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.

Talk:Angela Petrelli/Archive 1

From Heroes Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive.jpg WARNING: Talk:Angela Petrelli/Archive 1 is an archive of past messages. New messages should be added to Talk:Angela Petrelli. Archive.jpg


Where did it say that Mother Petrelli first name is Angela?
~ ~ ~ ~ Red = 23:10, 17 February 2007 (EST)

  • Hmm... I'm not sure, it may have been information originally found at Wikipedia a long time ago. She's probably credited at the end of an episode somewhere, but I dont know which episode offhand. Hopefully someone else knows where the original mention of it came from. If you search Google you find a lot of Heroes results for Angela Petrelli, so I'm pretty sure it's accurate, I just don't know the exact source off the top of my head. (Admin 23:23, 17 February 2007 (EST))
    • Nope, nothing stated in the end credits.[1]
      ~ ~ ~ ~ Red = 13:12, 18 February 2007 (EST)
  • I found a web reference that states it is in the Opening Credits of Genesis --Orne 09:36, 21 February 2007 (EST)
TAWNY CYPRESS as Simone Deveaux
NOAH GRAY-CABEY as Micah Sanders

ALI LARTER as Niki Sanders
MASI OKA as Hiro Nakamura

ADRIAN PASDAR as Nathan Petrelli
MILO VENTIMIGLIA as Peter Petrelli

Guest Starring:
CHRISTINE ROSE as Angela Petrelli 
JACK COLEMAN as Mr. Bennet (HRG)
ASHLEY CROW as Sandra Bennet

JAMES KYSON LEE as Ando Masahashi
JOHN PROSKY as Principal

BRIAN TARANINA as Weasel (Thug 1)
RICHARD ROUNTREE as Charles Deveaux

Co-Producer: LORI MOTYER

Executive Producer: DAVID SEMEL
Executive Producer: DENNIS HAMMER
Executive Producer: TIM KRING

Created by: TIM KRING

Written by: TIM KRING
Directed by: DAVID SEMEL
  • Additionally, "Angela Petrelli" is referenced in an NBC press release photo [2] --Orne 09:36, 21 February 2007 (EST)

Am I going crazy?

So there's a bunch of quotes and a reference in the episode for Genesis that I can't find in the episode. Maybe it's the file downloaded from iTunes that is different, but I can't find the part of the conversation between Angela and Peter regarding Nathan being the "alpha" dog and Peter referring to Nathan's accident. It just ends with her saying "I only wanted to feel alive again". --Bob 16:54, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

  • I'm not an expert on Genesis, but according to the transcript site, the "alpha dogs" line happens in the station's bullpen, right after the "I just wanted to feel alive again" line. Whether it's there or not in reality, I don't know. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 18:03, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
    • I checked my copy of the original airing, and Ryan's right. It is indeed in there where he said it was. (Admin 19:14, 7 April 2007 (EDT))
      • Yeah, I guess Apple sells a cut version, because the one that I downloaded stops when Angela says "I just wanted to feel alive again" then cuts to Micah and Niki where Micah says "I hate it here". Weird.--Bob 19:17, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
        • Bob, that is indeed a cut version. This is what Angela said right after she said "I just wanted to feel alive again."

Peter "Nathan only cares about himself." Angela "Your father was the same way. Alpha dogs, both of them." --JLYK 17:55, 28 February 2009 (EST)


I thought she was just severly beaten as far as I could see. She looked alive, but then again, I had to use the restroom ^^.--DarkPhoenix 22:17, 1 October 2007 (EDT)

  • I corrected the summary. Yeah, I'm fairly certain she wasn't dead though I'll go back and look just to be 100% certain. (Admin 22:19, 1 October 2007 (EDT))
    • Didn't Nathan ask her who did this to her? Dead women tell no tales.--Hardvice (talk) 00:00, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
      • She didn't die. She was just in a state of shock. So was I because if she was killed, I would've had a heart attack. I love my mean Petrelli mommy. --AvadaNella 11:22, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
        • She was in a locked room in the middle of the police station and no one saw anything? I suspect she faked it. She definately had the know-how to let Parkman read only what she wanted him to read from her mind.--MiamiVolts (talk) 11:26, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
          • I don't think she was faking anything at all. I don't think she could have (or would have) cut herself the way she did. --Pinkkeith 11:33, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
            • The scratches on her cheek aren't that deep. They could be self-imposed. Very curious as it's not at all similar in modus operandi to Kaito's killer.--NissanVersaDootDoot 00:59, 4 October 2007 (EDT)
          • Allan Arkush's comments in the episode commentary that the attacker "wasn't really there" intrigue me. There's two ways to read it: the attacker wasn't there because Angela faked it, or the attacker wasn't there because he has the power to attack her remotely. Personally, I think it's the latter (since that could also tie in to how the attacker survived the fall with Kaito), and I hope it's the latter because that's far, far more creepy. Being stalked by a killer who can attack you remotely is Not Good.--Hardvice (talk) 01:05, 4 October 2007 (EDT)
            • Yeah, when I saw it originally it looked like the attacker wasn't actually there as well. My suspicion was that it had to do with the Being who can see Molly, but we'll see! (Admin 01:07, 4 October 2007 (EDT))
          • It could be that Matt's dad put a nightmare whammy on her. Or else, someone who has absorbed his power. Is there a theory page somewhere about who is going after the original 12? I'm wondering if it's an empath, as this would explain being able to knock Kato off the building without joining him at the bottom (flight or teleport) as well as messing with Angela at the police station. On the other hand, that would be too easy. (Kief 13:35, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
            • This isn't that far fetched, really. Claude recognized that Peter was an empath, so he has apparently encountered at least one before. --Ted C 13:44, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
            • I thought that at first, but that wouldn't explain what happened to the lights and the locked door.--Ice Vision 13:49, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
              • The lights could be an electrical power absorbed from Elle, or the guy in the comic. The locked door would be telekinesis. Kief 13:52, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
                • That's all true, but you don't need to be an empath to be multipowered. My theory is still that Angela is multipowered and could thus pull off all-of-the-above.--MiamiVolts (talk) 13:57, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
  • I Couldn't Be bothered reading all of that but I'm pretty sure in that part Maury is attacking her and she doesn't know what's going on so she digs her nails into her skin because of the pain as she tries to get the images out?--ViciousKillgasm (talk) 08:45, 22 December 2008 (EST)
    • Could be. It was really ever explained.--MiamiVolts (talk) 12:52, 27 December 2008 (EST)


I know it's a bit early, but does anyone have any guesses on her power? --Hero!(talk)(contribs) 22:51, 2 October 2007 (EDT)

  • has a lot of theories regarding this. Megalomania 08:27, 17 October 2007 (EDT)
    • She might have telepathy, since Peter was able to realize she was his mother after a "Matt-like" power occurred, though it could have been Peter accessing her memories. Dean Harper 01:14, 6 November 2007 (EST)
      • I doubt that Peter just accessed her memory. He is still (again) at the point where he mainly uses his abilities unintentionally, just by instinct. This telepathy thing Matt now (S02E07) learns to controle ist an adept ability and I'm of the opinion that you need some degree of controle over your ability to unlock this potential. Maybe Angela has a similar ability like the Parkmans and just copied her memories to Peter or she can restore lost memory. Maybe an oppositional ability to the Haitian's. BloodyFox
  • Could be something to do with electricity, like the patient in the graphic novel. When she flipped-out in the holding cell the lights went wonky. I'm thinking Maury gave her a nightmare vision which caused her to attack herself, and use her powers. Kief Random Dude 09:02, 10 November 2007 (EST)

Four Months Gone I believe makes it clear that Angela Petrelli was not responsible for Peter regaining memories last time but it was the Rapid Cell Regeneration. --Snow Leapord 21:10, 12 November 2007 (EST)

  • On the contrary, I think the scene with Heidi gives more credence to the persuasion through touch theory. Kakumei 01:58, 13 November 2007 (EST)
  • The Persuasion power theory seems to work well. It would seem only natural that Angela hold some power to explain why Peter and Nathan are gifted. Angela seems to have the ability to get what she wants by simply touching another person and asking for it. This is observed in several cases like Genesis where she gets the prosecutors to drop charges, in the The Hard Part where she persuades Nathan to follow the plan, in Out of Time where she persuades Peter to remember or force his Enhanced memory power, and in Four Months Ago where she's seen directly holding Heidi's hand and persuading her to keep the secrets safe. Having so much experience with the Company and The Group of Twelve, it's most likely that she only reveals her power when absolutely necessary to keep matters under control. Naturally, her ability to quickly recognize Matt Parkman's gift came from experience of dealing with his father in the past. --Dogbert 5:13, 13 November 2007 (PST)
  • Whenever she talks about people with powers, she always says "we", or am I understanding wrong? Like, "what we're capable of" or "what we can do" Webrunner 12:10, 27 November 2007 (EST)
  • Has anyone considered she might have the power of phasing. The writers did say we have seen Peter use Angela Petrelli's power on the show. Peter has never met DL as far as I have seen, so how is he able to phase? --Dreamsparkle 12:25 27th December 2007 (EST)
    • Peter met DL in the Season 1 finale in Kirby Plaza, they same time he got Super-Strength from Niki. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 12/27/2007 08:15 (EST)

Hi all - on Angela's page on Wikipedia (as opposed to Heroes Wiki), there's a referenced quote from Jeph Loeb and Jesse Alexander, stating that "viewers have seen Angela Petrelli's powers used on the show, not by Angela but by Peter":

Should this be mentioned here as well? Btw, I find this very interesting, because I was completely convinced that she had Persuasion powers. But if we've never seen her use her own power, then that apparently can't be true. Obviously, this last part is not encyclopedic, just an observation -- but the quote itself seems pretty solid. - Seansinc 18:11, 4 February 2008 (EST)

  • A user added it to the notes, recently, but, deeming it too spoilerish, we moved it to Season_two_spoilers. -- Lulu (talk) 18:13, 4 February 2008 (EST)
    • Right. It's a terrific quote, and very promising, but spoilers belong on spoiler pages. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 18:38, 4 February 2008 (EST)
      • Cool, thanks. - Seansinc 19:37, 4 February 2008 (EST)

Angela and Kaito have made sweet love

I'm sure she told Matt Parkman that she slept with Kaito a long time ago. Furthermore if it was a long time ago, let's say the 60's, I doubt protection was used, which means that they may have had a child. I wouldn't want it to be Hiro of course, and it doesn't look that way but then again I have never seen or heard of his mother, any thoughts?

  • Yeah they had sex, but for everything else, we can't know. But why not, nice thought ^^ -- Frenchflo.gif (talk) 07:18, 3 October 2007 (EDT)
    • I could've sworn there was mention of Hiro's mother at some point in conversation between Hiro and his sister. I took the reference as posthumous. I think Hiro as a Petrelli is a little far fetched.--NissanVersaDootDoot 00:59, 4 October 2007 (EDT)
      • In Five Years Gone, Matt says Hiro is the son of Kaito and Ishi Nakamura. It's possible that Ishi is not his biologicial mother, but "not the real mommy" is a lot less common than "not the real daddy" for obvious reasons.--Hardvice (talk) 01:07, 4 October 2007 (EDT)
        • Please explain. JK. Why is it that the Petrellis are theorized to be so loose on this show? Geez.--Bob 02:28, 4 October 2007 (EDT)
          • Nathan is a bit of a slut. Peter did kinda steal Isaac's woman. Angela did Sulu. You do the math. :) --Hardvice (talk) 02:36, 4 October 2007 (EDT)
            • Nicely put, Hardvice.--MiamiVolts (talk) 02:55, 4 October 2007 (EDT)
              • I hear in Kindred, Monty hooks up with a 3rd grade girl and a 4th grade girl at the same time--and they hold hands! (Slut!) -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 07:03, 4 October 2007 (EDT)

" During a December 2007 Word Ballon podcast, Jeph Loeb and Jesse Alexander stated that viewers have seen Angela Petrelli's powers used on the show—not by Angela but by Peter." So i have a feeling She has "astral projection". When you first see adam with peter (when peter comes back from the futre) he goes back soon after, verry quickly tho, but when he returned, adam did not see him dissapear like hiro does, but he was just standing there. Only a thaught

Group of Twelve

The following sentence was removed, with the comment "rem speculation":

Angela and her late husband were members of a group of individuals who were involved in the Company's efforts at locating evolved humans.

There's nothing speculative here. Angela was definitely a member of this group, as evidenced by the Group of Twelve article and the several recent episodes where the photo is shown / discussed... and both Bob and Noah Bennet have said this group was involved involved in finding evolved humans for The Company. We don't know anything more specific at this point, which is why I didn't say anything more specific.

If there are no objections, I'll put the sentence back, because the current version ("Angela Petrelli is a member of a group of twelve, and the mother of Nathan and Peter") might be a bit confusing.

Cheers, Seansinc 04:45, 24 October 2007 (EDT)

  • The speculation is the connection between the Company and the group. There is no evidence that the group founded the Company or vice-versa. In fact, there's no connection of Angela and the Company except that the Haitian takes orders from Angela that supersede those of the Company, which would indicate to me that she's separate of the Company. Hope that helps.--Bob (talk) 04:52, 24 October 2007 (EDT)
  • Aha, thanks for the clarification. I'm fairly sure such a connection has been made, but I'm not 100% sure. Short of going back through all the episodes looking for evidence, how about if I alter the sentence to read as follows?
Angela and her late husband were members of a group of individuals who were involved in locating evolved humans years ago.
It's succinct but explains the basic idea without making the reader follow a link.
Seansinc 10:57, 24 October 2007 (EDT)
  • This is one of those frustrating cases where we're trying to get from A to G and we've got A, C, E, and G but no B, D, or F, if you follow me. We know who the members of the group were because of the picture. We know a lot of them were evolved humans because we've seen them use powers. We know that a group of twelve people founded the company because Bob said so. However, even though it's so obvious as to seem confirmed, we don't know that the twelve people in the picture all have powers and founded the company. Even though the reasoning is perfectly sound, and it's been all but confirmed in interviews, etc., we still can't make assumptions that exceed our knowledge without venturing into speculation.--Hardvice (talk) 16:01, 24 October 2007 (EDT)
  • Oh, no, we definitely can't say that all of them have powers or that they founded The Company. That would be complete speculation. Actually, the current introductory sentence (following recent edits by Ted C) covers what I was going to say nicely: "Angela Petrelli is a member of a group of twelve individuals who have been aware of evolved humans for years." If the reader follows the link to "group of twelve", they'll learn
"Of the known members, only Daniel Linderman, Bob, and Maury Parkman have confirmed abilities. It seems likely, however, that others in the group are evolved humans."
...from the Notes section on that page, as well as other bits on what we know and don't know about this group so far. So I think Angela's page is fine as is for now. -Seansinc 13:56, 26 October 2007 (EDT)

Season 2, episode 5

Though she didn't make an appearance, it was mentioned that Matt visited Angela, after episode 4. Should this be related in the article? --Conspiracy Unit 23:00, 26 October 2007 (EDT)

Added Season One Summery.

I'm new to wiki editting but I got tired of seeing it as a stub. Feel free to clean it up, or scrap it all together if it is unsatisfactory. If people don't protest it, I'll probably do Simone and then the others later. -Lulu

  • Actually, I'm wondering if we should lose Simone's Season One history and just put it back where it was. Even if she somehow appears in like, say, five more episodes, it still wouldn't be terribly long. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:05, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
    • Considering it, that's probably the best way to do it, since it's rather unlikely she'll be in season two. And even if she is, then we could just add it to the page, I'm sure it wouldn't get terribly large. I just mentioned her because her summery is requested on the current events page. Lulu 21:11, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
      • Same goes for our other dead guys, Isaac and D.L. We know that a certain ex-con is going to appear in episode 8, but I still think the page will be just fine without a season one history. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:13, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
        • Agree on all three counts. I'm not sure why we ever added summaries for season-one only (or mostly, in D.L.'s case) characters.--Hardvice (talk) 21:59, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
          • I'll go ahead and restore those summaries then. Of course, for anybody who disagrees, good luck finding this talk hidden on Angela's page. :) -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 22:23, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
            • I took care of Candice too--her entire S1 and S2 summary is even shorter than some of the other characters' S1 summaries alone. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 22:34, 27 October 2007 (EDT)


"During a December 2007 Word Ballon podcast, Jeph Loeb and Jesse Alexander stated that viewers have seen Angela Petrelli's powers used on the show--not by Angela but by Peter." I just listed to the commentary, and they mention that it is, indeed a spoiler, so should it be removed? Either way, it's an interesting piece of information. -- Lulu .:talk:. 22:57, 18 December 2007 (EST)

  • I haven't heard the podcast yet. It sounds very much like a spoiler that 1) Angela has a power, and 2) we've seen it manifest on the show. I would move it to Spoiler:Season Two. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 22:59, 18 December 2007 (EST)
    • Sounds like a much better place for this. Leaving it here encourages edits into Powers part of the template. -- Lulu .:talk:. 23:00, 18 December 2007 (EST)
      • Hmm, I thought of posting this in the spoilers, but since I'm here anyways, something just clicked when I thought about the spoiler given above. First of all, when it was confirmed for the second time that Angela had a power and was shown on the show I had immediately guessed that it was some sort of tactile persuasion (such as with Nathan in the first season & and with Heidi in the second season) but then when I continued and it was used by PETER, I was thinking that perhaps - and actually very possibly - the power that she has was the clairvoyant/precognitive dream (I'm not totally sure its definition) power that Peter exhibited when he found out about his brother's accident (and maybe even when we talked to Charles and when he dreamt of flying and Charles Deveaux knew about it). Just a thought :) -- Ericcarner 21:11, December 19, 2007
        • I know that speculation doesn't really belong here, but a spoiler. Regardless, I think that it's either something related to his dreams, or it's something where she can be two places at once or something of that nature. This would explain why Peter is in the past while passed out, or why he's in the future when Adam doesn't notice him disappearing when they're in the middle of a conversation. Just my thoughts. But a cool tidbit. From the video of the "Villains" preview, it seems like she'll be more active, so we better see something happen.--Bob (talk) 02:15, 20 December 2007 (EST)
          • I'd like to find out her power (and Kaito's, Charles's, and Arthur's, too, since they've all been heavily hinted at)...but I must say I've had a love-hate relationship with the teasing the writers have done so far. :) -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 15:15, 20 December 2007 (EST)
            • Is the Heroes Official Magazine considered Canon? Because in Edition 3, there's an article (that's the 4th page) that someone posted from the magazine online. Side box, the heading is "Beautiful Dreamer." It seems to confirm, basically, what her power is. Page one of the article is here. --SpellingBee~Talk to me!~~Contribs~ 21:14, 6 April 2008 (EDT)
              • It is not canon. It is considered on par with interviews. Information from the magazine can be included in notes where appropriate. Spoiler information from the magazine (like you noted above) can be included on spoiler pages like Spoiler:Season Three. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 00:36, 7 April 2008 (EDT)

Touch based

Thigns seem to happen when she touches someone. Mostly they do as she says. This is a definate possibility since in the videos sylar touches her which seems like a pretty important moment. Its shown descreetly through alot of the show but it hasnt been listed yet.

  • Interesting idea, one I probably agree with, but as it hasn't been confirmed on the show yet you could add it to Angela's theory page. -- Friskymuffin - (talk) 13:40, 15 June 2008 (EDT)
    • The NBC commentary states that the touching is all Cristine Rose and has nothing to do with the a power. In heroes magazine CR was asked if she had the power of persuasion by touch and she laughed and said no, "If I did things would have ended a lot different in season one" (I paraphrase). There are a lot more spoilers out there leading to other powers - I can't post them here of course. And I agree with Ryan, we still don't know for sure, so stating her power here is moot - so to speak.

User:Nonredhead/sig 13:40, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

      • I'm not 100% sure what the level of canon the magazine is, but hearing it from the actress means its probably true. Although I heard elsewhere that the writers have confirmed Angela does have a power, but they hadn't even decided what it was until they started season 3, so I'm not trusting any information regarding Angela and a possible power to be honest. -- Friskymuffin - (talk) 03:29, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
        • Oh, totally magazine NOT canon, but as you said the actress saying, "no" when she won't give an answer to "What?" - I'd say its true. The spoiler, where did you find that? I never heard that? I did hear her power is in Peter in the pilot & two years ago Ausellio gave hints and confirmation her power was dreams -- not that the writers can't change their minds, but it looks like they had and an idea of her power in May 2007--Nonredhead 13:27, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Angela's Ability

On the season two dvd the last disc has clips from the lost episodes and i think its the last scene that shows Angela's ability. Its the "dreaming futures" kind of ability that Peter has showed us several times in season one. Like when he had dreams of flying and nathan being under him, his dreams of exploding. Angela dreams of this major massacre where all of our favorite heroes are dead and bloody everywhere. And directly after the dream it shows Angela waking up in her car and they threw in "spoiler alert" across the screen as she processes what she just dreamt. I don't think they would throw that in unless it was Angela's ability that would have been finally introduced in the upcoming season. So is it safe to say thats her ability?--Pbmarcano 11:57, 28 August 2008 (EDT)

  • I covered up the spoilers. Sadly it is not save to say this as 1) this is not a cannon source as it is deleted and 2) someone could of put the dream in her head.--Skywalkerrbf 12:00, 28 August 2008 (EDT)
    • ...or it could just be a bad dream.--Bob (talk) 18:38, 28 August 2008 (EDT)
      • yes but she seemed way to comfortable with it, like we would be way freaked out of our mind if that happened to us! lol --Pbmarcano 11:56, 30 August 2008 (EDT)
          • I'm afraid it is correct and it will be revealed for canon on Septmeber 22nd.--Nonredhead 11:01, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
            • It was announced Last night during Both Episodes that Angela Petrelli's Ability is indeed to dream the future, as she states to Peter that is where he inherited his first ability from! Retroarcade 14:39, 23 September 2008 (EDT)

So I watched that deleted scene over the summer and I was really upset how it showed spoiler alert at the end of the scene instead of the beginning, and when it came up in the season 3 season premiere I was pretty angry.-Heroics

How Did she know that Peter's "First Ability" was the dreaming anyway?-ViciousKillgasm

She could have dreamed it. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 08:53, 22 December 2008 (EST)
        • And Peter told her in the pilot - in the police station - that's when she slaps him. --Nonredhead 23:31, 23 December 2008 (EST)

Sylar's mother?

So, because she said so in The Butterfly Effect, we should totally assume that she irrefutably is Sylar's mommy? They even changed Virginia Gray's article saying "she's the adoptive mother of Sylar". Well, you all will have to excuse me, but when she TOUCHED SYLAR and said "but I am dear, I am...", it remembered me when she did the same thing with Nathan's wife (remember it's speculated she hypnotizes people somehow). What I'm trying to say is: do we really have solid and reliable sources (the producers, some publication, etc) were it states Angela is Sylar's mom? L Lawliet 02:00, 26 September 2008 (EDT)

  • There were spoilers indicated that there was a main character who was adopted, and that the Petrelli blood line would be expanded. In all honesty, I don't think Angela would lie to a serial killer, nor would someone who seems to understand complex issues not recognize the truth when it hits him.--Bob (talk) 02:15, 26 September 2008 (EDT)
  • What I'm trying to say is that maybe it's too early to assume that Angela is his real mother. Why don't you think Angela would lie? That's the reason of her live! Also, you can't say that Sylar has been fooled if we haven't seen what happens next when Angela says "but I am dear". Doesn't anybody think it's too early to make assumptions? If we don't have reliable sources that say so, we can't assume a fact that hasn't been confirmed inside the events in the series, can we? CAN WE? L Lawliet 17:19, 26 September 2008 (EDT)
    • Amen! I am a firm believer that Angela is lying. We've seen how manipulative she can be. We've also seen she is known to lie, i.e. telling her sons that their father died of a heart attack, rather than from suicide (which might also be a lie). I think she told Sylar that she's his mother for one main purpose: to keep him on a leash. Sylar himself said he wished that one day "a stranger would come to [his] house and tell [him] [his] parents weren't really [his] parents," or something along those lines. Obviously, Angela knew how appealing it would be to Sylar if his "real" mother was special too. Now, by telling Sylar that she's his mother, Angela has won Sylar's loyalty, and thus he continues to serve the Company for dear old mommy. In general, she's a very sneaky character, and I wouldn't put much merit in anything she says. That's what's so appealing about her. X] What I'm trying to say is that we should not have her stated as Sylar's mother, not yet at least. --Mask-o 21:38, 3 October 2008 (EDT)
      • We'll wait until she's proven to be lying rather than just assuming that everything she says is a lie. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 09:55, 4 October 2008 (EDT)
  • "There were spoilers" is enough to say it's too early to assume. We can't make that declaration until it's proven on the show, no?--Riddler 17:21, 26 September 2008 (EDT)
    • This is a rough area. One one hand it's risky to go with information disclosed as a cliffhanger until the next episode when there could be some clarifying statement that she'll follow up with. On the other hand we can't speculate as to whether she was lying or not. She did say she was his mother. Regardless of what way we swayed, one group would probably consider it confusing or premature to say one way or the other. It's kind of a toss up at the moment. (Admin 17:26, 26 September 2008 (EDT))
      • I say re-add that "(Claimed)" tag 'til it's explained further.--Riddler 17:27, 26 September 2008 (EDT)
      • Sylar's lie detection about Arthur's paternity has NOTHING to do with the veracity of Angela's claim. Angela is known to have had an affair with Kaito and could well have had another one with the father of Gabriel Gray. Until we have more information, the article should indicate that she claims to be the mother of Sylar. To assume that is not true is mere speculation.--Johnnyd1980 12:22, 10 December 2008 (EST)

HA! I KNEW IT! What about that? Nor Angela nor Arthur are the real parents of Sylar! You should listen to me next time! L Lawliet 16:00, 20 December 2008 (EST)

  • That's a very rude response. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 16:30, 20 December 2008 (EST)
    • Yes, L Lawliet. You should respond like I do: give a smug smile and a shrug of the shoulders, as if to say "I told you so." X] --Mask-o 23:12, 27 December 2008 (EST)
  • The writers designed the plot to lead him (and thus, us) to believe otherwise until it was revealed. --Ricard Desi (t,c) 05:11, 28 December 2008 (EST)
    • Yes, but L Lwaliet managed to see past their facade, and therefore I'd say he deserves to be a little proud of himself. You'd be happy, too, if one of your theories panned out, right? Yes, that doesn't really give him the right to be rude (although I don't really see anything particularly rude about his response), but it doesn't give others the right to be rude to him, either. --Mask-o 12:37, 1 January 2009 (EST)
      • It was rude in that he was acting as if the other participants in this discussion were idiots for believing that Angela was Sylar's mother, when they had all the reason to. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. And actually, nobody else was being rude to him. Sincerely, Thrashmeister [ U | T | C ] 13:40, 1 January 2009 (EST)
  • Well, I failed at adding an emoticon or some sort of annotation to let you know that I was kidding, I must admit, and I didn't want to sound rude. But as Mask-o said, I deserve a little merit, don't I? Also, I think he knew it was a joke. Whatever, the point that I tried to state when I made my fist comment was that we should be more cautious at making changes to the articles at HeroesWiki too prematurely. At the end, I was right about Angela/Arthur's lie and it made me a little conceited.--L Lawliet 05:46, 3 January 2009 (EST)
    • No, I think we did exactly what we should have done. We used the information we were given by multiple people. Promos touted the relationship. Heroes: The Official Magazine printed it. Writers, directors, and producers even referred to Angela and Arthur as Sylar's parents. It was all a big ruse to throw off the audience, in essence making us take that journey with Sylar in realizing we were misled and lied to. I don't want to start ignoring everything that Angela says just because she's lied in the past. If we have good reason to believe otherwise (like a fake birth certificate for Claire, or when we see Nathan telling one person something and another person another something contradictory), then that's one thing. But when we're given reasonable information, we should use it. There is no change here that can't be undone, and everything can be qualified by saying something like "Angela says she is Sylar's mother". -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 11:07, 3 January 2009 (EST)
  • L Lawliet, this is unacceptable and must be I am not afraid to have you banned.--Citizen 11:30, 3 January 2009 (EST)
    • That's an over-reaction. --DocM 11:47, 3 January 2009 (EST)


"Angela Petrelli is a founding member of the Company, as well as the wife of Arthur and mother of Nathan, Peter and Sylar." Am I being pedantic for thinking it should read "mother of Nathan, Peter and Gabriel Gray"? I mean, Sylar was who he became. --Matchu 12:42, 10 October 2008 (EDT)

  • That is pedantic because Sylar is still the person who is her son. But it wouldn't hurt to change it to Gabriel Gray, which simply links to Sylar's page. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 15:16, 10 October 2008 (EDT)

Significant other

I saw the recent edits on the significant other field and I'd like to know something: is that section meant to show people with whom the character has or has had a marriage or just romantic feelings? Isn't there a "spouse" field in the character infobox? If significant other stands for spouse, Kaito should be removed, if meant for actual feelings, Arthur should be listed as formerly too, she clearly doesn't have feelings for him anymore. Same thing for Arthur's page. Intuitive Empath 09:16, 17 November 2008 (EST)

    • I think "feelings" is subjective for he has some feeling for her - technically they are still married - but I guess Angela "asked" for a formal separation when she served him dinner. But they are still married and Arthur did refer to her as "Mrs. Petrelli", not to mention for two people who seem to not "care" they BOTH still wear their wedding rings.
      • I do however think we can say they were married in April of 1964 as in Villains they we're celebrating their 41st wedding Anniversary. And we know 6 months ago started on April 24th, Charlies Birthday, right?--Nonredhead 17:43, 22 November 2008 (EST)


We all remember her talking to Heidi in Four Months Ago. She seemed to be acting strange, almost forcing opinions on Heidi. I noticed the same thing in It's Coming, and this time they put more emphasis on it. I wonder if she has two powers, any thoughts? Dracomaster4 03:37, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Nope, this has already been discussed, in FMA, the whole touch thing was the actress improvising, nothing at all related to her ability. Intuitive Empath 10:26, 18 November 2008 (EST)

That's all well and good but she seemed almost Eden-like in It's Coming with the way she was talking to Arthur, having to reissue commands sort of to get him to understand. Exproject 15:08, 20 November 2008 (EST)
      • Every power is based on the core power, persuasion has nothing to do with a dream power, so far we have only seen Angela use a power in a dream like state. Heroes Unmasked, the BBC show, says that the writers say that Arthur only has one weakness, and that's Angela. I don't think it's odd to think he has to have one weakness and that a man may have a love for his wife of 41 years over a love for his children. Still, if Angela's children are her weakness, much like Arthur if it came down to one person or "saving the world and billions of people over one person" in the way they see it, we know what would win out. She just knew how to get to him. And the scene did shift to her office, perhaps she got his weakness and took control of the dream - still NOT Persuasionin the way we have seen it in the show. Why not tell him to stop trying to end the world? Or not put her in the dream in the first place. --Nonredhead 17:49, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Angela's phone call.

So lets talk about the phone conversation Angela has at the end of "powerless" about pandora's box and all. Everyone who has the season 2 dvd's knows that originally she was suposed to be speaking with Howard Lemay, about how they were going to let all of Odessa die in order to cover up The Company's involvement. The writers said that they left the scene in, but that it has a different meaning in the "sans Exodus" universe. Am I the only one who thinks they should of deleted this scene with all the other Exodus stuff? It doesn't make any sense anymore. Whow as she talking to and about what? It wasn't Future Peter cause she confronts him at the hospital, it wasn't Lemay as the virus didn't get out. Yet another season 3 error. D Toccs 23:21, 30 December 2008 (EST)

  • They way I interpreted it, it was supposed to be Future Peter but we really don't know who it was. That is one of a few loose ends from Volume 3 I hope get cleared up.--MiamiVolts (talk) 23:26, 30 December 2008 (EST)
    • I just hope that if they ever explain that scene, they don't create more plotholes, we've got enough of those already. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 10:55, 31 December 2008 (EST)

Level 3

Was just rewatching "Villains" and came across this bit of conversation between Angela and the Haitian. "Use the incinerator on Level 3. Use my passcard to grant you access. Should anyone ask, he's a casualty of a field op." As far as I know, this is the only time we've heard of Level 3 in the whole show, and presumably it's at the Hartsdale facility. Not really sure how it could be applied to anything though. Perhaps a note somewhere here or on the Primatech page? --Ricard Desi (t,c) 00:52, 2 January 2009 (EST)

    • Dont worry i added the first time i saw it.i noted it to ryan the first time it came out.Gabriel Bishop 15:44, 14 January 2009 (EST) Gabriel Bishop

Angela A Mimic

Hey guys i had an interesting theory about angela being a could make kinda sense as in she could of absorbed dreaming from charles ? Gabriel Bishop 15:44, 14 January 2009 (EST) Gabriel Bishop

If she was a mimic she'd have many other powers, and wouldn't have been so afraid of Arthur. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 16:08, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Maybe like sylar she has to use empathy. she doesnt seem to have any so maybe thats why she hasnt gt there powers.while she has been empathic to charles. Gabriel Bishop 16:19, 14 January 2009 (EST) Gabriel Bishop

I think you're just trying to see something that's just not there, I'm too focused on logic to consider that theory. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 18:40, 14 January 2009 (EST)

We know what Angela's power is: precognitive dreaming. She tells Future Peter pretty explicitly (and now that I think about it, I'm not certain PRESENT Peter is even aware of it). To claim that A) she was lying, and B) the power she claims to have was actually taken from another person altogether is pretty far-fetched. --Ricard Desi (t,c) 19:44, 14 January 2009 (EST)

  • I agree with Gabriel Bishop, I think there is more to Angela than meets the eye, to counter Richard, A) She has lied to her sons before, when she told them Arthur killed himself, also since Angela seems to lie frequently we cannot say one way or another if she is lying. B) Arthur, Peter, Linda and Sylar have all taken abilities from other people, Angela may have taken abilities like Peter and chose not to use them, it isn't so far fetched. Oh and Gabriel did you mean peter when u said "Maybe like Sylar she has to use empathy.". --laughingdevilboy 11:26, 15 January 2009 (EST)
    • Thanks --laughingdevilboy i meant when sylar as empathic to elle he gained her power.well maybe angela hasnt got much powers becuase she isnt really empathic.well really im just trying to show that maybe the petrelli family are all mimics,except from nathan whose ability is synthetic. :) Gabriel Bishop 11:49, 15 January 2009 (EST) Gabriel Bishop
      • I get ya :) --laughingdevilboy 11:52, 15 January 2009 (EST)
        • Thanks im glad you understand ],im just wondering if anyone else knows what i mean


On the bottom of the screen, Infobox showing who is the current chairprerson of the Company. Chairwoman should change to Chairperson. Iam not sexist, just it look better than chairwoman. What do you think? Hopwas2007 04:45, 7 March 2009 (EST) Roger that, Hopwas2007. Chairwoman is a sexist term, so is Chairman. Blood 3 2:28 p.m AEST 5/05/2009

"Angela's sister"

The sister in Into the Asylum, is probably Linda Tavara or Leona Mills. Any thoughts? Blood3 2:28 p.m AEST 5/05/2009