Talk:Slavery Abolition Act 1833

message: Perhaps more discussion of the ramifications of emancipation is needed?  --Benwilson528 12:20, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ramifications

message: With the abolishment of slavery, the planters were not as profitable and many plantations were shut down at an alarming rate. 
Sorry to be all english teacher about this, but I don't think abolishment is a word.  I think the correct word is abolition, I'm not 100% sure on this though. (I get mixed answers from the internet and am not sure who to trust) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.145.211.42 (talk) 12:42, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just a question 

message: Perhaps I'm just a dunce, but why was this act repealed in 1998? Johnleemk | Talk 14:21, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeal 

message: If all slavery was abolished in 1833, then how come North America didn't free its slaves (the Emancipation Proclamation) until 1863? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77pinklady77 (talk • contribs) 13:27, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Slavery Abolition Act 1833 was made an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.  It affected the British Empire, not the United States. --Mysdaao talk 13:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Though how we wish that were not so. Wikidea 17:19, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A question 

message: This article contains not a single word about who was behind this act in Parliament, who was Prime Minister, how much opposition there was, or who was opposed. I think we should at least know who was Prime Minister at the time. --MiguelMunoz (talk) 06:34, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who did this? 

message: Going to look it into it on my own, but I think the article would be well served by including an estimate of how many slaves were emancipated as a result of the act.  ThomasAndrewNimmo (talk) 20:00, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The majority were in the Caribbean.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.98.54.253 (talk) 15:36, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: There are now about 3,000,000 in the area. The population has increased since 1833.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.98.54.253 (talk) 15:39, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Ten years later this important fact is still missing from the article. I believe the number is around 800,000, but I would like to see a breakdown by location. LastDodo (talk) 13:51, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of slaves freed 

message: The first paragraph of the "Background" section has an unresolved html "blockquote". I have no idea what the author of this edit intended, but someone who understands this (I do not) ought to fix the problem.Bill Jefferys (talk) 02:23, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weird blockquote instruction 

message: Just to let you know :Category:Slave owners is being considered for deletion. This nomination is part of a discussion of several related categories. You can share your thoughts on the matter at this category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Eartha78 (talk) 20:36, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:Slave owners is being considered for deletion 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Slavery Abolition Act 1833. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091210021701/http://www.royalnavalmuseum.org/visit_see_victory_cfexhibition_infosheet.htm to http://www.royalnavalmuseum.org/visit_see_victory_cfexhibition_infosheet.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091210021701/http://www.royalnavalmuseum.org/visit_see_victory_cfexhibition_infosheet.htm to http://www.royalnavalmuseum.org/visit_see_victory_cfexhibition_infosheet.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:00, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Slavery Abolition Act 1833. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130817111642/http://www.daa.wa.gov.au/en/Stolen-Wages/ to http://www.daa.wa.gov.au/en/Stolen-Wages/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:29, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Hi  and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. I have left most of your changes from "slaves" to "enslaved people" except where the term (and others) were used in a quote, or created clumsy constructions, such as "enslaved people ships". However, the slave trade is a recognised term and used throughout articles about slavery in Wikipedia, as are slave ships. You introduced "from African heritage" where cited sources make no mention of this. Please be careful about introducing wholesale changes to long-standing articles - it is better to tread cautiously as a new editor, and post questions on the talk page, or go to the Teahouse or Help Desk rather than making blanket changes. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 02:49, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent changes

message: The opening sentence of the article is misleading.  "'The Slavery Abolition Act 1833 (3 & 4 Will. IV c. 73) provided for the immediate abolition of slavery in most parts of the British Empire."
It does not explicitly state that the 1833 act was an act of immediate emancipation, but implies to readers that this is the case.  Per WP:RS, according to distinguished professor of emancipation and slavery at the University of Hull John Oilfield, the 1833 Act was an act of gradual emancipation and not immediate.  One way or the other, the article should clearly the case unambiguously.   Professor Oilfield wrote:
:In May 1833 Lord Stanley presented a plan to Parliament which finally passed into law on August 29. In essence, the new legislation called for the gradual abolition of slavery. Everyone over the age of six on August 1, 1834, when the law went into effect, was required to serve an apprenticeship of four years in the case of domestics and six years in the case of field hands (apprenticeship was later abolished by Parliament in 1838). 104.254.227.62 (talk) 05:00, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Gradual or immediate?

message: Both Slavery Abolition Act 1833 and Slave Compensation Act 1837 say those laws paid slave owners £20 million. Was it the same £20 million or was a total of £40 million paid? If the first law did this, why was the second one needed? Did it set out implementation details or something? -- Beland (talk) 17:09, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no way it was done twice. £20m is the figure used everywhere so the first Act must have made no such provision. LastDodo (talk) 13:54, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Payment by 1833 or 1837 act?