Laura Kinney/X-23 is not the 'cloned daughter of Wolverine and Sarah Kinney'. The latter was a surrogate mother, and contributed no DNA. Laura is a strict clone of Wolverine, with a few modifications. These differences are slight and stem from damaged areas of Wolverine's DNA (as the blood sample used to create Laura from was flawed). Dr. Sarah Kinney had to repair these gene sequences to the best of her abilities.
 
On the topic of Kirika and X-23, I agree that they are not one and the same.

                    Laura Kinney/X-23 is not the 'cloned daughter of Wolverine and Sarah Kinney'. The latter was a surrogate mother, and contributed no DNA. Laura is a strict clone of Wolverine, with a few modifications. These differences are slight and stem from damaged areas of Wolverine's DNA (as the blood sample used to create Laura from was flawed). Dr. Sarah Kinney had to repair these gene sequences to the best of her abilities.  On the topic of Kirika and X-23, I agree that they are not one and the same.

                   

               

Yeah, I don't see much similarity even visually. 
 
    

Just to play devils advocate,  the manner in which they are connected to Wolverine  doesn't discount the fact that she is  the AoA counterpart of X-23. She's Wolverine's daughter with a different backstory (like all the AoA counterparts).

She was even called X-23...

Laura Kinney/X-23 is not the 'cloned daughter of Wolverine and Sarah Kinney'. The latter was a surrogate mother, and contributed no DNA. Laura is a strict clone of Wolverine, with a few modifications. These differences are slight and stem from damaged areas of Wolverine's DNA (as the blood sample used to create Laura from was flawed). Dr. Sarah Kinney had to repair these gene sequences to the best of her abilities.  On the topic of Kirika and X-23, I agree that they are not one and the same.

, both daughters would not be the same person.

But you also have to remember that AoA 10th Anniversary (which is the mini that Kirika appears in) is not the same story or related to the official AoA story.

@Gambler: 
Pretty much can only agree to disagree. I brought it to the table and didn't make the change to X-23's page (noting again they have separate pages) as it's a mods choice here ultimately. 
I understand the point your driving home, and the same came to mind when I debated this to myself before making the thread. But the error's I and others pointed out still are there, and I believe it's 
still open for debate. Again by your reasoning I could say that 616 Celeste Cuckoo and House Of M Mindee Cuckoo are the same person, yet we know they are not because a little more exists to debate that.
A question though, would it change your view if Kirika ends up being one of the characters from Age Of Apocalypse chosen this year to join 616. 
 

But you also have to remember that AoA 10th Anniversary (which is the mini that Kirika appears in) is not the same story or related to the official AoA story.

 Untrue. While I thought something along the same lines, those lines we're erased recently by the current Dark Angel Saga story running in Uncanny X-Men. Dark Beast confirms Anniversary to have been next page of AoA, and the Dark Angel Saga the current (as well the Exiles adventures were directly tied in as well)

@Gambler: Like Wonder Woman and Superwoman

@k2 said:

Laura Kinney/X-23 is not the 'cloned daughter of Wolverine and Sarah Kinney'. The latter was a surrogate mother, and contributed no DNA. Laura is a strict clone of Wolverine, with a few modifications. These differences are slight and stem from damaged areas of Wolverine's DNA (as the blood sample used to create Laura from was flawed). Dr. Sarah Kinney had to repair these gene sequences to the best of her abilities.  On the topic of Kirika and X-23, I agree that they are not one and the same.

Christopher Yost and Craig Kyle (her creators) have said themselves that genetically speaking, X-23 is akin to a sister of Wolverine more than a clone. 

@k2: @ReVamp:  I'm aware of this, and was aware that you all were aware of it hence I didn't feel the need to add the subtleties of the  relationship between Laura, Wolverine and Sarah Kinney as it wasn't pertinent to the case.. (I considered for a moment I would have a user narf me for it but didn't really care.)  But to the issue itself, their not, yet, on both bio pages (I've deleted it on Kirika's, but I'm sure that won't hold), their they are  listed as alternate reality versions of each other. 

Alternate realities :/ psh. xD

Just to play devils advocate, the manner in which they are connected to Wolverine doesn't discount the fact that she is the AoA counterpart of X-23. She's Wolverine's daughter with a different backstory (like all the AoA counterparts).

@Gambler: Most of the crime syndicate is like that. Johnny Quick and Powering aren't the same people as Flash and Green Lantern either.  I honestly don't understand how Laura and Kirika could be sisters if the exact same Wolverine isn't their father.

Comparing this to Spider-Man: 
X-23 = Scarlet Spider. Main reality clones of Wolverine and Spider-Man.
Kirika = Spider-Girl. Alternate reality daughters of Wolverine and Spider-Man with 50% genetic material from someone else.
I don't see how anyone would think Spider-Girl is a counterpart of Scarlet Spider, so Kirika isn't a counterpart of X-23 either.

@fesak said:

Its easy to believe she's X-23's counterpart because every single character in the 10th Anniversary edition is a counterpart of a 616 character, and there are enough small connections to lead one down to this conclusion. Counterpart doesn't necessarily mean exact duplicate or same character. President Obama is not the same person as Prime Minister David Cameron but they're"Counterparts." 616 X-23 and AoA X-23 aren't the same character but they dont need to be in order to be counterparts. In the AoA X-23 isnt cloned from Logan's DNA, she's fathered by it. But that slight alteration serves more as a connection then a disconnection.

@cascadeking09 said:

@Gambler: Most of the crime syndicate is like that. Johnny Quick and Powering aren't the same people as Flash and Green Lantern either.  I honestly don't understand how Laura and Kirika could be sisters if the exact same Wolverine isn't their father.

My thoughts exactly,eventhough there are several similarities,the characters are totally different. The only thing they seemed to have in common is the bloodline and the powers,on top of that Kirika is trained as a samurai,Laura as an a assassin!

@fesak said:

Its easy to believe she's X-23's counterpart because every single character in the 10th Anniversary edition is a counterpart of a 616 character, and there are enough small connections to lead one down to this conclusion. Counterpart doesn't necessarily mean exact duplicate or same character. President Obama is not the same person as Prime Minister David Cameron but they're"Counterparts." 616 X-23 and AoA X-23 aren't the same character but they dont need to be in order to be counterparts. In the AoA X-23 isnt cloned from Logan's DNA, she's fathered by it. But that slight alteration serves more as a connection then a disconnection.

It seems like some people have a misconception of the term counterpart.  They don't have to be carbon copies or even the same character for that matter  for them to be counterparts of one another here are two prime examples.  Ultimate Cable is actually an older version of Wolverine not the son of Cyclops and Maddie Pryor like the 616 version of Cable but they are still counterparts of eachother.  Ultimate Ben Riely is an african american scientist with no spider powers and he's not even a clone but he is the ultimate universes counterpart of 616 Ben Riely.   and like someone else mentioned Super Woman and Wonder Woman both completely different characters but counterparts of eachother. Now I know my examples were only in the ultimate universe but it's another universe just like AoA.  Using this logic it is completely acceptable to think Kirika and X-23 are counterparts, hell some counterparts just share the same name and no other similarities.  The fact that X-23 and Kirika are so similar and writers have hinted at them being eachothers counterpart pretty much solidifies it in my book.

Yes it is very illogical but the whole idea of an alternate universe with counterparts of pre-existing characters is very illogical.  Going by your logic the real Cable/Nathan Summers can't be introduced into the ultimate universe unless he himself is from another completely seperate alternate universe considering the fact that the Cyclops of the ultimate universe is dead and as far as I know there is no ultimate Maddi Pryor.  

Although I am glad you made me think of the Ultimate Clone Saga considering there is another counterpart to a 616 character involved Jessica Drew.    She was a female clone of Peter Parker yet she took the name Jessica Drew and even went on to adopt the identity of Spider Woman.  She doesn't have the same origin of the 616 Jessica Drew but she is her counterpart none the less.  To be someones counterpart does not require them having to be a carbon copy of said character.

Then in theory she would be a counterpart of Julia Carpenter.  The writers instead intended for her to be Jessica Drew hence the spider powers, hence her adopting the same identity, hence the writers deciding to name her Jessica Drew.
   

the only problem with there being a "true" ultimate Cable is that the Scott Summers of the ultimate universe dead and there never was a maddy pryor. 
 

By your logic it's like saying Ultimate Thor isn't a counterpart of the main 616 Thor just because they have different origins and some serious major differences in character.

@afgossett said:

Yes it is very illogical but the whole idea of an alternate universe with counterparts of pre-existing characters is very illogical.  Going by your logic the real Cable/Nathan Summers can't be introduced into the ultimate universe unless he himself is from another completely seperate alternate universe considering the fact that the Cyclops of the ultimate universe is dead and as far as I know there is no ultimate Maddi Pryor.  

Ultimate Cablerine already was from an alternate reality, Earth-2107 and not Earth-1610, so i don't see the problem there. I also don't see how he's a counterpart of Cable and not Wolverine.

@cascadeking09 said:

@Gambler: Like Wonder Woman and Superwoman

Precisely. When making the Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths movie, writer Dwayne McDuffie established (off-camera) that in an alternate timeline you have two counterparts: one who is you but with a different past, and one who fills the role in that timeline that you fill in yours. Sometimes, they're the same person; see, for example, Wolverine (Earth-616) and Weapon X (AoA). Both are "Hi, I'm and James Howlett" AND "Hi, I'm the scrappy dude with claws who likes Jean Grey and pals around with the X-Men". Sometimes, they're different people: in JL: CoTE, for example, Wonder Woman had two. One was Superwoman, and was the female powerhouse member of the Crime Syndicate. The other, Olympia, was Diana of Themyscira. Incidentally, Superwoman's really name was Mary Batson. She had two counterparts in Wonder Woman's timeline: Wonder Woman, and Mary Marvel, the sister of Captain Marvel.

Following this logic (if we can agree to apply it here; I know it's a whole different company, and probably a whole different Multiverse within that company, but still), then Kirika is definitely X-23's "spiritual counterpart" as she fulfills the same (very basic) role in the AoA timeline that Laura does on Earth-616, but she is not X-23's direct counterpart. Neither Kirika nor Laura have a direct counterpart in each other's worlds due to the changes separating the timelines.

Was Kirika created just to fill the gap that is left by not having X-23 exist?

@DFChewie said:

@cascadeking09 said:

@Gambler: Like Wonder Woman and Superwoman

Precisely. When making the Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths movie, writer Dwayne McDuffie established (off-camera) that in an alternate timeline you have two counterparts: one who is you but with a different past, and one who fills the role in that timeline that you fill in yours. Sometimes, they're the same person; see, for example, Wolverine (Earth-616) and Weapon X (AoA). Both are "Hi, I'm and James Howlett" AND "Hi, I'm the scrappy dude with claws who likes Jean Grey and pals around with the X-Men". Sometimes, they're different people: in JL: CoTE, for example, Wonder Woman had two. One was Superwoman, and was the female powerhouse member of the Crime Syndicate. The other, Olympia, was Diana of Themyscira. Incidentally, Superwoman's really name was Mary Batson. She had two counterparts in Wonder Woman's timeline: Wonder Woman, and Mary Marvel, the sister of Captain Marvel.

Following this logic (if we can agree to apply it here; I know it's a whole different company, and probably a whole different Multiverse within that company, but still), then Kirika is definitely X-23's "spiritual counterpart" as she fulfills the same (very basic) role in the AoA timeline that Laura does on Earth-616, but she is not X-23's direct counterpart. Neither Kirika nor Laura have a direct counterpart in each other's worlds due to the changes separating the timelines.

You just wrinkled my brain.

Well based on marvel vs capcom 3 X-23 and kirika are counterparts XD

Kirka is the AOA counterpart of X-23. Deal with it Bub. Marvel has even stated it.

@jordama: Kirika was created specifically to fill the X-23 gap in AoA, yes.

@DFChewie: Then it seems clear that she is the counterpart. End of essay arguments.

@jordama said:

@DFChewie: Then it seems clear that she is the counterpart. End of essay arguments.

We reached an agreement and ended that months ago. Sorry for posting " essays " of in my thread? Seriously, your frequent need to outwardly dismiss my posts is getting a little irritating.

@CATPANEXE said:

@jordama said:

@DFChewie: Then it seems clear that she is the counterpart. End of essay arguments.

We reached an agreement and ended that months ago. Sorry for posting " essays " of in my thread? Seriously, your frequent need to outwardly dismiss my posts is getting a little irritating.

Sorry I left the Forum a while back and only replied because someone @'d me, and I replied to that user to make the point. And I apologize if I offended you, I didn't think I did anything wrong but perception is reality.

lol.