Talk:Order of Nine Angles

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Order of Nine Angles article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2: 3 months

Order of Nine Angles has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 5, 2007	Articles for deletion	Deleted
February 5, 2007	Articles for deletion	No consensus
February 13, 2016	Good article nominee	Listed

Current status: Good article

Crime and Criminal Biography: Organized crime / Terrorism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Organized crime task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Terrorism task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Discrimination Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Organizations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religion: Left Hand Path / New religious movements Low‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of Left Hand Path work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive.
	This article is supported by New religious movements work group (assessed as Low-importance).

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

a majority of this page is incorrect

Closing per WP:FORUM, no actual sources provided for these claims. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 20:53, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

764 isn’t a nexion of the o9a and only used the o9a aesthetic, the o9a isn’t a group but a magick path, “the rape anthology” was a joke book, o9a condemns pedophillia in Hostia (an actual o9a book) pages 130-131 and Drums of Tophet by Agony’s Point Productions is a Satanic Front book, and Satanic front has a shoot on site order for any o9a follower — Preceding unsigned comment added by EsotericRevolt (talk • contribs) 18:58, October 23, 2024 (UTC)

Um, what? Acroterion (talk) 23:01, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know we're supposed to assume good faith but c'mon. Also the claim that O9A doesn't condone pedophilia despite...evidence to the contrary...is pretty ridiculous when the in-house magazines (even if you disregard Drums of Tophet) like Fenrir have child erotica (Girl Goddess, etc). I could provide direct evidence but I'm sure people wouldnt like that stuff here, so you're just gonna have to google it. And I'm operating with the assumption you're editing in good faith and don't have any idea what you're talking about, instead of just blatantly feigning ignorance. And it is so very hard to assume this isn't just an attempt at bamboozling us, when ONA brags about spreading disinfo about itself. And if ONA isn't an organization, how can it have official representatives?RKT7789 (talk) 08:32, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Split 764

This article is 11000 words long, at which point it becomes recommended, though not mandatory, that we split it. The Terrorism and crimes section is especially long, and 764 makes up a large chunk of it and receives quite a lot of attention as its own thing. Split it?

Even if we don't split it this way, this page needs to be trimmed or split in some other ways too. It is now 2x as long as when it was promoted to GA. PARAKANYAA (talk) 14:35, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PARAKANYAA: Maybe a timeline of crimes involving ONA, a la Atomwaffen and Proud Boys page? RKT7789 (talk) 09:53, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RKT7789 That would also work. PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:58, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PARAKANYAA: Okay, I'm working on it.RKT7789 (talk) 10:03, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RKT7789 Thank you! PARAKANYAA (talk) 11:45, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now it's at basically exactly the size it was when it got GA'd, lol. PARAKANYAA (talk) 11:46, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to be upset that such a large change was made with little discussion but... honestly, this was a good call. I'd recommend people Watchlist the Timeline article as well, just in case vandals show up there. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 14:11, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@HandThatFeeds @RKT7789 I'm happy with how this turned out, but do either of you have any specific thoughts on 764 having its own article? Though now it would less be splitting and more writing a whole new article. The size issue is solved, but there is increasingly coverage of it more divorced from its context as the O9A. I have no strong feelings, but there's enough to sustain an article and it passes GNG on its own IMO. Though we could keep it without an article per WP:PAGEDECIDE. PARAKANYAA (talk) 14:40, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PARAKANYAA: I think things are good as they are now, the FBI has been cracking down hard on 764 so I doubt there will be much more news about them. The Timeline would be a little barebones if the 764 stuff was split into its own article. I'm generally opposed to writing a bunch of short articles about ONA nexions, tbh, there was an attempt to do that a few years ago and they ended up getting deleted.RKT7789 (talk) 02:35, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disregard that, I saw the draft and it looks good.RKT7789 (talk) 04:57, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ONA/O9A

was it necessary to alternate between these two in the article? If so why? 193.149.173.67 (talk) 18:20, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]