KrytenKoro) 12:14, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

In a discussion about a page for minor characters, it was decided that they each get their own page if they actually appeared, and not just mentioned. Around that time the article got expanded, so that's probably the reason. TheSilentHero 17:53, 9 July 2018 (UTC)