Talk:Northbridge, Western Australia

Cut para
Warning about Northbridge : Northbridge posesses a high crime rate and is one of the worst crime effected suburbs in Perth. Northbridge has been notorious for numerous bashings stabbings and other assaults aswell as a lot of clashes between rival street gangs and criminal gangs. For safety reasons Northbridge is best not to go to at night on your own. If going to Northbridge at night make sure you are with a group of people that way you will avoid getting mugged.

This paragraph contains some facts but its presentation does not comply with WP:NPOV so I removed it from the article and placed here for rewording. Please include references for this section before adding back to article. Gnangarra 13:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Violence
I have added a more neutral, referenced section on Northbridge's violence culture, It is incomplete and needs expanding. Trideceth12 (talk) 16:28, 14 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I removed the section on violence, as it doesn't really fit in the article. Considering this article can be read right across the world, in places where real violence actually occurs and where Perth's issues would rightly be seen as "slow news day" material, I think we need to be careful about emphasis here. See WP:UNDUE for more information. Orderinchaos 22:52, 14 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Even compared to other night spots worldwide it is a high crime area, certainly weekend-evening Northbridge is one of Australia's worst spot's for assaults. The alcohol culture is a  defining aspect of the area and deserves treatment on the page.  I will look for some comparative statistics and perhaps add something that can put it in perspective. Trideceth12


 * I have flagged the article as POV until we resolve this issue. (talk) 04:31, 15 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Dear Orderinchaos: Office of Crime Prevention (2009) “Northbridge has developed a reputation for unacceptable levels of violent, aggressive and anti-social behaviour”... It is this reputation that needs addressing in the article.. If we can find that the reputation is a myth then great, I am not convinced that it is - I just did some calculations of my own (based on WA vs. NSW police stats) and calculated that Jan 2011 had 2 Assaults / 1000 population in Sydney LGA vs. 24 Assaults / 1000 population in Northbridge. I used the 6003 postal area population stats to inflate Northbridge's population. Obviously there are many many many flaws with the comparison I just made and I'm not suggesting such soft, creative stats go in the article.. but it's interesting. I wonder if there is a standard statistic that is used to measure assaults in nightlife areas (one that takes into account the floating population). Trideceth12 (talk) 05:10, 15 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "developed a reputation" What you're describing above is original research. Go to Boston, Vancouver, Auckland or Paris and then try and tell me that Perth's piddling level of crime isn't "slow news day" stuff. We're still at the stage where someone getting murdered occupies weeks of news time rather than disappearing into page 63. And the crime area in NSW isn't the Sydney CBD, so you're looking in the wrong place, by the way. Orderinchaos 10:01, 15 October 2011 (UTC)


 * No, the quote is from the Office of Crime prevention, this has nothing to do with OR.. it is the general perception of the area. You are trying to whitewash over it... In an effort to make the article reflect your opinion i will modify the section... Do not remove it just because you disagree try to be more contructive. Trideceth12 (talk) 04:20, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

It has nothing on south west sydney or other less well defined areas of parts of Melbourne - this is really a beatup with the old problem of UNDUE - if you dont understand Undue - please read it! - and be very careful about WP:OR as well SatuSuro 11:31, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Another point to make - Northbridge and Perth CBD are pretty much non-residential (there is some residential development there, but we're talking hundreds, not thousands), whereas Sydney CBD has extensive residential development. Therefore crimes per 1000 people is meaningless as you want to look at the number of people who attend the area, not the number who live there. Using false measures to argue a point is unhelpful. Orderinchaos 12:11, 15 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree that it is meaningless actually... I was just looking at the possibility of finding meaningful stats.. if you look at my last post I think I was pretty clear that those figures themselves are meaningless. This is certainly NOT undue... The perception that nighttime NB is an area predominantly characterized by anti-social behavior is a major defining feature of the suburb AND DESERVES TREATMENT ON THE PAGE.  However, I have added a sentence to reflect that the perception may be unwarranted.. If you have any more concerns then try revising the para Trideceth12 (talk) 04:30, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * wrong - if you applied the same logic to a lot of wikipedia - you would have a very weird place - encyclopedia articles do not rely upon apprehensions and perceptions that are major defining features - rubbish - the suburb is used and visited by a very large number of people at all times of the day and night who show no sign of having concern - otherwise they would not be there SatuSuro 04:59, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * A "defining characteristic"?? "predominantly characterised"?? On what basis - your own opinion? They sound like weasel words to me - they can't be verified even if they were theoretically true (which I don't believe they are). This ain't Compton or Brooklyn we're talking about. It's not even on a par with some places in the suburbs of Perth incident-wise. Wikipedia is not interested in fringe views based on lazy media coverage, or people desperately trying to find sources which somehow back up their existing prejudices about a place. This is called WP:OR. (And as for reputation - I am not actually sure it has one at all beyond the tabloid newspapers.) Orderinchaos 05:09, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * How can you criticize my submission for being my own opinion when I have submitted several references that it has a reputation... just tabloid newspapers!?!?! AND the WA Police AND the State Premier.. You are the one who is editing on the basis of opinion... show me some verifiable references that refute the statements of the WA Police, the Office of Crime Prevention, and the Premier. This is NOT undue, and you have absolutely no evidence other than your own opinion. Trideceth12 (talk) 06:56, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Speculation by public figures does not a "reputation" make. Since this started, you have been desperately casting around trying to find an excuse to write negative things about Northbridge. If this was a BLP, you'd already have been banned. Moreover, the section was very poorly worded and uses unreliable sources, so per my obligations under WP:V it has been removed. Orderinchaos 07:35, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I would like to point out that at this point in the discussion I realized Orderinchaos had vandalized my edits on Curtin University. Trideceth12 (talk) 07:07, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * "Vandalised"? That's wandering close to personal attack territory. If the edits had have been quality, they would have stayed - trouble was they introduced anti-Curtin POV to the article. Certainly, I agree with you that it had too much pro-Curtin POV in it, and I did some work to try and fix that, but introducing unbalanced sources doesn't actually help. Orderinchaos 07:35, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I retract "Vandalized"... But it was reverted without close attention. Trideceth12 (talk) 07:54, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I made something like 8 or 9 edits, and consulted each source I re-used directly. I'm not sure how this wasn't "close attention". Orderinchaos 08:09, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The problem I have here, Orderinchaos, is that just as Northbridge's alcohol and violence problems are not notable by world terms... neither is it's "Arts and Culture", nor are it's restaurants. So I will, for now, agree that a dedicated section on anti-social behavior be removed.. but I am going to remove the section on "Arts and Culture" as well, as the same logic applies to both. I sincerely hope we can work constructively together on many articles in the future :) Trideceth12 (talk) 07:54, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I think the relevant description for this is disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. Quite simply, you are making extreme and biased claims about Northbridge's "reputation" which only tabloid newspapers can verify. The State Premier, for instance, made claims about the area without ever having been there, talking to local businesses or in fact anyone else (something he himself admitted), and was rightly criticised for this. The Northbridge businessmen know he is and always has been offside with them, and it shouldn't be forgotten he represents an area in Parliament, Cottesloe, which views itself in competition with Northbridge for numbers; nor that Northbridge votes for the Labor and Green parties. The belief that all sources, no matter how unreliable, are equal is not shared by Wikipedia policy, which urges us to use reliable sources. We also should work in a relatively academic way, using the sources to come to the conclusions, rather than reaching them first and trying, struggling even, to find sources to back up the conclusions. Undue weight looks at two things - the preponderance of the totality of the sources (i.e. not just sensationalist tabloid journalism), and also the significance given to the point given the size of the article. Someone viewing your preferred version of the article would instantly think that this area has a problem with alcohol-fuelled violence of a level of significance that requires such attention. However, while History, Geography, Culture etc are standard sections in any suburb article, Alcohol and Violence is not and nor should it be unless the area really *does* have a problem. I hope you understand where I am coming from here. Orderinchaos 08:09, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Okay okay, you suggest an article about a similar suburb somewhere, with similar characteristics, that you believe is balanced, and we can use it as a template. All I want is the article to, as accurately as possible, reflect the area.  You might notice that the history section which I expanded, is not an attempt to smear the area. I want it to be balanced and to me, an article that effectively says "Northbridge is a great place to hang out with loads of great pubs, galleries, and restaurants" is just as biased as "Northbridge is a hell-hole, full of criminals, you're gonna get bashed". Trideceth12 (talk) 08:19, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * There is nothing wrong with the "Arts and Culture" since it describes what the suburb has. Clearly you're proving a point which is disruptive. Bidgee (talk) 08:31, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks to Orderinchaos for rewriting the culture section. Seems like a pretty good compromise now. Trideceth12 (talk) 08:36, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * my 2c Northbridge area has had a level of noteriety since the early 1900's, the "businesses" on the edge of the law are regular a feature of northbridge whether its brothels, clubs, casino's and the social fabric associated with it. There has also been an entertainment trade withs bars, restraunts, pubs and nightclubs that have mutually benefitted from the attractions of people out for a good time. Violence isnt a new thing it isnt an overly prominent feature when compared to outside WA but within the Perth metro its a significant location for issues. For comparison Kings Cross, New South Wales does a good job of both acknowledging the dark or red side of the social fabric of the area similar in nature or Redfern, New South Wales with it issues. It needs to be dealt with appropriately thru discussion not edit warring, the restrictions placed on the alcohol trade are worthy of coverage as are the reasons behind it. Gnangarra 23:51, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * From Kings Cross, New South Wales "the area is known as Sydney's red-light district, and is reputed to be home to organised crime groups". Perhaps those on the other side of the discussion could suggest a phrase that they find acceptable, which also manages to sum up Northbridge's "reputation" as the quote does for Kings Cross Trideceth12 (talk) 05:20, 17 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Having been to both Kings Cross and Redfern, as well as Footscray in VIC, and even Midland and Scarborough here in Perth, I think the stuff which goes on at Northbridge is a mere fraction by scale / magnitude. The other thing is that most of the media's efforts to beat up what goes on in Northbridge ignores the fact that the majority of incidents which occur - as infrequent as they are - are outside the suburb's boundaries. The Cultural Centre and surrounding precinct is in Perth (suburb), while the old "red light" area in Palmerston Street was actually in West Perth, as are two of the clubs where major incidents occurred in the last 10 years (one is in West Perth, the other Leederville). There is inevitably some "edge of the law" stuff which goes on in places where entertainment is a major focus - that's always been the way and always will be the way. But making out as if Northbridge is some violent hellhole and nothing ever goes on anywhere else in Perth would be misleading our readers. My friends who have come here from over east being warned about Northbridge (and there's been a few) openly laugh about it when they see the place. Orderinchaos 08:34, 17 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Sacrborough of the 1960's 1970's even the 1980's is whole lot different to that of the last 10 years but that doesnt mean it didnt happen or that its wasnt noted for that. Midland 1970s-early 1990's was different to that of the last 10 years but again that it didnt happen even Freo was different pre 1987. All that is irrelevant as persnal observations arent valid sources Gnangarra 01:42, 18 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Every city has a comparitively "high crime" area like this, in Brisbane it's The Valley, in Sydney it's Kings Cross, in Gold Coast it's... well, it's the whole of the Gold Coast. The trick is to have an appropriate acknowledgement of the high levels of crime relative to the rest of the city, while at the same time not sensationalising and making it sound like Juarez or apartheid-era Soweto.  In my view Trideceth12's edits tend more towards the latter, although some of the former wouldn't go amiss here either.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:09, 24 October 2011 (UTC).

Indigenous History
I would just like to point out that as it stands, the article suggests that the human history of the area began with European settlement. Perhaps a friendly expert can help with some indigenous history. Trideceth12 (talk) 05:20, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Knowing a bit about the area, I actually doubt it had any. Northbridge has a very small land area and it was somewhat removed from the main areas where the Mooro camped and traversed (they moved between Mt Eliza in what is now Kings Park up a chain of lakes - some of which have been reclaimed since white settlement for housing). According to various observers, there were 28 (1837) or around 50 (1833) of them across that entire area. There's evidence of a sacred site near the Swan Brewery, and several in Kings Park, around Lake Monger and at least one in Claremont, but they don't actually seem to have left any evidence of occupying anything further east.
 * There was a discussion about this on the Adelaide articles and the indigenous section got removed from many articles because it looked exactly the same for dozens of them and was of questionable relation to the suburb itself (given, for example, we have no records of any sites in Northbridge). Orderinchaos 08:13, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

"Zebra" arch gone
I'm going to delete the arch photo shortly, it was removed in early 2024 (possibly late 2023.) Jondvdsn1 (talk) 13:08, 28 May 2024 (UTC)