Talk:Gangs in the United Kingdom

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Poorly worded sentence[edit]

The sentence in the introduction: capeside "Glasgow in Scotland also has a historical gang culture with the city having 6 times as many teenage gangs as London, which has ten times the population, per capita"

doesn't read well. I'd suggest:

"Glasgow in Scotland also has a historical gang culture. Though the city has a tenth of London's population, it has 6 times as many teenage gangs per capita"

I'm not sure if the claim is even true, but as it stands it's just clumsily worded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.194.218.109 (talk) 06:58, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Either the population comparison or the phrase "per capita" needs to be removed, as they mean the same thing (I notice it has been more than 2 years since the original comment and this hasn't been fixed). --68.151.48.165 (talk) 20:28, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template of Page[edit]

Was thinking it might be worth breaking down into for example "Drug Gangs", "Street Gangs", "Organised Crime Groups", the latter would be a cach all for things such as the Turkish-Kurdish crime groups, Asian heroin dealing networks, tradional crime families and people such as Curtis Warren - most of these have their own pages so it would link to them. Also is Bristol relevant? The bit about the Aggi crew could go under the "Drug Gangs" header, Glasgow and London under street gangs, Manchester's main ones i always fort was more Drug Gang types and Liverpools more organised??

I suppose the lines are very blurred anyways and some organisations can have all various elements within it. OSGSSS (talk) 00:08, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Errors minor and major[edit]

Have managed to add in all the points on errors now into the main article OSGSSS (talk) 23:50, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance we can improve the accuracy of the article and put things in proper perspective? Also why does Bristol appear as a stub and not Glasgow?? Glasgow has the oldest continous gang history in the UK going back at least 8 decades - any article on gangs in the United Kingdom is not complete without Glasgow! OSGSSS —Preceding undated comment added 17:45, 22 October 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Addressed some of the issues on UK Gangs and updated LOndon section complete with sources/references. Might not be in the correct style for wikipedia so am open to suggestions on minor edits to amend this.

OSGSSS (talk) 22:10, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]




WikiProject British Crime[edit]

  • For those interested, a WikiProject regarding crime in Great Britain has been proposed. MadMax 19:16, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


The Liverpool Gang War section relates to mostly organised crime involving guns and shootouts, rather than street gangs. Maybe it should appear elsewhere. London street gangs bit needs sorting out too.

Sheffield? Newcsatle? Birmingham?[edit]

I think the above cities (INCLUDING GLASGOW) should have a sub article about them in the page, Birmingham, Sheffield Newcastle and Glasgow as all 4 have or had a high concentration of gang activity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.140.172.60 (talk) 10:32, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I created a Birmingham and Belfast section. Obviously, we don't need to include every town and city in the UK in the 'Gangs in major urban centres' section - only those that really stand out as hotbeds for gang activity or have notable historic association with gangs. If you think Sheffield and Newcastle fit the bill, you're welcome to include them 77.99.12.140 (talk) 03:56, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Glasgow?[edit]

Why is Glasgow missing from this list?

The gangs of Glasgow is a very important part of it's history, the formation of the world's oldest Police force, ethnicity similar to American gangs and ideology conflicts. I actually think it has the potential to be an article itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.23.134.105 (talk) 20:53, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

STARted to add Glasgow but dont really kno much about it, just read up some stuff right quick and got a couple bits on there. Someone please expand OSGSSS (talk) 12:17, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion[edit]

I feel the Gangs in England page should be deleted. I also feel that a section names European Gangs should be added to the wikipedia article named "gang". It can draw upon the new research on European gangs, why there has been a denial of gangs existing in the UK and Europe, a history observing the various youth sub-cultures that were ganglike but never referred to as gangs (Teddy Boys for examnple).
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.71.24.81 (talk)

I disagree. There's more that enough material to have its own article.
-- Randy2063 16:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. gangs by nature are changing organizations. their discussion is best suited for the newscasts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dk pdx (talk • contribs) 01:22, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

This article, in my opinion, is written up by only one website community that may not have all the facts. We need:

  1. Sources
  2. Government figures
  3. News reports
  4. Maybe a picture
  5. Crime studies

I'm doing research at the University of Wales into Gang crime, but there is only so much I know... HawkerTyphoon 02:42, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As far as resources go they are out there but i dont have time right now to add them -

firstly for the bristol Section all the BBC news articles used in it are on the reference list, as well as non-fiction crime books from Tony Thompson.

the same can be said for liverpool and manchester, the books have been given.

there is a website for manchester MMAGS (Manchester Multi Agency Gang Strategy), a London Guns Gangs and weapons Forum, Operation Trident all gang/gun orientated.

The Home Office has produced a number of reports most notably Identifying and Tackling delinquent Youth Groups (Study into youth gangs), gangs and guns:rationalisation into current research on gang and gun crime a report by the Jill Dando Crime Institute, Also the British Journal of Criminology has some articles recently published regarding gngs in england. There are an estimated 30,000 street gang members in england in 2002 (Home Office). In Manchester a recent article and a quote from an LA Styl;ed Gang Initiative in Manchester has qouted the city as having 500+ gang members in Longsight/Moss Side Area, and the Beswick Area is quoted as having 100 seriously at risk youths, thats coming from the youth Offending Team. The informatiom is there to the public but it is just a case of them being interested or not? and most are not interested in the statistical side but they are interested in the media side


I have added some facts and information regarding gun and gangs in the UK to the top of the page 9

gangs in england[edit]

ive started to add to the sections of this page with liverpool, manchester and bristol. however, i only have limited knowledge on these areas and so someone from these areas in the know should contribute further. im based in london but dont really have time to add to the london section because its a large complex area with many notable incidences of gang violence to mention in comparison to bristol/liverpool/manchester.


also how exactly do copywrite laws work because wikipedia said dont use things from observe without persmission. i mentioned what was in the article but did not copy what they had written. also i thought reproduction of literature was ok so long as it was properly referenced, can someone help me on this because i am unsure about how that sort of thing works on the internet


  • The copyright information for Wikipedia is long and complicated --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyrights . My comment on Copying things from The Observer was placed because the information there at that time was from The Observer, word for wor.d AFAIK, reproduction of literature is OK, as long as the literature is not copyrighted. text from The Observer is generally copyrighted either to the newspaper itself, or to the writer. Small quotes are generally acceptable, however large sections of text are not. I try and use 5% of the article maximum, although I'm not sure of the copyright law on this. As for referencing, I use the Harvard Referencing System - Long and complicated. Again, check Wikipedia Help for this info.

P.S. try and keep wikipedia as Neutral as possible. Don't worry too much about this though; other people will make adjustments as they see fit - that's what wikipedia is all about! Anymore questions, ask me! HawkerTyphoon 18:27, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]



Vietnamese Criminal Activities in the UK[edit]

It has been discovered over the last 2 years in the UK that Vietnamese criminals are using ordinary houses to grow cannabis plants commercially under artificial growing conditions. The enterprise is now almost exclusively Vietnamese. Young illegal immigrants are smuggled from Vietnam to serve as 'gardeners' in these enterprises. The Vietnamese use, for example, Vietnamese nail parlours that have sprang up all over UK towns and cities, as fronts for their unlawful enterprises, with young innocent looking women sent out to rent houses from unsuspecting landlords. Recently, a combined Police effort to crack down on these enterprises, was launched in the form of Operation Keymer.


194.60.106.5 10:17, 27 October 2006 (UTC) Vietnamese criminals were also found to be running prostitution and people smuggling rings discovered in the recent UK combined Police Operation Pentameter. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4757023.stm 27 Oct 06.[reply]


http://www.bbc.co.uk/crime/crimewatch/cctv_hackney.shtml


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4808468.stm


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/334718.stm


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/essex/4077814.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4916276.stm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/drugs/Story/0,,1860305,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,1772195,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/drugs/Story/0,,1731843,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,1567386,00.html

http://www.ukcia.org/news/shownewsarticle.php?articleid=12256

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6445201.stm

http://www.eveningstar.co.uk/search/story.aspx?brand=EADOnline&category=News&itemid=IPED16%20Mar%202007%2017:52:52:483&tBrand=EADOnline&tCategory=search

http://www.eveningstar.co.uk/content/eveningstar/news/story.aspx?brand=ESTOnline&category=News&tBrand=ESTOnline&tCategory=news&itemid=IPED26%20Feb%202007%2013%3A17%3A10%3A070

http://www.ukcia.org/news/shownewsarticle.php?articleid=12545

fuck the 5 66 all day

Page in Question[edit]

It seems very few people contributing to this do not know anything about the current situation. All the people complaining about one sided-ness and neutrality etc.. the "academics" the almighty "gods" of wikipedia who look down upon those like a teacher punishing a child of incorrect pronunciation should shut the fuck up and leave the topic to those who are experts in the field. As with all speciality topics experts should be sought for the material displayed. Views such as those of "says who?" are very bias, stereotyping and ignorant.

Unless you have a genuine knowledge of the subject, keep your useless opinions to yourselves. I am by no means an expert and probably am somewhat as Naive as the "says who" guy. But i am open minded and would really appreciate some expert input from those who really know.


However condescending the "almighty gods" of wikipedia may seem their goal is the same. Regardless of an individuals expertise, proper grammatical usage and punctuation are imposed for the receptiveness of anyone using wikipedia. Articles need structure. You cannot take a whole bunch of statistics and slap them wherever you like on a page. Also, you cannot make statements without any evidential source. I do have to agree with some of the points made by the "says who?" person. The whole page is written in a completely bias format which strives to make points like current gangs in England are 'more violent than their predecesors' and essentially should be feared. The page is obviously referring to Streetgangs, and not gangs in general. As mentioned on this page gang activity from foreign nations practically dominates this country nowadays with the expansion of the EU amoungst other things. They are the ones profiting from drug dealers on the street, they are the ones who take home the big bucks (Tony Thompson - GANGS 2004). We definitly need to be clear on the level on gangs we are referring to here.

Its foolish to compare gangs like the Krays to streetgangs, which is probably why the information on this page needs to be re-written into a British Streetgangs article. I myself am no expert on the subject, and it would obviously take people from across the nation to give an accurate depiction on specific areas. I do know however that much of whats reported in the media reflects common traits of US streetgangs. I do not think it is ignorant to say that kids are assimilating whats exposed to them through popular media channels - especially when you have groups in B'ham and Manchester calling themselves Crips and Bloods and dressing in Los Angeles based gang attire. It is my view that many of the people editing this page are less interested in creating a neutral informative article, and more interested in portraying a false image of streetgangs in our society.


The Manchester gangs representing Crip and Blood wasn't a portrayal because of the media. The Doddingtons, Longsight, Pitbulls, OT and various other gangs were already formed and then made legitimate contact with Los Angeles gang members. Some of the contact came from British guys going over to LA and vice versa. There's news reports and sources for this online, it also happened in London with a British guy who went to America, joined up with the UBN and then taught their principles to gang members in London under the guise of being a youth worker.

I can't remember what gang it started with in Manchester but they made legit contact with LA gang members and got the green light to represent their alliance. I think it was one of the Crip sets. Their rivals then started flagging Blood to contradict them and it spiraled from there.

I'm not sure exactly WHY they did it, I think they were doing business together.

Either way, it's important to note that while many of the younger and newer gangs flagging Crip and Blood haven't got any contact with actual sets, they usually do it to contradict their rivals, who either do have that contact OR were contradicting a set that did. It's also relevant that gangs didn't just pop up and decide "We're Bloods", they were already gangs that then decided to adopt elements of that.

Another important aspect is that just because a gang flags colours doesn't mean they are doing it to emulate American gangs. Gangs in the UK have worn bandannas and colours as identifiers from the Middle Ages (and probably before) to the fucking 1900s and all that time inbetween. Look at the Scuttlers, the Mohocks, the Peaky Blinders, Penny Mobs and countless more who did that.

When you're in a fight with a gang of people and you are all wearing the exact same clothes (all black tracksuits and hoodies) then you need something to seperate you to tell the difference. So a coloured rag helps that. Also, the naming conventions are very different in the UK to the US and in the UK often reference their colour as their gang name, so "Green Gang" or "Grey Gang" etc. 86.2.213.86 (talk) 15:54, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup[edit]

This article is in dire need of a complete revision or re-write to bring it up to the standards of a Wikipedia article. I urge anyone who feels they have the competence to contribute to this page that they first understand the guidelines for editing a Wikipedia article. These can be found under the help link to the left of the page. This is not a teacher to student lecture, however the current version reads like a jumble of statistics and storytelling. If you are unsure on how to contribute or edit a page, or on how/what a well written article should be templated on, please browse the help section - it is extensive, but you will find a wealth of information beneficial to both you, and the reader. Roguestate


I will do this when i have some free time. It seems many do not understand the complexities of gang research and what gangs actually are. The term gets used carelessly. There is no consensus on a single definition in 70 years of research. And many argue, with regard to youth gangs, that much youth crime is committed by groups - where do you draw the line between a gang and a group of young criminals? Many people generalise gangs as gun carrying drug dealers. However, this is not the case although it does account for much of the sensationalist media reports of gangs in this country. I intend to bring this page up to standard.


OK so i start to clean up and remove large sections for rewriting and wikipedia immediatley removes those changes to put the page back how it was? reverts to previous or something? Why?

OK tried again adding references and rewriting and it keeps saying edit conflict and disregarding my edits for fuck sakes!!!!! I give up. Who's next?

Merge[edit]

I think that this article should be merged into gang. My reasoning for this is that currently the gang article does not have any information on gangs outside the united states - but you'll see that some of the sources these articles use are very simmilar (for example the source from the first paragraph is also on the gang article). --danielfolsom 01:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also think that by merging - this article can really be improved. Right now it's really not up to par - sources are at the bottom of sections, there are strange paragraphs and paragraph spacing that has gone unnoticed. Frankly by moving it into Gangs editors can work on the sources and we can remove the extras - it'd bring a spark to the content.--danielfolsom 01:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm gonna go ahead and remove the copyright violations and do some other cleanup --danielfolsom 01:24, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of this is original research. I wrote the Manchester, Bristol and Liverpool sections. However, i gave up on the article because people from these areas began adding ludicrous statements such as "there are also Bloodz and Cripz and the Mafia..." to "big up" there localities. It began to get very messy but im glad to see the page is looking a little healthier. Where i have not used original research i have taken information from books and newspaper articles. The newspaper articles i can reference but there are no links to many of them as i accessed them using an athens acccount.

There are a num ber of recent academic journals and reports on UK gangs but again these require athens accounts and i cannot provide links for them. I definatley think though that this should be encompassed by the gang page.

Englandgangs 17:55, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet - there's actually a small deal going on in the gang page (a new editor is adding stuff that is content fine, but needs to be made ... encyclopedic like), but once that's done I'll merge.--danielfolsom 19:55, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As the sections relate to individual cities would it be possible for these sections (Liverpool/Manchester/Bristol...) to be articles on there own under a list of "Cities With Street Gangs" or something? That way on the "gang" page links can be made to particular cities whereas the main sections of the article can refer to countries/continents ? Does that make sense?

Also there is very little in the way of gang research available on the internet with regard to British gangs. One website http://www.piczo.com/gangsinlondon has a wealth of information on gangs but only within the capital. It is similar to the http://www.chicagogangs.org/ website that is used as an external link on wikipedia for Chicago gangs.. Englandgangs 16:26, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's to be avoided - one of the problems with this article is that it has unsourced additions such as "they're especially prevalent in...." and then list cities. If we were to list every city that gangs were in then it'd be a ridiculously long article - sorry it's taking me so long on this by the way - I have like twenty things on my plate, and I think I'll need some help in cleaning this article up (and it does need major clean up) and adding information to it before we move it in.--danielfolsom 17:55, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The reason those cities are listed is because these are the only ones that have "sterotypical US" street gangs. A major problem is many people, in fact most people, do not know what a gang is. Most U.K cities will have gangs but these are the largest cities with high rates of firearms offences relating to gangs. I think the best thing for this article would be an entire rewrite. There is a source saying that gangs are most prevalent in those cities (http://www.iansa.org/documents/2002/gang_culture_and_young_people1.pdf) bottom of page three. I personally think the article should be written in a more general style that encompasses England and mentions the various cities rather than having a large section as is presently there. I wrote the Manchester, Bristol and Liverpool sections 2 years ago at least, and i know the majority of material i used will not be found on the internet, (exception Bristol as all aspects of the section relate to the News Reports section).

Im stuck on this? Im prepared to rewrite/add to the section material that can be sourced. What are your thoughts?

Englandgangs 18:41, 12 July 2007 (UTC) Well of course it needs to be sourced, but if people don't know what a gang is they would find out by the definition - so how is that an argument to have every city. The current gang page and how it is in the Us is pretty good right now - but we don't say these cities have the most gangs - because A) it's kinda random, b) we'd be hard pressed to source it, and c) it's not that useful in an encyclopedia. We might list a link with that info in external links - but we would never specify a city, let alone write sections on them.--danielfolsom 23:55, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your misunderstood. I was not arguing to have every city. I said the article should be more general and perhaps mention those cities but not have specific sections for them. For example, the section on American Street Gangs is general and mentions particular cities without going into detail on them. I was suggesting that England or Europe perhaps should be written in the same format as is currently used for the U.S. Englandgangs 16:56, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh - yeah I agree completely, again sorry it's taking me so long.--danielfolsom 18:55, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update - so I finally got to work on this a while ago, and I proposed the move to WP:Spotlight, but it was decided that the best thing to do would be to have different articles for different countries (thus the creation of Gangs in the United States of America)--danielfolsom 00:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Biased[edit]

I find it quite strange that it has been said views where people seem to be "bigging up" their own area have been removed yet they seem present still. The Manchester section in particular I found quite strange considering it mostly only focused on areas like Moss Side and Cheetham Hill, and it didn't mention Yardies and things such as the Hacienda night club. Also I found it quite strange that there was no mention of Chris Little, who is one of the most notorious Manchester gangsters, there's even a book focused mainly on him.

Perhaps because this is focusing more on "street gangs" rather than more organised criminals/groups such as Chris Little and the Salford lot. Although the Liverpool gangs mentioned on the page are lesss street based and of a more organised nature. 80.193.44.19 10:25, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mess[edit]

This article is a mess. First off, all statements must to be verifiable and referenced by reliable sources (see WP:CITE for more info.), or they will be removed, nothing libelous is allowed here. This article is also not the place for adding 'gang' names or slang terms, so unless they are notable in their own right, they may be removed. Sue Wallace 18:52, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]



deffo messed up[edit]

Hehehe @ Sue. Facts.....put people in prison girl, Being a dicky bird can get you killed.. ;)

I agree we should trash the article and start a new one entitled ...'American-Style Street Gangs in England'.

Dang!!! gotta go....I'm on probation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.177.148 (talk) 16:59, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed you have put a lot of effort into this, and you've added cites, so thats good, hopefully we can help clean the article up a little bit. Unfortunately this article sometimes attracts editors who just want to glorify gangs or add un-encyclopedic details (and this will be deleted anyway). We all have to remember to keep the language neutral so that people in other countries will be able to understand it. I agree the title could be a little more specific. Is this article about 'street gangs' that are a petty criminal nuisance in neighbourhoods or is it about much more sophisticated underworld networks? Sue Wallace 22:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're so right Sue. I was puzzled by some of the wording used within, for example the Liverpool section. It did seem a tad biased.

I'd like to thank whoever has re-titled this article to Gangs in the UK. Kudos :).

I'd like to see the article include at least a history of 'gangs'. Especially the cities of Glasgow and Belfast, where there is a long history of organised gangs.. Its just a shame we cannot include Dublin in the article :(.

Thanks to all who have contributed.

I don't think this article is going to be able to include all citable gang activity in the whole of the UK past and present, including going into specific cases also. It will be far too long. It needs cropping as it is. I was thinking of dividing it, I don't know if there is enough notable info to do it, but say an article on Gangs of Liverpool, a separate article for Gangs of London, Gangs of Manchester etc. etc. or something like that, more specific. What do other people think? If it stays as Gangs of UK it will have to have much smaller sections per area, most of the info that has been added will have to be cropped, esp. in Liverpool and Manchester, which is at the moment very lengthy already. Sue Wallace (talk) 01:12, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that each city should really be an article in its own right. The background behind the Liverpool gangs is far too complex to simply condense, and its a mistake to imagine that the youth gangs in Liverpool are somehow distinct from their older counterparts. And I can't wait to see how Glasgows or Belfasts tale would turn out, if you think Liverpools is complex :0o . lol

Cool, let me go ask an admin what he thinks about dividing the article up. Sue Wallace (talk) 01:58, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sue asked my opinion; let's improve the article we have before splitting it into subarticles. There is quite a lot of scope for trimming it for ease of reading and style. I may have a go at this myself if I have time. --John (talk) 02:33, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Good lad John ;) . I'll have a look in tomorrow... I'm thinking of beginning an article on 'John Haase' over the weekend. Cheers all.


Would it be possible to include a small paragraph especially in the Liverpool and Manchester subs, regarding how the 1981 80's riots influenced the evolution of the 'gangs?

I was looking at the Gangs in the United States of America I think this article will probably need to follow that style, ie like a general overview, or it will be just too big. Maybe specific cases like John Hasse mentioned above if their notable enough can have their own article? Sue Wallace (talk) 18:01, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Ah......... but.. Britain is not the USA. Outside of the the period of the 1600's until the mid 1800's, We share no common denominators regards gang structure. Though admittedly US black culture has pervaded since the birth of hiphop. But again, we are not the US, British Jungle, d&b and grime are todays influences.. with an American Flavour.

Their Gang Culture and structure is different from ours. Ours are more akin to Hooligan soccer firms than US street gangs...imo..like :o)..

But I defer to your judgement. Regards Liverpool, Haase I think does deserve an article, and I also think that Curtis Warrens article could do with a little updating. The David Ungi murder,and controversy deserves an article I feel. As does mention of the Liverpool riots in aiding the evolution of Liverpools organised gangs. Remember that Curtis Warren was allegedly instrumental in leading the riots in Toxteth, and he was a teenager at the time.

x

I'm not saying it has to be exactly like that, tbh I haven't got a clue about gangs I only came on here to add cites and a little tidy up. If you look on Wikipedia:WikiProject British crime and scroll down there is a list of sub categories that a lot of the excess of this article can be put into? Sue Wallace (talk) 18:29, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Ah now Sue I'm only suggesting that British Gangs outside of London are not as ethnically based as the USA's gangs.. I am also suggesting that most teenage 'street gangs' are simply the youth wing of a much larger local gang. To attempt to distinguish between the two in my opinion is a fools errand. The British gang scene is a web, and everyone is a spider.

Have a good weekend kid, all the best. You too. You should get a username. Sue Wallace (talk) 18:44, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of my new name Sue ?  :)


I found an thread on the Streetgangs.com website which may be of interest to some.. http://www.streetgangs.com/billboard/viewtopic.php?t=7028&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0


I found this big thread on the history of Glasgow gangs

http://www.setbb.com/englandgangforu/viewtopic.php?mforum=englandgangforu&t=426&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15&mforum=englandgangforu

and an interesting thread of one ignorant youth and trying to explain why gangs exist even if they aint like the holloywood movies

http://www.setbb.com/englandgangforu/viewtopic.php?mforum=englandgangforu&t=955&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&mforum=englandgangforu —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.31.240.179 (talk) 22:48, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


excellent resources above... nice one. ;o) ......... ( are you studying too?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.177.148 (talk) 16:06, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I think that the quote from Professor John Pitts should be removed regarding the number of gang members. His 1500-2000 im sure relate to just the borough of Waltham Forest and not the whole of London, if it does refer to the whole of London then that figure is jusdt for the hardcore element of street gangs. John Pitts' work is highly innaccurate and he was verbally abused at a workshop by "gang members" for his misinformation. Unfortunately owing to his status as Dr/Professor people believe what he says to be true. Anyone who knows him or has come across him at crime seminars and workshops will know he is an expert at fuck all.

Also, the article about there being 169 gangs in London, that report is also very innaccurate and some boroughs did not submit any information whatsoever so although Hackney was the hgihest, it was the highest of 7/8 boroughs where info was carried out. The report also did not define what a gang was so that 169 could include anything from the more ruthless groups of drug dealers to just Tom, Dick and Harry on the corner calling themselves WK Crew.

Little is really known publicly of the street gangs in London, with the exception of www.piczo.com/gangsinlondon and www.setbb.com/englandgangforu or if you are living in inner London and under the age of 23. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.68.135.182 (talk) 12:46, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


"Professor John Pitts should be removed regarding the number of gang members. His 1500-2000 im sure relate to just the borough of Waltham Forest "

Well in his latest shoddy report about 40 Lambeth gangs he claims PDC has got 2,500 members!??!?! But he has got a bit confused there and added all the cliques in Brixton together and assumed they was all PDC —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.198.230.230 (talk) 13:01, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


The problem is... if you wish to make a statement to the contary, you need to provide a citation from a source. And I don't mean a quote from a public forum. Peace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.177.148 (talk) 18:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dont understand what you mean by quote from a public forum? The problem is there is no published work to quote, and the work thats available online to quote is highly disputed or simply innaccurate, and im referring here to reports such as the John Pitts reluctant gangsters work, the 169 gangs identified by Met Police etc.. These are unreliable sources. There has yet to be an up to date report that is accurate and most information out there online is from the media and well, enough said —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.34.254.162 (talk) 22:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violations[edit]

Please can editors not copy paste work direct from other websites it is not allowed, please see Wikipedia:Copyright violations for guidelines. Thanks Sue Wallace (talk) 15:29, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism[edit]

I see the user 'Joshii' allegedly from Manchester has completely destroyed the article rather than selectively edited it. In fact the user stated. "delete as much crap as I can" I think personally your account should be deleted asap. You have not added anything you have contributed nothing. Typical plastic Manc. 92.234.248.31 (talk) 12:51, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the Liverpool section it now states "In August 2007 the ongoing war between these two rival gangs caused nation-wide outrage, when innocent 11 year old Rhys Jones was shot in the neck and died in his mother's arms in the car park of the Fir Tree pub in Croxteth Liverpool. [13]. Police have still to bring the 'teenaged' shooter to justice.[14]"

What, which two rival gangs? 92.234.248.31 (talk) 12:55, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Don't just try saying my account should be deleted because I remove POV nonsense from what was a hugely biased article. There was no need to add anything to the article as it was jam-packed full of crap so it needed cleanup which in this case meant deleting alot of it. ┌Joshii┐└chat┘ 14:40, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Show us where the Liverpool section was biased and had any POV Joshii? --92.234.248.31 (talk) 15:20, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I recommend that this article be deleted as since the users Joshii deletions it has become non-sensical and incomprehensible. --92.234.248.31 (talk) 15:23, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Like the new look[edit]

Page is looking better than it has for some time, nice and concise Englandgangs (talk) 19:12, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

please correct the spelling of "area's"! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.137.39.189 (talk) 05:15, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dead Rabbits]][edit]

what happened to the dead rabbits reference on the Liverpool Gangs entry?

Did Joshii from Mancland delete it?

{{editsemiprotected}}[edit]

{{editsemiprotected}} Update for the article on Gangs in England under the liverpool section - Tuesday, 16 December 2008 saw Sean Merce convicted of the murder of Rhys Jones. Article [1] is a good reference.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Toonwhitters (talk • contribs)

 Done diff. -Unpopular Opinion (talk · contribs) 18:42, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

erm?[edit]

Why no mention of this? "The Serious Organised Crime Agency’s (SOCA) UK Threat Assessment report puts Merseyside at the top of the tree for the supply of guns and drugs throughout the British Isles."

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2009/05/26/merseyside-gangsters-lead-britain-s-illegal-drug-and-gun-trade-100252-23712164/

Edit request from Montemanm1, 15 June 2011[edit]

Montemanm1 (talk) 18:52, 15 June 2011 (UTC) Multiple instance's of using appostrophe's in plural's.[reply]

Montemanm1 (talk) 18:52, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. GaneshBhakt (talk) 07:46, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Birmingham[edit]

Where has the Birmingham Section gone?? Surely this has is quite an important story to tell? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.197.127.191 (talk) 06:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 23 June 2012[edit]

London asian pakistani gang called PAKI PANTHERS well known in waltham forest and newham East london https://sites.google.com/site/londonstreetgangs/gang-lists/east-london-gangs/paki-panthers

Nextman786 (talk) 15:39, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done, need a more reliable source than a google sites page--Jac16888 Talk 00:01, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nextman786 (talk • contribs) 15:56, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

heres a reliable source Paki panthers also called Asian virus are one the gangs to be documented on paranoma On knife edge http://violenceagainstwhites.wordpress.com/2012/04/18/asian-virus-their-actual-gang-name-beat-deividas-strizegauskas-to-death-and-get-away-with-it/ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/6935545.stm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nextman786 (talk • contribs) 19:07, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Gangs in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:43, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

21st Century NOT 20th Century.[edit]

I edited the part that says there was headlines of gun crime in the early 20th century when it clearly means early 21st and it was reverted and I was told to stop being a vandal.

I'm fairly sure it's a typo because the early 20th Century means the 1900s and yet the references later on about gun crime pertain to the 21st century. 86.2.213.86 (talk) 16:00, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gangs in the United Kingdom. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:14, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Gangs in the United Kingdom. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:21, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Glasgow[edit]

"It has been suggested that the rise in Glasgow gangs from the 1850s was a result of an influx in Irish immigration" By whom? The source provided is extremely poor; and this risks being xenophobic. It is certainly true that some of the gangs had religious divides: e.g. "Norman Conks" (Catholic) and "Calton Tongs" (catholic) vs "Billy Boys" (Protestant) but I don't think you can conflate the immigration of Irish people with increased gang warfare without providing very good sources. The Irish were, historically, often blamed for the social problems of Glasgow, and before them the Highlanders were blamed: but you can't support/argue these things without giving a detailed source. Therefore, I would ask someone to remove this sentence.

reference/citation number 69 to the Glasgow Herald is broken, I kid you not. Many thanks, and forgive me for this - I hope it doesn't appear to be a diatribe,

EcheveriaJ (talk) 19:12, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Greece[edit]

Greek 79.166.151.102 (talk) 20:35, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The gang violence in Britain[edit]

Information 77.101.165.132 (talk) 15:54, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gangs_in_the_United_Kingdom&oldid=1207358165"