Talk:Fourth Test, 1948 Ashes series

Orphaned references in Fourth Test, 1948 Ashes series

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Fourth Test, 1948 Ashes series's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "report5":

• From Sid Barnes with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948: "Fifth Test Match England v Australia". Wisden Cricketers' Almanack. Wisden. 1949. Retrieved 2008-07-02.
• From Don Tallon with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948: "Fifth Test Match England v Australia". Wisden Cricketers' Almanack. Wisden. 1949. Retrieved 2008-07-02.
• From 1948 Ashes series: "Fifth Test Match ENGLAND v AUSTRALIA". Wisden Cricketers' Almanack. Wisden. 1949. Retrieved 2008-07-02.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 22:03, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

A couple of minor points on the lead

"Australia put together a stand of 301 in only 217 minutes..." Wouldn't it be better to say that Morris and Bradman put together the stand, as they were the batsmen who did it? Also, while nowadays the ground may be officially called "Headingley Stadium", everybody still simply calls it "Headingley" and it certainly didn't have the Stadium part of the name back in 1948. Ordinarily I'd edit those points myself, but as it is now a FA (and congrats to those who've achieved that) I feel inhibited from doing so. JH (talk page) 08:48, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Where are you seeing the first part? The lead says "Australia started slowly, and Bradman joined Morris at 57/1 with 347 runs still needed in 257 minutes. They put together a stand of 301 in only 217 minutes". As for the second part, including stadium is useful in the first instance to inform less familiar readers that it is a stadium. It is referred to as just "Headingley" throughout the rest of the article. CMD (talk) 09:11, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Wouldn't Headingley Cricket Ground be a more specific link than Headingley Stadium, which refers to the overall complex rather than just the cricket part of it? --Bcp67 (talk) 15:04, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

That would make sense to me. It didn't exist as an article when this became an FA. CMD (talk) 15:08, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply - like Jhall1 I also didn't want to change an FA without discussing but have now edited the link.--Bcp67 (talk) 15:16, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

I'd been going by "From today's featured article", which I'd assumed - clearly wrongly - would be quoting verbatim from the lead. I should have checked with the article itself. Sorry about that. JH (talk page) 15:13, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Unsourced statement?

I cannot find a source supporting this line in the lead: Test attendance would never be as high again, as cricket became less popular in the UK. Is there a mention and source for this in the body? Kpddg ^(talk) 12:57, 25 July 2022 (UTC)