Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 13:40, 21 August 2006

This article was previously nominated for deletion. The result of the discussion was keep.

Need a link to classism somewhere. Secretlondon 20:01, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

What about?

What about the "metro-bogans" and "uptown-westies". You know the type, basically bogans, but with money... same value systems, same sub-culture, still nationalistic to the point of idiocy, but they've got a bit more money then most (and can be seen wearing pink shirts...)

I am a sydney westie

and this article needs bits on the sydney and melbourne westie/bogans at least. --Ballchef 14:41, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

New Zealand

The claim that bogan is only a South Island term is absurd. Bogans are plentiful in West Auckland (as discussed) and the Hutt Valley. Although "western", the West Coast "coasters" are not, generally, bogan/westie types and have other perceived character defects 84.66.44.115 20:38, 9 September 2005 (UTC).

Sydneycentric?

I have never heard the term used outside Sydney, save when referring to people from Western Sydney. Also a Westie can refer to anybody of a lower socio-economic Caucasian background, whereas a Bogan is usually used to describe a poorly presented younger male or female.

Sydney Westie

In Sydney, someone known as a "westie" is simply someone living in the outer western suburbs. Whoever did this article is clearly having a shot at "westies" by describing them all as bogans.

Out of date?

when was the last time you saw a sane person in real life with a mullet? --Sumple 22:53, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

There's a dude down my street who sports one. I see him each day on my way to work. Dispite the desrision they recive it's not an uncommon sight in Wellington (NZ). Palendrom 23:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

no

Absolutely not. Westies aer a uniquely sydney concept.

in ballarat westies are as stated in the article and bogans are different. more just like bums but they dont wear eminem and other stuff like that. so "westie" is not a soul sydney term thankyou very much.

Westies, Metros and Bogans

In Brisbane, a Metro is the pink shirt type (also in Melbourne, sometimes interchangeable with Wog, to the point where some people only know them as Wogs and haven't even heard the word Metro). Westies are usually people from Western Australia, but that term isn't used much at all, except by those who have liven in Western Australia. Bogans are generally just the proleteriat.

Merging of the Bogan article into the Westies' article

I have to ask why the suggestion is for the Bogan article to be subsumed by the Westie article, and not the other way around. I can only assume that this is due to the ongoing perception of Sydney residents of Sydney being the non-political capital of the country, despite said residents being more or less isolated in holding that opinion. Petrus4 11:52, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Bogans and Westies different terms

Bogan is clearly a term that has little use in Sydney and should definitely be kept separate from Westie. Bogan can be seen to be not offensive whereas Westie has direct derogatory connotations - and related terms (Eastie).

I agree - since Eastie has been been given a NPOV tag, I've given Westies a NPOV.

I disagree that westie people should be merged with bogan. --WikiCats 10:16, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Oppose the merge with Bogan

As I've mentioned on the Bogan talk page & the Aussie English talk page the terms are not synonymous but carrying through with this merger would be to imply that they were. To make this implication would be to have a go at westies. This would be offensive even tags suggesting the merge could be found offensive. It seems that most of us are against the merger and for much the same reasons as I mention. Therefore there should be no merger and the tags should be removed promptly. Jimp 10:38, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

The result of the debate was do not merge. --WikiCats 11:56, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Hear! Hear! Thanks for removing the tags. I was about to remove them myself. Yes, as I've stated, I agree that the general consensus was that to merge the articles would be a mistake. The terms are not equivalent. I've just done an edit of the article to remove the implication that westies are bogans or that the term is implicitely classist. Jimp 01:42, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree with your recent changes Jimp. Thank you --WikiCats 15:18, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Problem with the first paragraph

The second sentance of the first paragraph does not make sence. It may have been that someone has accidentally edited out half of the sentance. It simply reads: 'In other cities of Australia (such as Canberra and Brisbane'.

Cost of living

"... Sydney's western suburbs, a region of suburbs in which the cost of living is generally considered to be less than that of Sydney's more easterly and inner-city suburbs." states the article. Either it is or it isn't: what does it matter how it's considered to be? Jimp 03:29, 2 June 2006 (UTC) It matters, because people make decisions based on their perceptions, not based on their knowledge. They use "gut instinct" and feelings.--Garrie 03:40, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Origin of the term... Sydney, Australia

I would like to suggest that for much of the area between Parramatta and Penrith the crime rate is lower than it is in say Redfern? Also - in a LOT of the residential suburbs - it is probably lower than the crime rate in Sydney's Central Police District. --Garrie 04:48, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't be at all surprised if you are right. But it's irrelevant. The article is trying to describe the meaning and conotations of the word 'Westie'. Whether that meaning is unfair prejudiced, or plain wrong in it's intent, is interesting, and probably meat for endless discussion, but of marginal significance.

Cost of living around the world

The westie stereotype is perceived by some as being in a state of transition, as Sydney is one of the most expensive places in the world to live

I think this needs to be very well referenced. In fact if your list is long enough, every place in the world is one of the most expensive places in the world to live. It's all relative to income anyway. --Garrie 04:51, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

How popular is the term these days?

I get the impression the term has less currency than it did in the 70s/80s. My suspicion is that people have been rearranging their pejudices somewhat.

• Muslim enclaves have taken more space in the mental space people used to reserve for Westy/non-westy distinctions
• people have moved about, suburbs have become gentrified, and what used to be looked down upon, by those East of (hey the article should definitely define exactly where the inner city ends and the western suburbs starts) I dunno, Annandale, now live there.
• Emblematic westy football teams have merged and moved about (so have teams that westies were untied in hating)
• Westies have embraced the term to a certain extent making it less effective as an insult in the hands of non-westies
• People have come in from overseas and other states, for whom the term means much less than to those raised in Sydney, and other terms mean more. For example Sydneysiders know what a bogan is, 20 years ago we probably wouldn't have, (now we're grateful to have a useful term for Macquarie Fields).

Maybe one day the article can be deleted as an obscure historical artefact, but probably not quite yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter.cant (talk • contribs)

Major removals

Please do not make major changes and remove tags during this sensitive time when major issues about this article are being discussed.--WikiCats 12:17, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Major changes to the article should gain consensus on the Talk page.--WikiCats 12:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

The point of NPOV and other sort sof tags is that they are inviting people to improve the article to remove the problems. Adding references and removing POV sections does not need discussion on the talk page first - not unless/until the action is disputed. JPD (talk) 15:54, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

There has been unilateral action to make major changes to the article without discussion or consensus. All this during a major debate. Making major changes during a debate is against the guidelines and against the spirit of Misplaced Pages. No removal of tags or major edits occurred on the Eatsies Afd. The same courtesy can be extended here.

The changes have been challenged and need to be debated.--WikiCats 10:53, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

The changes made have been so broad scale and insidious that even the link to Easties was removed. --WikiCats 14:42, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Restore the link to Easties if you like, but it will have to be removed if Easties is deleted. The changes haven't been challenged until you tell us what is wrong with them. It is good thing to improve an article to address issues raised in a debate, even while the debate is still going on. That is how Misplaced Pages works, and the guidelines encourage it. The only question is whether they were improvements or not. JPD (talk) 18:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Well let's start with the See also section. Why did you delete that? --WikiCats 11:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I deleted it because it is fairly clear that the article is going to be deleted. I have already agreed that that may have been premature, so you could add it back in. That is a very minor point compared with the content of the article. JPD (talk) 13:06, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

The Macquarie reference claims to be an online reference but it is not online at all. Also the Scott Poynting reference can't be checked.--WikiCats 15:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

The Macquarie reference claims to be the online edition of the dictionary, which is online. There is no link given, as you have to pay $20 a year to subscribe to it. I don't see why the Scott Poynting reference can't be checked - find the book in a library and look it up, or even try . You can't complain that an article has OR research, and then complain when someone bothers to add referenced material! JPD (talk) 15:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

This phrase "refers to people from outer suburbs and a lower socio-economic background" is not neutral prose. The Macquarie Dictionary is not governed by guidelines but we are. --WikiCats 10:38, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't see what about the phrase is not neutral, but even if it weren't that would not be relevant. The sentence taken as a whole is neutral, which is all that matters. Isolating phrases from their context is a bad idea. JPD (talk) 18:03, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Referring to the people from the Greater West of Sydney with terms such as "socio-economic" most certainly is POV. --WikiCats 14:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Scientists (and encyclopedias!) all over the world use terms like 'socio-economic' when describing a group of people. The term only describes through what aspects of a group you're describing, it's not inherently POV. Please read Socioeconomics for more information. --JoanneB 16:15, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Joanne is absolutely right. On top of that, the phrase you complained about doesn't say anything at all about the people from the Greater West of Sydney. Even more importantly, the whole sentence is reporting what the dictionary says, rather than stating it as a fact, and so the only question as far as NPOV goes is whether it is whether the Macquarie Dictionary's view is worth reporting, and you would have to agree that the Mac is a pretty important and authoritative source when describing the use and meaning of Australian words. JPD (talk) 13:58, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Dictionary entry from the Macquarie dictionary

I found this entry in the Macquarie dictionary.

I'm not sure how much of this can be used verbatim due to copyright issues but the ideas are certainly valuable and should be incorporated into the article.

(Derogatory) a person from the western suburbs of Sydney, usually characterised as being unsophisticated, uncouth, and typically wearing certain distinguishing items of clothing, as flannelette shirts and ugh boots. The word is applied negatively to any people living west of one's own suburb, thus a Bondi inhabitant may call a person from Ryde a westie, but Ryde inhabitants would not consider themselves such, and instead apply the term to people from Parramatta, who in turn apply it to people from Penrith, etc.

--Richard 17:10, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it probably is worth mentioning. Note that this is from the Macquarie Book of Slang, not the dictionary. The dictionary entry, as well as being more recent (I think) , takes a slightly different approach. JPD (talk) 19:05, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Neutrality

The article still has numerous problems with POV and a lack of neutral prose. --WikiCats 10:45, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Please do not place NPOV tags on articles unless you are willing to spell out the problems in detail on the talk page. There is nothing non-neutral about the one example you have given so far. The only problems I can see are a lack of direct citations for the "Sydney, Australia" subsection, which also contains material that is borderline, and the "unintelligent", etc stereotype, which is not a POV problem at all. JPD (talk) 10:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, you can see some problems. That's a start.

The history shows that I have been reviewing and editing this article since the start of the year. There have been big problems with prose and unreferenced original research and there still is. Individuals who wish to pigeon hole the vast bulk of Sydney’s population with sweeping generalisation based wholly and solely on where they happen to live at the time ought to be aware that I am not going anywhere.

There has just been an effort on the part of individual editors to consciously and deliberately create a huge NPOV problem for the Misplaced Pages. There was no effort on the part of those offended by the Easties article to clean it up. It was left in the shocking state it was to ensure its deletion. Those editors should be aware that this state of affairs is not being tolerated.

Be aware that the "Sydney name calling battle" will be documented in it entirety. (and in neutral prose) --WikiCats 12:53, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

If your "Sydney name calling battle" is already documented, then it can be included in Misplaced Pages, in this article or otherwise. If not, it shouldn't be documented here, but that is not relevant to this discussion at all. Please stick to discussing this article. You have claimed there are POV problems here, but saying that you have been reviewing the article since the start of the year, or making accusations about other articles, does not back up this claim. JPD (talk) 13:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)