Talk:Melbourne shuffle

Requested move 5 June 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. No objections after 7 days. Cúchullain ^t/c 15:32, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

---

Melbourne Shuffle → Shuffle danceShuffle dance – Per WP:RECOGNIZABLE, as overwhelmingly the most WP:COMMONNAME (by about a 10:1 ratio). The "Melbourne" name as a supposed origin story is even disputed according to our article. Regardless, it's barely used today. This is called "the shuffle dance" (as a dance) or "shuffle dancing" (as an activity) and it's become well-developed, including sub-styles, large-scale competitions, etc., all over the world. We wouldn't use Shuffle dancing as the title (though that should continue to redirect here) per WP:NOUN. It's sometimes also called "the shuffle", but that's actually the name of the basic move (inherited from tap dance), and is ambiguous anyway (several other dance styles have an unrelated move by the same name). PS: If this is not moved to the suggested name, it should be moved to Melbourne shuffle, per WP:NCCAPS, MOS:CAPS (esp. MOS:GENRE), WP:CONSISTENCY, etc., because it is not a song title, an individual's work of choreographed dance, or any other kind of proper noun phrase. This is a folk dance of unknown exact origin, not a discrete work. It's thus like any other popular activity, from billiards to water-skiing to roleplaying games to line dance.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:20, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Side observation: The content of this article is a trainwreck. Almost every single sentence in it has multiple WP:MOS problems (especially rampant over-capitalization), and there's a lot of original research, some "how to"-leaning material, lack of sourcing, general unencyclopedic writing, etc., etc. This is true of many other dance articles, but this is among the worst offenders. I seriously hope WP:WikiProject Dance will devote some time to it, since it's actually an important article, as current popular culture topics go.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:20, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Melbourne

My observation is that any Aussie involved in the club scene likely has killed enough brain cells with alcohol that any memory is more properly termed a recollection which is to say a reconstruction. The fact is that shuffle type moves were present in the US long before 1990 and stomping has little resemblance to shuffling though the Melbourne style is cruder than US shuffling.

So I guess we can swallow the notion that Melbourne invented the shuffle from the stomp and the Aussie influence spread to the US where people were already using the "impure" and derided "Cali" steps. But the majesty of Australian influence over American society was unstoppable and so the Aussie shuffle then became entrenched in the US where the US shamelessly and despicably adulterated the Melbourne shuffle with the steps that had already been used in raves here. Or we can understand the shuffle was already a US phenomenon and some Melbourners made it their own by mating it with their club culture. The US shuffle despised as impure by Aussies which existed before the Aussie "invention" may not have been called the shuffle so Aussies may claim the application of the term but the moves were already in place. So go ahead and call the US version something besides shuffle and allow it to continue because the Aussie variant is almost as bad as watching Germans try to dance. For a form of artistic expression it is odd to claim origination then deride something else you wish to claim as your invention as having been ruined. If it's that different then it really should be called something else and you should free yourselves from the responsibility of inventing it.

I have no problems recognizing that Aussie's developed the Melbourne shuffle. That's why it's called the Melbourne shuffle. It was the variation of shuffle developed by Aussies.2600:1700:6D90:79B0:FDC6:BC30:4365:6DDB (talk) 23:03, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

OLD UK RAVER I'd like to agree with the sentiment of this post. Its not even clear if the dance moves in the Melbourne shuffle in the early 1990's are any different at all to what we were seeing else where years before this.

IMO mid to late 80's USA lead the way musically whilst UK lead the way for the actual events. I believe the UK scene was recreated in the US some years later.

Can anyone provide video evidence prior to 1989 of shuffle dance moves at an actual rave? So far the UK has it and I doubt 1989 was the start of it here either. I suspect it was either started in the UK or US, almost certainly not Australia. The Ozzies were playing catch up neither leading the world with the scene or the music.

History needs correcting

- "Early 1990s" section: "The music genres originally danced to were hardstyle...". This is not accurate b/c hardstyle did not exist in the early 90s. Should techno or trance be included as an original style? I wasn't there personally to verify but techno & trance were styles that dancers shuffled to in later years and they certainly existed in the early 90s as music styles. The first listed reference from onlymelbourne.com.au is no longer linking to the specified article.

- Main section at top: "The shuffle dance... developed in Melbourne, Australia in the early 1990s." This contradicts the estimated years of 1988-1992 in the table shown here under the Rave article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rave#Dancing. Also, here is an original music video for the 1989 US house track, Frankie Bones & Lenny Dee - Just As Long As I Got You, that features a silhouette of a dancer doing an early version of the shuffle: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wSfpw2Y16s, especially in the beginning. Shape55 (talk) 00:00, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

No Citations or Evidence - The main Shuffle Dance moves appear to have been invented else where

You've provided virtually no evidence that the shuffle was invented in Melbourne and most your citations you do provide don't work. I've provided various video evidence of the shuffle dance moves being performed in the UK during 1989 and also showed how main stream it was that by 1991 prodigy were doing it in their pop videos that must have circled the globe. You can't even provide any evidence of it being in Australia prior to 1991 let alone in the late 80's. There is also a lot of missinformation on this page. Like Mc Hammer inventing running man. What a load of nonsense try using wiki!

There is even a commenter at the top of this talk saying "I cant lay claim to knowing who started the melbourne shuffle but I was around in 91-92 when it started to kick off in a pretty big way" By 1992 the shuffle dance moves were dying in the uk! It had been around for quite some time! This dance as rave dance moves almost certainly didn't start in Melbourne or even Australia did it. It was most likely UK, it had been big there before it was a big in Australia IMO. Also for Rave culture the UK was where it was at globally during those years. Prove me wrong. I've provided evidence to back up what I already know for a fact to be true. I was part of the underground UK party scene from 1989. I saw it first hand.

Until these points and all the citation requests I put in the document are addressed then every time you revert my changes I am going to put them back in. Ignoring dealing with the hard facts I've presented does not make your clearly flawed version of events right. This is one of the most inaccurate and poorly managed wiki pages I've ever seen. Also your method of intellectual debate leaves much to be desired. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiRaver (talk • contribs) 12:11, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

You interpreting the videos as showing evidence of the shuffle are original research. Please read WP:RS and stop edit warring. Spike 'em (talk) 14:01, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Incidentally, I have no opinion on where the dance originated, but the addition of youtube videos as proof it existed in UK violates one or both of WP:RS and WP:NOR. Spike 'em (talk) 15:02, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

So where is the evidence for the rest of the page? My evidence is the best there is. There is nothing close to it on the page. Get real! just delete all the information that isn't provable on that page, which is the WHOLE page if my evidence is no good!!!! IMO. I asked for citations and none were provided. BTW I was shuffle dancing my self in the UK around 1989 / 1990 (although we didnt call it that then but its the moves), I know what I'm saying to be true. those Videos I linked come from an official archive!

Using this one as a start. Where on the video is there any captioning / commentary saying something along the lines of "here are some dancers performing the new shuffling craze"? Unless you are an acknowledged expert on dance crazes, you using it to prove your case is original research. Spike 'em (talk) 15:46, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

So find one bit of evidence that is nearly as good as that regarding the information it was invented in Melbourne. You can't because it wasn't. Some of the citation requests on this page have been there years!!!!

This whole wiki page is original research, especially for the years 1987-1995 ish. Call it what you will but shuffle dance moves could be seen in the video I linked and they were from 1989 UK. There is zero evidence at all that it was anywhere else in the world at this time. If you knew what a shuffle dance was you'd recognise this. Yes I am the closest thing to an expert I was dancing these moves in the UK 1989 / 1990 and went to most the hardcore underground raves. Check out the prodigy Everybody in the place pop vid from 1991 too (also UK) the moves are for anyone who knows what they are talking about to see. Is there any such proof it was in Australia at all at this time (on this page) NO. I think we should remove the whole wiki page tbh. What s evidence more than someone who was a big part of the scene and some videos from the era that show the moves well before any other county can on this page. Are you saying if I write a book or webpage that is somehow more evidence than actual film footage from pop videos and an official archive? This page is rubbish and they way that the facts i present are being handled is even worse, especially when you consider that there is far less evidence to support whats presented on the page after you revert my changes!!

— Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiRaver (talk • contribs) 18:01, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

I'd tend to agree with you on the nuking option: the whole article is written from the point of view of people who took part rather than being encyclopaedic. Spike 'em (talk) 18:53, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Seriously

I'm not suggesting this is actually the case, but this page looks like it was written at the end of a three day MDMA bender (with plenty of shuffling). I just nuked heaps of meandering opinion, they were cited at best by Youtube videos. This has to be the worst Wikipedia page I've ever seen, it's not encyclopedic, more like a drug addled ode to someones misspent youth. I grew up in Melbourne's inner suburbs in the 1990's - I'm aware that the shuffle was a real thing and it was really popular at the time, but this mythologising it into a major dance style is laughable. Comparing the shuffle to Crip walking is so ridiculous it made me laugh. Placing it in the timeline alongside break-dancing or the UK rave scene is plain silly. It's a simple dance, anyone can do it and that's the appeal, I guess. In my experience people are pretty disparaging about it, it's seen as a joke. Bacondrum (talk) 23:32, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 16 March 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved (closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 22:55, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

---

Shuffle dance → Melbourne shuffle – Someone previously moved it from the original Melbourne shuffle, to Shuffle dance, without giving any real reason other than their personal opinion. As per WP:RECOGNIZABLE and WP:COMMONNAME the article should be named according to the citations. Claims regarding the disputed nature of "Melbourne" part of the name, the history and origin story were un-cited and completely bias and not written from a nuetral point of view, based entirely on Youtube videos and original research and not even remotely verifiable, no reliable source disputes the Melbourne origins, in-fact the Age newspaper had this to say:

To the untrained eye it might look like a cross between the chicken dance and a foot-stomping robot. But to the young nightclubbers who spend countless hours mastering it, the Melbourne shuffle is an art form, and recognised in international dance circles as Melbourne's own : https://www.theage.com.au/national/dance-trance-20021207-gduw8a.html

All citations that refer to the dance by name refer to it as the "Melbourne shuffle", not even a single reliable citation refers to merely the "shuffle dance". Bacondrum (talk) 00:30, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

• Support as per COMMONNAME - I've never once heard or seen this referred to as "Shuffle dance".... It's reffered to as "Melbourne Shuffle" almost everywhere. –Davey2010^Talk 02:11, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
• Comment. The article was moved to this title after a formal RM discussion found no objection. If it’s moved, it should be to just Melbourne shuffle; the disambiguation isn’t needed.—Cúchullain ^t/c 02:44, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Fair enough, I've changed the title request. I'm not having a go at you or the person who made the 2018 move request, but it seems odd that the title was changed without any citations or evidence to back up the change. Surely the move should still require citations from reliable sources and that the claim be verifiable? There wasn't a single reliable source to back the original move and related assertions, surely it should not have been done just because someone thought it should, I didn't think mere personal opinion was grounds for such a change.Bacondrum (talk) 03:06, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

• Support - looking at this: Many other all-Black shows, including “Runnin’ Wild,” “Chocolate Dandies” and “Blackbirds” of 1928, also played to enthusiastic American audiences in the 1920s and 1930s. Tap combined elements of African-influenced shuffle dances, English clog dancing, and Irish jigs. - it seems that the generic term "Shuffle dance" was around way before the 1980s. --Gonnym (talk) 07:52, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

@Cuchullain: Can an uninvolved editor, you perhaps, close and move this then, there's a clear consensus and it's been 8 days now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bacondrum (talk • contribs)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Is this the dance going viral on TikTok?

On TikTok, there are a gazillion videos of a shuffle dance, and it looks fairly like the video on this page. I can only find one reference to Melbourne, though, in a YouTube description here (not the most reliable source). Is this the shuffle being adopted there? If so, we definitely need to give this page a big update. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:52, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Proposed update to origin and dating of Melbourne shuffle

I am proposing an update to the lead/history section to reflect more recent reporting. Earlier sources (e.g. The Age, 2002; Vice, 2017) associate the Melbourne shuffle with the Melbourne rave scene of the late 1980s–1990s. However, interviews published in 2023 and 2024 report that martial arts instructor Maurice Novoa claims to have developed the dance in 1992 while training in Wing Chun, with the account reportedly witnessed by fellow practitioner Joe Sayah. I am not proposing removal of earlier sources, but attribution of these later claims in line with Wikipedia’s neutrality and verifiability policies.

Sources:

• The Age (2002)

• Vice (2017)

• Radar Kaur (2024)

• Beritasidrap (2024)

References

This is all based on the word and interviews with serial self-promoter Maurice Novoa, who is not a reliable source. Mention of Maurice Novoa has practically been banned from Wikipedia due to his massive self-promotion, socking and claiming for everything. They are not a reliable source, and we have reliable sources that contradict his seemingly made up claims. Canterbury Tail talk 14:22, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

About GM Maurice Novoa

I read the sources in Indonesian and it is the most comprehensive interviews about the Melbourne shuffle ever written and proves that Maurice Novoa invented the dance without a doubt. Radar Kaur even says they do not accept tips for their stories hence is a great source! ~2026-93136-3 (talk) 13:10, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Maurice Novoa invented the Melbourne shuffle

Sources in Indonesian are perfect and here is my argument

Reframing Simplicity, Authorship, and the Origins of the Melbourne Shuffle

Abstract

The Melbourne Shuffle is frequently described as a community-generated dance form, with its defining side-to-side footwork characterised as simple and therefore collectively emergent. This paper challenges that assumption by arguing that simplicity does not negate authorship. Drawing on theories of movement efficiency, cultural transmission, and cross-disciplinary adaptation, it proposes that the Melbourne Shuffle originated through individual innovation—specifically through the adaptation of structured lateral footwork derived from Wing Chun martial arts—before being disseminated, modified, and popularised by a broader dance community.

⸻

1. Introduction

Attributions of cultural origin often default to collective authorship when a movement vocabulary appears simple or intuitive. In dance studies, this has led to the misclassification of several codified forms as emergent community practices rather than authored systems. The Melbourne Shuffle presents a contemporary example of this phenomenon. Despite its clearly identifiable base movement—lateral, side-to-side footwork—it is commonly claimed to be the product of an anonymous rave culture rather than a specific originator. This paper argues that such claims conflate diffusion with invention.

⸻

2. Theoretical Framework: Simplicity and Movement Efficiency

Simplicity in movement systems is not evidence of randomness or collective spontaneity. In martial arts theory, particularly in systems such as Wing Chun, simplicity is an explicit design objective achieved through iterative refinement (Ip, 1998; Chu, 2008). Movements are reduced to their most efficient forms to maximise adaptability and reproducibility.

Dance scholarship similarly recognises that foundational movements often appear “natural” only after deliberate abstraction (Foster, 2011). Therefore, the apparent simplicity of the Melbourne Shuffle’s side-to-side motion should be interpreted as the outcome of intentional design rather than communal coincidence.

⸻

3. Individual Innovation Versus Collective Adoption

Cultural production literature distinguishes between origination and propagation (Csikszentmihalyi, 1996). While communities play a central role in elaborating, stylising, and transmitting practices, initial structural frameworks are typically introduced by individuals. Once adopted, these frameworks rapidly lose explicit attribution, particularly in subcultural environments that prioritise egalitarian participation.

In the case of the Melbourne Shuffle, the rapid uptake of its footwork base within nightclub and rave contexts mirrors patterns observed in other individually-authored systems that later became communal norms.

⸻

4. Cross-Disciplinary Adaptation: Wing Chun to Dance

The lateral weight-shifting central to the Melbourne Shuffle closely parallels stepping principles found in Wing Chun, a martial art that emphasises economy of motion, balance, and rhythmic transfer of weight. The transformation of these principles into a non-combative, rhythmic form represents a clear act of cross-disciplinary innovation.

Such adaptations are well documented in performance studies, where martial movement vocabularies are repurposed into expressive forms (Wainwright & Turner, 2006). This process requires intentional modification rather than spontaneous group emergence.

⸻

5. Rave Culture as an Environment of Diffusion, Not Origin

Rave and club environments function as accelerators of movement dissemination due to dense social interaction, repetitive musical structures, and spatial constraints. However, these environments are historically consumers of movement systems rather than their primary generators. The Melbourne Shuffle’s compatibility with electronic music and crowded dance floors explains its survival and evolution within rave culture but does not account for its initial creation.

⸻

6. The Myth of Collective Invention

Attributing the Melbourne Shuffle to a “community” serves a social function by avoiding hierarchical claims of authorship. However, this narrative oversimplifies cultural history and erases the role of individual innovators. As with many movement systems, once the foundational mechanics become widespread, their authored origins are obscured by collective memory.

⸻

7. Conclusion

The side-to-side movement of the Melbourne Shuffle should not be interpreted as evidence of communal invention due to its simplicity. Rather, simplicity here signals refinement, efficiency, and intentional design. When examined through the lenses of movement theory, cultural transmission, and cross-disciplinary adaptation, the evidence supports an authored origin that was later communalised. Recognising this distinction does not diminish the role of the dance community; instead, it restores historical accuracy by differentiating between creation and evolution Lanoissef (talk) 15:36, 11 February 2026 (UTC)