This wiki is a XML full dump clone of "Heroes Wiki", the main wiki about the Heroes saga that has been shut down permanently since June 1, 2020. The purpose of this wiki is to keep online an exhaustive and accurate database about the franchise.

Fan Creation talk:Paire

From Heroes Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


  • Think maybe we need a new category that covers phenomena like this? Maybe Fan Creations or something? I'm sure Theories would also fall into the category for instance. (Admin 13:44, 29 December 2006 (EST))
    • Not a bad idea. It needs to be a category outside category:Heroes, but doesn't really fit either category:Heroes Wiki or category: Production. That said, this article needs some work. At the very least, it should note Peter's and Claire's ages from the press kit, as well as Milo's comments on the likelihood of the pairing, and needs to be a lot more careful to avoid all the fandom jargon. *Sigh* I was personally kind of hoping we could avoid all of the 'shipping stuff and focus on the show, since this stuff is just a bunch of unfunny edit wars spoiling to happen, but I guess it's inevitable.--Hardvice (talk) 13:55, 29 December 2006 (EST)
      • I'll leave the category decision to you since you're one of the category masters. ;) New top-level category maybe? I could see some fan creations being in-world and some being real-world. The article is being promoted by someone from this site so I'm hopeful they're going to want to contribute and clean the article so it looks nice. I agree with your comment about the material, my initial reaction to the article wasn't positive either. :) However, like the Theories page, this is probably something the community is interested in so I think we should definitely try to cater to it essentially becoming a one-stop-shop for people interested in the encyclopedic content as well as fan-created phenomena. I'm sure we'll find the right balance and way to integrate the fan-created content without compromising the integrity of the encyclopedic content (like we did with the Theories page). (Admin 14:10, 29 December 2006 (EST))
      • The Tolkien Gateway wiki uses the term "fanon" for somethings like this. --Ted C 14:47, 29 December 2006 (EST)
        • Interesting. I hadn't heard of "fanon" before. I checked out the definition and the only issue I'd have with it personally is that it conveys a sense that information is more canonical than it really is. I personally think we need to make it clear the category is for fan creations and not imply that a fan creation is at all canonical. Reading the article on "fanon" there's even controversy when it comes to the meaning of the word itself!  :) (Admin 14:56, 29 December 2006 (EST))
          • As used at Tolkien Gateway, "fanon" is information that is widely believed to be authentic, but has no actual basis in "canon" source material. I don't know if that's exactly what you want for this category. Right now, I'd consider any kind of romantic relationship between Claire and Peter to be pure speculation, and move it to the Speculation page as such. --Ted C 15:27, 29 December 2006 (EST)


Sounds better than "Paire" which sounds like the actual fruit :o --Arkillion 11:30, 11 February 2009 (EST)


  • This article pretty much demands a Clach article. Personally, I think worrying overmuch about the potential, as-yet unseeen love lives of fictional characters is a bit silly, but somebody ought to write it, for parity's sake if nothing else. (I might break down and write an "Uluggles" (Uluru/Mr. Muggles) article just for s&g though.)--Hardvice (talk) 16:00, 29 December 2006 (EST)

Fan Creation Flag

We're going to need to create a template warning of fan creations, as well - kind of like a spoilers flag, only not so severe. (PS - anybody want to write a "Brylar" article for Sylar's love affair with brains?) - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 17:07, 29 December 2006 (EST)

Nice work

  • This page is coming along nicely. Kudos to everyone who's helped contribute to the article. You've all done an excellent job presenting this fan-creation in a way that fits nicely with the overall goal of this wiki. (Admin 19:31, 29 December 2006 (EST))

Uncited Additions?

  • I'm new to this, so I could be wrong, but isn't the edit by Ryangibsonstewart adding "(ONLY if the said legal adult in the situation is less than 18 years, 11 months, 3 weeks, and 6 days-or younger)," to the "age difference" section uncited? I've researched this issue throughly, and I have no idea where this came from. If they can provide a source as to where they got this information, it would be much appriciated, because I saw nothing to that effect on the state of Texas website. Also, clarification may be needed as to which state they are referring to. Potostfbeyeluvr 21:15, 7 January 2007 (EST)
    • I actually didn't make that addition, Gargyloveswolfy did. [1] Remove it if you want. I don't really care what it says in the notes section of a page about two people that don't exist. Let 'em have superbabies if they want. - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:39, 7 January 2007 (EST)
    • Texas is one of a few states with what's called a 'Romeo and Juliet' law: the age of consent is 17, but only when the older partner is 19 or younger. It's designed to prevent couples who started dating when both where minors to be shielded from statutory rape prosecutions when one reaches majority before the other. See Texas Penal Code § 22.011. New York law also has an affirmative defense for defendants less than four years older than the offender. If Claire is 17, then neither of these exceptions are needed, but if Claire is 16, then neither of these exceptions would apply unless Peter is 20 (19 in Texas) or younger.--Hardvice (talk) 21:21, 7 January 2007 (EST)

--Hardvice (talk) 21:21, 7 January 2007 (EST)

      • This seems to indicate that a 16 year old can have sex with someone who is not more than three years older, and that a 17 year old can have sex with whomever they choose. Can you point me to a specific law that says otherwise? Potostfbeyeluvr 21:28, 7 January 2007 (EST)
        • No, and there's no need to be snotty about it. I was just answering the question about what the Romeo-and-Juliet law said, not commenting on whether it applies. I think worrying about the hypothetical love lives of fictional characters is silly, and couldn't care less if Claire has an affair with Peter, Zach, or Mr. Muggles.--Hardvice (talk) 21:33, 7 January 2007 (EST)
          • I'm not trying to be snotty in the least. I understand that it's hard to tell when people are being sarcastic online, and that my post my have come off in a sarcastic way. It wasn't mean that way. If someone has the real story on this, I'm interested. I posted the only law on the issue that I could find, and how I saw what it said. If that was not correct, I wanted to know. Also, I believe your post has been edited to answer my question since I posted. When I wrote my last post, I did not see the "If Claire is 17, then neither of these exceptions are needed" part. Maybe it was there, and I just missed it. I don't know. I'm sorry if I came off in a way I didn't mean to. I'm just trying to fin the answer here. Potostfbeyeluvr 21:40, 7 January 2007 (EST)
            • I'm sorry if I came across as harsh. It just seems like every fandom I've ever been interested in has been ruined by a handful of psychotic, agenda-filled 'shippers, and I really hate the thought that this Wiki is going to end up the same. Simultaneous edits here have the habit of making conversations here a bit perilous, and again I apologize. You are correct: the article needs to be edited, but we should bear in mind that neither Claire's nor Peter's ages are confirmed in-episode yet, except that Claire is presumably at least 16 since she has a driver's license.--Hardvice (talk) 21:49, 7 January 2007 (EST)
              • psychotic, agenda-filled 'shippers Are you accusing me of something? Because you have no right (as a Paire shipper, or otherwise) to judge another shipper!! You didn't even ask me why I added that. I personally have made a "Cleter" (aka-Paire) Shippage LJ Community, but I stated in my welcome post that people should wait for Claire to be 18 years of age officially before "hooking up" Claire/Peter. Even though I am a Clach shipper and (whoops! can't say anything but SPOILER and heart-breaking for Paire shippers in Canon) not a big fan of Peter/Claire........I have never went after Paire because of an agenda as a Clach shipper........but, because as a law-abidding citizen I've never could see a 30 year old man (Peter) being with a 17 year old girl (Claire) without thinking it to be some form of staturatory rape or pediophilla. I have no agenda!! --Gargyloveswolfy 21:41, 8 January 2007 (EST)
                • Of course I wasn't talking about you! Heck, I invited you here so both sides would be represented ... I just don't want the site to degenerate into edit wars between the shippers, and I (wrongly) took Potostfbeyeluvr's comment as the sort of snide bickering that goes on between warring ships. Again, I apologize for any confusion.--Hardvice (talk) 22:00, 8 January 2007 (EST)
              • No worries. I just don't want to come off as one of those rabid shippers. I do ship Paire, but that's not what this was about. I'm for accuracy in everything, whether it supports my ship or not. As to the article, would it be accpetable to edit it to say that if Claire is younger than 16, the relationship is illegal (Peter obviously isn't young enough in either state), but if she is older, it is legal? The details of "three years/four years" doesn't really matter, since Peter is too old for either. Simply saying that it is legal if she's 17, and illegal if she's not seems like the best option to me. Potostfbeyeluvr 21:54, 7 January 2007 (EST)
                • That sounds about right. In any case, good catch and welcome aboard!

Claire's age

  • I know Jackie was confirmed as 16 in Godsend, but was Claire as well? When? If so, we should update her article.--Hardvice (talk) 17:26, 25 January 2007 (EST)
    • Jackie was confirmed, Claire was not. If the last info we have says she's 17 then we need to stick with that until we're told otherwise. There is, of course, no reason Jackie couldn't be 16 while Claire is 17. (Admin 18:52, 25 January 2007 (EST))
      • Confirmed to be age 15, YAY for the fact that PAIRE will not exist! It still skeeves me out thinking about it. --Riddler 00:46, 30 January 2007 (EST)
        • You are my favorite person of the day!! --Gargyloveswolfy 14:09, 6 February 2007 (EST)

Peter is Claire's uncle

Everybody altogether now: Eeeewwwww!RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 00:04, 6 February 2007 (EST)

  • 15 & 26 wasn't ewwww enough for you?--Hardvice (talk) 01:50, 6 February 2007 (EST)
    • Oh no, when I was 11, I was just praying that I could have an incestuous relationship with my newborn neice. (Ugh, I'm skeeving myself out now!) — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 01:58, 6 February 2007 (EST)
      • I ship the uncle/niece relationship........but, I won't ship Paire as a romantic ship........that would be Ewwwwwwwwww!! --Gargyloveswolfy 14:08, 6 February 2007 (EST)
        • At least it's not "Dude Skywalker, you just kissed your SISTER!" --AverageMan 13:36, 8 February 2007 (EST)
          • Hahahahaha! Libertarian says, "Consenting adults = okay, non-consensual or minor = no way!" Strangely enough, the legal age of consent in both NY and TX is 17[2]. Of course, majority of the viewers couldn't handle such a concept, and the creators don't seem to have had any such intentions. I wonder how all them Peter + Claire fansites have been doing this past week. ^^;; Actually, since the writers are allegedly so in touch with the chatter of the online fan communities, anyone think they might've snuck this one in just to quelch the "Paire" fandom? Personally, I had to think that Claire's biological father was 1) dead, 2) Nathan, or 3) yet another new male char (likely a super) with a personality like Nathan's. Option 3 would've been rather extraneous since the show would then have two such characters running about in an already crowded cast. --Glue 06:35, 13 February 2007 (EST)

Given the fact that this show is international but produced by a USA national company, all references to seperate states will not be introduced into the show. Firstly, it's too complicated. Secondly, NY and TX state laws won't matter when people write in and sue. --Gargyloveswolfy 15:06, 13 February 2007 (EST)

  • I'm not quite sure what these statements mean. ^^ The show itself refers to different states and countries each time it shows them in the captions. I'm also not sure what these people would be writing in and suing for but if they're filing suit then laws do matter. I do agree though with what I think you're saying in that any discussion of these distinctions between laws of different states, while amusing and educational, is a bit beyond the scope of a fan wiki. Unless future episodes do play out some romantic interest, which seems unlikely according to what the creators have said, there's no need to continue this topic. =) --Glue 21:48, 13 February 2007 (EST)
To Quote 4-chan, Incest is wincest Max 00:32, 23 December 2008 (EST)

Claire's Age, Part 2

I'm not sure we're supposed to take from Meredith's statement that Claire actually had a birthday between The Fix and Run!. I think we're supposed to get out of it that Meredith's not exactly up for mother-of-the-year and that little things like her long-lost daughter's actual age don't really matter to her. "16" is close enough for her. Claire, who actually cares about it, says she's "almost sixteen". At least, that's how I took it. (I suppose if you want to get all conspiracy theory, it's also possible she was lying to Nathan about her age because Claire isn't really his daughter, but given that we're talking about an age difference of a few days, that seems unlikely.)--Hardvice (talk) 15:22, 13 February 2007 (EST)

  • But Tim Kring did say that Claire was 16 in his most recent Q&A with Ausiello at TV, and what with the statement of Meredith's and since there is no way of contradicting it and there's no way to know for sure whether Claire had a birthday in-between The Fix and Run! (which seems kinda' odd, since Claire would've probably had a Sweet Sixteen Party, and Zach would've been there to help celebrate) it's easier to go with the latest assesment. --Gargyloveswolfy 15:46, 13 February 2007 (EST)
    • Someone who is 16 could be described as "16", but not "almost 16". Someone who is 15 and very close to 16 could be described as "16" or "almost 16". Anyway you slice it, she's 15 to me. The dates given (18 months old in February 1992, according to the Odessa Register) put her birth at somewhere between August and November 1991, which puts her very close to 16. (But who can trust a newspaper that reports two living people as dead?) — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 16:48, 13 February 2007 (EST)
      • They are 2 weeks away from November 8th 2006 now in the show, which could put Claire's birth year 1990, and where did you see the actual date on the newspaper article? --Gargyloveswolfy 20:53, 13 February 2007 (EST)
        • Also, to state some clarification if in 1992 Claire would turn 2 years old, now add 14 years to it, and viola you have a 16 year old in 2006!! --Gargyloveswolfy 20:55, 13 February 2007 (EST)
          • You're right, she will be 16 in 2006. 2006 is not over yet on the show. To answer your question about the date on the newspaper article, the Odessa Register article was written on Friday, February 28, 1992. Look under the title of the newspaper. It's hard to see in this pic, but it's very clear in HD. But in the end, it doesn't matter what a possibly erroneous newspaper states or what a long lost mother says, Claire herself says she's almost 16. Now, I wouldn't be surprised if in the next couple of episodes she has a big ol' Sweet Sixteen party, since she's due for a birthday really soon. :) — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 23:55, 13 February 2007 (EST)
            • 18 months can be an approximation and the newspaper can be wrong. --Gargyloveswolfy 13:17, 14 February 2007 (EST)
              • Which is exactly what Ryan said already. However, that doesn't change the fact that the most reliable source we have, Claire, says "nearly 16". This is corroborated by the newspaper, and Meredith's claim that she is sixteen is easily reconciled as either approximation or the error of a mother who hasn't seen her daughter in fourteen years and doesn't seem to have that much interest in her as anything but a cash cow anyway. Taking all three statements as a whole, I agree with Ryan 100%: she's 15, nearly 16. Two out of three canon sources agree, and the third is less reliable than the other two, and reconcilable as approximation.--Hardvice (talk) 13:25, 14 February 2007 (EST)
                • Changed the age to reflect Claire's age more clearly and accurately. --Gargyloveswolfy 14:10, 14 February 2007 (EST)

Real-Life Paire

You better believe it. [3] --  Seclusion  talk / contribs 06:53, 9 January 2008 (EST)


Really needs an update and filling in the stubs. --mc_hammark 20:30, 18 October 2009 (EDT)

Statutory rape

Just something people should know, 18 is not the legal age of consent in all states. For instance, it's 17 in New York, 16 in Alabama and 14 in Iowa (if the partner is no more the four years older). Anyway, I'm not sure of the age of consent is in California or Texas, but depending on that a possible Paire relationship may not have been illegal.--PJDEP - Need further explanation? 23:46, 4 January 2010 (EST)

  • Even with the whole uncle/niece factor? --mc_hammark 19:02, 5 January 2010 (EST)
    • Well, when you put it like that, no. I somehow forgot about that lol. That's incest though, not statutory rape.--PJDEP - Need further explanation? 19:36, 5 January 2010 (EST)