From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Songs (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Note icon
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
WikiProject Australia (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon Aussie is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia.
Note icon
The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to for other than editorial assistance.


The chant looks like Oggy Oggy Oggy -- a spin-off? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:23, 19 February 2005 (UTC)

Please Explain![edit]

The section on Aussie as a cultural moniker reads like a defenseve attack upon a so-called "radical egalitarian movement" and goes on to throw in a comment regarding legal the "fictions of arbitrary citizenship status". The paragraph whiffs of polemic and needs cleaning up. mangonorth

The argument (where it should not be an argument but description of facts) posits that it is not the nationalists that are being exclusive in their use of the word Aussie. This seems to fly in the face of their obvious intentions! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:41, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

As Chant?[edit]

I have removed the lengthy description of the "Aussie" chant, as there is already an independant page on this topic. As the chant is a relatively new phenomenon, (and one that has been politicized under the current wave of nationalism,) it should not dominate a description of a word that has broader, long standing and more inclusive meaning. mangonorth —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:32, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Usage of 'Aussie' as ethnic descriptor[edit]

Article states:

"While attempts by schools, politicians and the media to use the term as an all encompassing label for those with Australian citizenship, it has continued to retain common usage as an ethnic descriptor, especially among youth."

Are these claims regarding common usage and usage among youth verifiable? --Salada 10:46, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

....Salada, it is not verifiable. It is strictly a 'slang' term which is normally used only in informal conversation or communication; for example in speaking with another Australian I might use the words "we Aussies", but any attempt to formalise the word as a substitute for "Australians" as a descriptor of those holding Australian citizenship would be met with derision.Geoffrey Wickham 05:05, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

As a white Australian born and raised in Australia, and only 20 years old, I would say that "Aussie" refers to anyone who identifies themselves as Australian, and accepts and respects "Australian Values" (or "Aussie Values") and way of life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Removed point of view statements that the term carries any official bearing, that the traditional cultural group is "European", or that it is used by such people in a "multicultural" context (most use it in a reactionary context, as opposed to cultural separatism and the state's destruction of an Australian multiculturalism). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ottre (talkcontribs) 02:58, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
What do you mean?
Read the following:
  • This approach was first taken by the neoconservatives, so it's safe to say the majority of cultural historians agree with it. See the WP:NPOV tutorial#Space and balance guidelines.
  • In the context of cultural separatism, the identifier (Aussie) is correctly described as a defense against the use of the term Anglo-Australian. This is notable in that the Australian people have resisted English imperialism for at least one hundred years (and this is the only point radical nationalist and marxist historians agree on). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ottre (talkcontribs) 14:49, 22 July 2008
That's a nice essay on British and multiculturalism in Australia, your first point seems ok, but the second is POV and quite inflammatory. 'British' used in this way, maybe interpreted as a political term, so perhaps use 'Anglo-Celtic' instead. -- (talk) 00:44, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Utterly ridiculous that. Anglo-Celtic is far more a part of the (culture wars) vocabulary an encyclopedia should avoid than is British. Unless you want to put in a request for mediation, and insert a second (sourced) interpretation of its usage, changing back to "Australian British (Celtogermanic) descent". Ottre (talk) 07:00, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Why use 'post-Grassby' (it doesn't mean much to the average reader, whereas 'multicultural' does)? -- (talk) 03:44, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
What do you mean? Using the term 'multicultural' would politicise this article, whereas 'post-Grassby' or 'post-Grassby (the godfather of exclusive multiculturalism)' would not. Thought the latter alternative is somewhat disjointed for an encyclopedia article. EDIT: see my second last edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ottre (talkcontribs) 15:29, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
I disagree, the word 'multicultural' would not politicise the article. Using 'post-Grassby' or 'post-Grassbian' does not belong in an encyclopaedia, in an academic text maybe, but in an encyclopaedia, no. Anyone who reads the article is not going to know what it means, it will be non-sensical to the reader. An encyclopaedia needs to be simple as possible, easy to read, and unbiased. -- (talk) 00:44, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Have you read the article? "The usage of Aussie then is offensive to those who believe that it unfairly excludes outgroups as not equally Australian. It may also be used in a derogatory sense by those who do not consider themselves Australian to label those who do." Clearly judgemental statements which rest upon the rejection of an inclusive multiculturalism by detractors of Australian identitarianism. You absolutely have to go into specifics. Ottre (talk) 07:00, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Use of the word "Aussie"[edit]

Article states:

"In New Zealand and the United Kingdom the term is sometimes used to refer to the country of Australia, as well as Australian persons. In Australia itself the term is only used to refer to its inhabitants."

Does anyone agree with this? I am an Australian and I have heard a number of people use "Aussie" to refer to the country. Should this unsubstantiated claim be removed from the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Buvelot64 (talkcontribs) 10:21, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

The word Aussie can be a noun, a proper noun and an adjective, examples include;

  • "I love the Aussie (Australian) way of life,"
  • "He's as Aussie (Australian) as it gets,
  • "I am going home to Aussie (Australia)." FlatOut 10:49, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Perjorative use[edit]

I've removed this topic from the category 'Perjorative terms', as the term Aussie is rarely or never used perjoratively itself. Offensive use of the term 'Aussie' comes from its use as an exclusive term, thus labelling others (particularly Australians with an ethnic heritage) as 'not real Aussies'. I haven't found any reference of the term Aussie used perjoratively; please edit this if you find a solid reference. peterl 21:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree, except for the spelling--it's pejorative not *perjorative. I'm [dʒæˑkɫɜmbɚ] and I approve this message. 23:51, 7 May 2009 (UTC)


Do we really need that pretentious factoid in the lead? The lead should talk about the most important aspects of the subject matter, and the fact that this happens to be an autonym is an eye-rolling trivia that should be either removed or push well down in the article. When people look up something quickly in Wikipedia they don't want to know about some other smart-arse word that they probably don't care about. Not unless the oh-look-I-know-this-word-logism is necessary to explain the subject. (talk) 07:36, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Relegated to a category. Hopefully acceptable username (talk) 01:10, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Clarification on Use[edit]

Aussie, is a colloquialism that is a substitute for 'Australia' and 'Australian' Examples of how Aussie is substituted, include:

  • You can be Australian, or you can be Aussie.
  • You can also be an Australian citizen, or you can be an Aussie citizen
  • You can visit Australia, or you can visit Aussie.

FlatOut 13:00, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Use of Aussie as synonym for Australia, in Australia[edit]

I have reverted a good faith edit that claims Aussie as a synonym for Australia is not often used at home. The source used, where a NZ newspaper refers to Australia as Aussie, does not prove that it is rarely used at home. In fact, the sporting anthem C'mon Aussie C'mon uses Aussie as a synonym for Australia. Macquarie Dictionary also describes Aussie as a synonym for Australia.Flat Out let's discuss it 02:23, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Respectfully, I totally disagree. I have lived in Australia for over 60 years and have NEVER heard an Australian refer to Australia as "Aussie". Your edit asserting that "Come on Aussie come on" references Australia (in the article of the same name) is completely unsupported (as is your similar assertion higher up on this talk page), and it makes just as much sense to assume the phrase is urging an individual (though unidentified) Australian player to greater efforts. On that basis, I should revert your edit in the Come on Aussie article - which I refrain from doing: I' rather talk it out here and invite other opinions than start an edit war.
Furthermore, the reference supporting my edit is not simply a citation from a NZ newspaper - it is an AUSTRALIAN writer complaining that the common NZ use of "Aussie" to mean "Australia" grates on Australian ears. Of course, it always difficult to prove that something is NOT the case, but I thought the citation was at least a good step in that direction. Regarding the Macquarie Dictionary reference, it may very well be referring to NZ usage. Your thoughts? Ian Page (talk) 22:45, 5 January 2014 (UTC) P.S. You're not a Kiwi by any chance? <wink>
I can concede on the NZ reference, however the Macquarie is the definitive Australian dictionary and C'Mon Aussie, C'Mon is clearly slang for Come on Australia, Come on. Use of Aussie as a synonym for Australia is not common, but it is used. here is just one example. Regarding the origins of the anthem, C'Mon Aussie, C'mon started as 'Come on Australia, show us what you're made of
Thanks for the Herald-Sun citation. But even more, thanks for your very appropriate edit to the lead paragraph. I can happily live with that. Ian Page (talk) 21:17, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Mate, if only consensus was always this easy :) Flat Out let's discuss it 00:50, 13 January 2014 (UTC)