Talk:Organised crime in Australia

Inconsistencies
This "article" has some severe inconsistencies. It talks about the Australian mafia being an offshoot of the Sicilian mafia, but most of the names of the crime figures above and in the links to the article are anglo-celtic names. The 'ndragheta is also offered as an example - but they're Calabrian! It says the Australian mafia is rural like the Sicilian version, but the birthplace and stronghold of the Sicilian mafia is Palermo, the 5th largest city in Italy (and it was the 2nd largest city in Italy in the late 19th century). In any event, crime statistics in Australia show higher crime figures in the city than in country areas. In short, this article reads like absolute bull shit and populist imaginings (fed by recent TV shows) and is not worthy of being an article in a serious encyclopaedia. Aren't we really talking about some piss-ant crime groups with very little to distinguish them from the general Australian criminal population. If so - where does the term: "Australian Mafia" come from? And how on earth is it an offshoot from the Sicilian mafia? πιππίνυ δ - (dica)  23:00, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Agree. This is rubbish.  I'm moving it to Organised crime in Australia for a start..  Moondyne 02:56, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * And have reorganised it a bit. There's just no evidence of endemic mafioso type families such as in big US cities existing in Australia.  Organised crime syndicates certainly, but lets not overstate it unless we can see really solid references. Moondyne 03:49, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually you are all wrong. You should not act impulsively when it comes to changing titles and editing artictes. There is an Australian Mafia, it is alive and active. A simple Internet search on a news website can reveal much.

Check these out:


 * http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,897088,00.html
 * http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,20666498-661,00.html
 * http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,20666590-2862,00.html

I am going to redo the previous article, as it has been proven to be true. Jonaspv 02:52, 23 July 2008


 * I suggest you read WP:SYNTH. Organised crime in Australia is a better title which avoids original research issues at the same time as being more encompassing. Moondyne 02:46, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

This is not about general organized crime, that is a different topic. This is about a very specific criminal group. What you are doing is incorrect. It is the same thing as not allowing a New York Yankees article to exist because there is a baseball article that encompasses it. And why did you delete my references and edits? It was all correct verifiable. Don't do that. If you want an article about Australian Organized crime, create one, because this one deals with a different subject. I am redoing it until you present a valid reason to erase it. Jonaspv (talk) 02:53, 23 July 2008 (UTC)


 * You seem to be placing a lot a weight on this single 1964 Time article which is one persons view, and in which IMHO, a degree of journalistic license has been used. Moondyne 02:54, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Combine that with the other sources and you got solid references. Search Gomorrah and Gangsters Encyclopedia, and you can verify the information on this page. Jonaspv (talk) 02:59, 23 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Since searches of "Australian mafia" also turn up references to "Australian Cashmere mafia" and "Australian Enviro mafia" (or something similar) - you could consider a dab page (as long as you put a big smiley at the bottom of the page to show that you are joking). The previous reference was deleted because it talked about organised crime generally, when the article itself was talking about an Australian mafia being "an outgrowth" of the Sicilian mafia.  Given the paucity of court records showing such a link (unlike the American situation), then this seemed an incredible claim to make.  Also, quite a few excellent publications have been written over the past decade, all fully referenced, about the Sicilian mafia and its connections with an American mafia - and absolutely none of these mention Australia in any way, shape or form.   Lastly, just because some petty crim has a "woggy" name does not mean we are talking about an Australian mafia. So either point us to the court records that show unequivocally that there is an Australian mafia (with a Sicilian connection) - or forget about it - everything else is speculative in the extreme and will be treated as such - including your gangsters encyclopedia, which is the most deserving of a big smiley.  πιππίνυ δ -  (dica)  03:07, 23 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I think that things are very heated up around here. Whatever your name is πιππίνυ δ, relax, I got your point but you have to understand, I never said there was a Sicilian connection. I just said that it was an ofshoot of the Sicilian Mafia, wether that connection is mantained or not is another thing. I really doubt that there is a connection nowadays, but it is no secret that Sicilian Emigrants set up a criminal network in Melbourne. Does that qualify to be called "Australian Mafia"? In my opinion yes. That's what this talk page is for. Anyway I am going on a two week vacation, so you will have this page all for yourself =D (big smiley) When I return we can end the discussion, if it has not been finished by then by other users.

To finish, I would never denegrade anyone over their "woggy" surname, as I would be denegrading myself and my family as well. My surname is "Pulido" and "Valente", both very "greaseball" surnames. Now go figure. Jonaspv (talk) 03:31, 23 July 2008 (UTC)


 * My surname's a bit "greasy" too :).  Balkan Fever  03:44, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Mafia?
If any of the material from this page is salvageable, it should be placed in an article of wider scope, such as Organised crime in Australia, which could mention this "Australian Mafia", but focus on the more verifiable elements, such as the Melbourne gangland killings.  Balkan Fever  03:18, 23 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree with your solution. Jonaspv (talk) 03:31, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * In fact, I can't help thinking this article covers the modern situation completely. As for "organised crime in Australia" - I would have thought that there is a place for such an article, as long as it isn't just about Sicilians and Calabrians - I would have thought there has been one form or other of organised crime in Australia going back to the 19th century.  People in the bush using intimadatory tactics to extract a bit of coin from fellow travellers - ring a bell?  πιππίνυ δ -  (dica)  03:39, 23 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Since the article is at the title now, it definitely should be expanded to include the gangland stuff, and then any other organised crime; probably price-fixing like that ofRichard Pratt and maybe the bushrangers.  Balkan Fever  03:52, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 0 one external links on Organised crime in Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25883085-29277,00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:09, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

I will work on it
I will try and get working on this article after I finish with my other important project. This article needs serious improvement. User:Zapacit 04:44, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

"youth gangs"
I can't see how most of the "youth gangs" stuff belongs here.

Actual organised crime outfits have always been virtually exclusive of juveniles. (At most they employ kids as foot soldiers.)

This was especially so in the 1940s–1970s; bodgies/widgies, sharpies etc were primarily subcultures, like their overseas counterparts. Their membership and "adult gangs" were mutually exclusive. A lot of their members dabbled in petty crime, but they were, almost by definition, not organised – and not running weed plantations, cooking speed/meth or importing heroin.

Grant &#124;  Talk  11:03, 22 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I agree. This section also doesn't have any citations besides those in its last paragraph (which isn't even relevant to youth gangs). I'm making a proposal to delete that section.
 * FropFrop (talk) 09:36, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Proposal to delete 'Street and youth gangs'
It is poorly written, filled with grammatical issues and does not include citations (except in its off topic last paragraph). Even if it is a topic worth including, I expect it would have to be rewritten from the ground up. FropFrop (talk) 09:38, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Proposal to delete 'African gangs' & 'Activities'
The African gangs section, even if all sources are taken at face value, doesn't make a case that these activities were related to organised crime consistent with the 'refers to the activities of various groups of crime families, organised crime syndicates or underworld activities including drug trafficking, contract killing, racketeering and other crimes in Australia' definition provided. I would like to suggest it be removed.

The Activities section appears to be primarily a list of of crimes that may be associated with organised crime. This doesn't feel like an appropriate thing to include (especially without any context) in an Australian organised crime article. I would propose deleting the section BUT including the few relevant links in their appropriate sections. - Sporesalad (talk) 02:32, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I sympathise with all your points, while not necessarily agreeing with the idea of deletion. I have rewritten the section to reflect the better sources as a prelude to debate.


 * My feeling is that perhaps we are better having a sceptical section, than no section at all. If we delete there is a likelihood two years down the line, when neither me nor you is looking, somebody will come back and add the section in a more credulous fashion, leaving us back at square one. If we leave a section that in effect states "idiots say this, but they are wrong" we prevent the reappearance of nonsense, or at least, we have an obstacle to it.--Boynamedsue (talk) 10:12, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Boynamedsue Having a sceptical section makes the most sense to me as well. FropFrop (talk) 23:19, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * BTW, as somebody who patrols by whom tags, I would like to thank you for your absolutely text book use of the tag. You'd be surprised how rare that is!Boynamedsue (talk) 10:52, 9 June 2024 (UTC)


 * This makes a lot of sense as both anticipating later additions and as a way of including discussions of Australian organised crime (right or wrong). - Sporesalad (talk) 22:54, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Great, many thanks to both of you. Have a look at how it is now, and see if you feel it strikes the right tone or if you want to edit it a bit. I've just looked on google scholar and there are quite a few academic articles specifically describing the whole "African gangs" business as a moral panic, so I'm considering writing a main article on the topic which we could link to.Boynamedsue (talk) 06:08, 12 June 2024 (UTC)