Talk:Order of Nine Angles

O9A has been dissolved since the 21st of december 2023

[1]

They will probably return but for now the every active nexion is "unofficial". Kabiiiiik (talk) 12:13, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

A random screenshot is not a reliable source for Wikipedia's purposes. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 15:35, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

So after decades of structuring itself trough out society and getting in position of power, you really want people to believe they all of the sudden dissolved in 12/21/23???

That’s like saying politicians stopped being ignorant, greedy and corrupt all of the sudden 2600:100D:A00F:C480:3121:499A:5940:BDEE (talk) 16:30, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

I have seen niners claim this, but if they wanted people to take them at face value, perhaps they shouldn't have spent literal decades bragging how they spread disinfo about themselves and totally psyopped the magians.RKT7789 (talk) 03:13, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

niners would make something like that up. I guess we’re just gonna have to hold our breath and see if they claim responsibility for anything or if another exposé is done revealing thousands more covert members… honestly who knows at this point, since Myatt’s Muslim arc, the Order has been all over the place (literally…)

There seem to be edgelord niners-in-all-but-name affiliated with possible splinters? Like the organisations(?) with numbers as their names… Lucifer wept… what a clusterfuck… I hope us magians aren’t just being deceived and there isn’t some big conspiracy going on… 2A00:23C6:D603:8001:ADDC:152C:FF69:9F22 (talk) 21:16, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

actually, could be a smart move from glowies to dissolve/demoralise splinters… we’re missing some SERIOUS context here 2A00:23C6:D603:8001:ADDC:152C:FF69:9F22 (talk) 21:22, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

a majority of this page is incorrect

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)

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)

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)

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

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

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

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

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

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)

@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)

@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)

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

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)