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 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.

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]

I wouldn't say it's necessary to alternate, but they both should necessarily be used, as they are both used in first sources, MMS, etc. Burgercrisis (talk) 22:18, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of citation

It seems the intro needs to be fixed up. There isn't a single citation in it. Burgercrisis (talk) 11:36, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I read the relevant guideline, MOS:LEADCITE. It's not that rare for Wikipedia articles to skip citations in the intro, since the intro is supposed to repeat information that's in the body of the article and the expectation is that there will be citations there. But this is a controversial topic so you're right, it would probably be good to have citations in the intro too. Prezbo (talk) 11:53, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unless some specific bits are being challenged as being unsourced also in the article body (or as missing from the body), I see no need for it. Gawaon (talk) 12:34, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there is no need for citations in the lead, and such additions can end up looking messy. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:34, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

Midnightblueowl removed the infobox because it wasn't there when it was a GA and it was "detrimental to the article quality". It was attracting some kind of cruft but I do think this article is worse off without an infobox. And that it was not there when this was made a GA does not seem to me a compelling argument, since a whole lot has changed in the past 9 years, including most of this article. I do think a more slimmed down infobox would be appropriate. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:05, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In general this article needs an update as it contains no scholarship post its GA nomination nearly a decade ago, which is extra absurd because the O9A is now more well known than it has ever been and a lot has changed in the past nine years.

This needs an update. It was even worse before we split out the crimes. Due to the out of date news not sure if this is still a GA in this current state - and the suggestion to revert it to a version closer to 2016, as suggested by Midnightblueowl, would make this even worse. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:10, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Misinformation

Satanists are most certainly not “right wing” especially in light of a planned assassination plot on President of the United States Donald J. Trump, by a member of this organization. 2600:387:F:E17:0:0:0:7 (talk) 22:46, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not up to us as editors to determine the politics of Satanism, nor whether ONA is right-wing or Satanist; our role is to determine what description is most verifiable. And in this case, multiple cited sources describe ONA as a far-right/Nazi Satanist group ([1], [2], [3]). RhymeWrens (talk) 00:34, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I returned the wording to its original form since User:Edited4Space had changed the word "left-hand path" which he was confusing with political leftism.

Although the rest of the article makes it abundantly clear ONA is a right-wing group. So yeah.RKT7789 (talk) 09:47, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RKT7789 To my way of reading, "left-hand path" is a level of detail that will be confusing to any reader not familiar with Satanism's left and right hand path. That might be corrected parenthetically by defining the core tenets of the "left hand path", though that would probably over-burden the intro graf. My concern is that for anyone not familiar with Satanism, the reference to "left-hand path" is likely to be misinterpreted as a political reference. Your comment above describing ONA as a far-right/Nazi Satanist group would get the most important elements into the intro--would it work to adjust it to read, "a far-right/Nazi group associated with the left-hand path of Satanism. ? Edited4Space (talk) 17:09, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If people are unfamiliar with the word left-hand path, they can just click the article. In the very next sentence its stated it is a neo-Nazi group. I think it is fine the way it is.RKT7789 (talk) 02:22, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You conflate Satanists with the members of O9A, who certainly do not represent all Satanists. Some extreme right-wing accelerationists would love to see Trump assassinated. Even the Groypers are unhappy with Trump and his ties to Israel. In the eyes of some, the assassination of Trump would fulfil their accelerationist agenda and bring in a more extremist leader. This would certainly be in line with what some members of O9A would like to achieve. 81.97.84.159 (talk) 07:41, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]