Talk:Ten Pound Poms

message: I had a context warning come up when I published this article, but I think the article is perfectly understandable for someone who has no knowledge of the subject. Feel free to disagree, or offer suggestions for improvement. Triki-wiki 07:20, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm an American who had never heard of the scheme, and it made perfect sense to me. Picaroon9288|ta co 16:14, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Context Warning

message: I think I remember from reading Tom Cole's Hell West and Crooked that he was paid 10 pounds in order to emigrate to Australia and he spent it on buying a saddle. That was back in the 1920's I think. I'll read it again.--CharlieP 08:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tom Cole

message: I'm a Pom myself but had to pay my own way and took out Australian Citizenship as soon as I was able. However I don't think the failure of many British migrants to take out citizenship had anything to do with restrictive citizenship laws... it was more a case of "what's the point?" or "if it ain't broke why fix it?" Now, with cheap international travel and a more nationalistic mood in the country since the later 20th century I know of several fellow Poms who have taken out citizenship, but of course this is just anectdotal. However I would like to see a citation for the 'restrictive citizenship' comment. --MichaelGG (talk) 22:50, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no justification because the statement is untrue. I've removed it. JAJ (talk) 01:45, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Restrictive citizenship laws?

message: Is basically the heading for all the three sections at bottom of the article - 
* if someone is so keen about the documentary - perhaps a separate article?
* please do not conflate see also, and reference headings into yet more external links.  SatuSuro 23:36, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: I've converted the Uni of Sussex link to inline format, and placed it at the top because that article simply deals with the basic premise, not specifics. I removed the 'travelguru.com.au' because it was 'dead' and I couldn't find it on the Wayback archive. Accordingly, i've placed a refimprove on the top of the article for now. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 20:31, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: I've tagged the following line - Citizens of the Republic of Ireland born before 1949 were eligible as they too were considered British subjects - as dubious and in need of a reference.  The Republic of Ireland did not exist until 1949, but it's unlikly that any of them born there since independence 25 years earlier would have still been considered British subjects.  Maybe it's just badly worded, but doesn't seem right.--Dmol (talk) 21:40, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to clarify, the basic claim is correct - Irish people were able to travel on the scheme.  But I'm not sure under what qualifications they went.--Dmol (talk) 23:06, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irish citizens being "British Citizens" for the scheme. 

message: Paragraph two of the lead says "While the term "Ten Pound Pom" is in common use..." Is it really? I can remember it, but can't recall hearing it used since the 1970s. I doubt if many people born after that time will have heard of it. Would it be possible to find a citation for or example of its use in more recent use? HiLo48 (talk) 17:13, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There was a TV documentary (BBC?) last year, I think, which had 'Ten Pound Poms' as its title.  I'll look it up. Mikeo1938 (talk) 18:06, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  In fact, the documentary was in 2008 but I've found a reference on the BBC site dated 2009  and I'll add the citation. Mikeo1938 (talk) 18:12, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Good work. As a born here Australian I'll start using the term again in cricket conversations whenever convict ancestries are mentioned. That will help keep it current ;-) HiLo48 (talk) 22:58, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Still in common use? 

message: Can we try to add some citations so that the nag banner can be removed?  There's a lot of stuff on the Internet but I don't have time to do it yet.  (I never cease to wonder at people who write good stuff but then spoil an article by failing to add in-line citations.) Mikeo1938 (talk) 18:20, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I've tried to tidy up this article and have inserted some citations.  But I can't find anything to support the important final paragraph ("Details"), which deals with citizenship.  Hopefully someone will be able to assist. Mikeo1938 (talk) 16:42, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Nag banner about lack of citations

message: I've just found another (well cited) article at .  Perhaps the Ten Pound Poms article could be merged with this and given its own section.  There seems little point in adding much more to this one.
Mikeo1938 (talk) 09:29, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge this article? 

message: Ten Pound Poms were not restricted to Australia.  New Zealand had a scheme as well.  My partner's family could have participated but chose not to, because they didn't want to be told where to live and work.  (He says that "they did let some people off the ship in Aussie" 
I've found this film http://www.nzonscreen.com/title/journey-for-three-1950
I don't feel qualified to write anything.  
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Olwenwilliams (talk • contribs) 22:04, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. I'll amend the article. Schwede66 17:45, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Zealand Ten Pound Poms 

message: When did the Ten Pound Poms scheme end?
I came here looking for the year in which very inexpensive assisted passages ended. I didn't find the answer. Presumably (?) it was when air travel displaced sea travel for most people?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.233.53.146 (talk) 12:17, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  End of Ten Pound Poms 

message: The assisted passage program covered people across Europe and yet assisted passage redirects here? This is comical at best and a representation of wikipedia whitewashing --121.222.0.67 (talk) 09:42, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why 10 pound poms? 

message: A good article that helps highlight some of the racial undertones at the time. That said, might not something be added about the way people were CONvinced to move out - with the promised a lovely white-painted house - only to be dumped in rotten bug-infested huts?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.166.158 (talk) 09:03, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A New Life Down-Under? 

message: Ten Pound Pom was a slang term to describe British citizens who migrated to Australia and New Zealand after world war II Kaycies (talk) 16:15, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Congratulations. That’s a concise summary of the article's first sentence. Schwede66 17:45, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ten Pound Pom