Talk:Bank Street (football ground)/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

This article, although short, is quite good. I just have a few nitpicks to ask about:
 * You have the nickname as Bank Lane in the infobox, but nothing in the article either confirming the nickname, mentioning it, etc. Could this be done? (Kinda like what the Progressive Field article has in the lead, though ideally reffed)
 * The stadium was rarely referred to as Bank Lane, but I found one ref that refers to it as such. I think that Bank Lane may have been the name of the road that the stadium was on until it was changed to Bank Street.
 * Everything's inside one section, History. Any way to split it up? I know there's not a lot to split but it would be helpful. There's several Association football stadium GAs to help you out on this one.
 * I've split up the History section. The titles may not be ideal, but it's split now.
 * "On one occasion during the 1894–95 season, Walsall Town Swifts turned up at the ground and were greeted by what they regarded as a 'toxic waste dump'" Needs citation.
 * The statement was sourced from the reference at the end of the paragraph (ref name "murphy_14"), but I realise that may not have been all too apparent so I've replicated the ref in both places.
 * "However, weather restricted the attendance to just 12,000." I'm a little confused here. Does this mean the weather during the season, or a game? Or is it referring to something else entirely?
 * It was the attendance for the match against Manchester City that was restricted to 12,000, so I've changed the text to reflect that.
 * An good external links out there for this stadium? If not that's okay, just thought I'd ask.
 * I've not been able to find any external links that relate specifically to the stadium. Shame really.

I'll put it on hold, then double check the article to make sure I didn't miss anything. Wizardman 15:56, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments, fella. Very helpful. Hopefully all of the issues have been resolved and the article can be promoted soon. – PeeJay 22:53, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks much better. In this state I'll pass the article :) Wizardman  00:18, 13 October 2008 (UTC)