Talk:Steven Gerrard/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Gerrard and Xabi Alonso

I have noticed that in the last paragraph of International Carrer, Gerrard declared he is in love with fellow midfielder Xabi Alonso, I don't know who did that but they are being very immature.

It's an immature response to their infamous 'kiss'. Youtube it.

The Istanbul Final

Whoever wrote "The game started badly." is obviously a Liverpool fan, this is not a neutral POV, because i'm sure A.C Milan fans didn't think the game started badly.

Gerrard goals?

---why is dudek fowler and gonzalezs names still in the liverpool squad box

FIFA, the FA and http://www.stevengerrard.com all have Gerrard's International goals as nine, yet the Wikipedia article has it as ten, thought I add this here before changing it. David Kent 23:15, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

The BBC does not seem to clarify it. I will amend the article in accordance with FIFA. Thank you for this. -- Alias Flood 00:17, 21 June 2006 (UTC)bbay boo

Link to fansite?

Some of the infomation there is highly biased —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.152.169.80 (talk • contribs) 22:06, 8 June 2006.

Theres not yet a link to a decent steven gerrard fansite on here. A quality, requently updated fansite would have been an integral part of making the Steven Gerrard Wikki entry useful and informative. http://www.stevengerrard.com is frequently updated and contains news on steven, england and liverpool fc [updated daily]. As far as I know it is the most popular and biggest of steven's fansites on the internet getting many visits from all over the world. the site is relevant and informative. ive added it to the links section, is this ok? gunner 10:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

What fansite do you mean? Provide the link here first please, so that its merits can be discussed. Please sign all your comments (with four tildes (~~~~)). Also note signing in to leave this message and then signing out to add your site isn't cool, not only was the site added by your IP address, but you didn't even leave a link here, so it must have been you! edit: Sorry, I obviously am blind today, I see there is partial unlinked URL now, doh. Edit this page and see how I made this link: http://www.stevengerrard.com aLii 10:02, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Anyway, so what do others think of his page? I'm not going to comment as I've already had lengthy discussions with Gunner007 via email about this issue. I'd like a few others to check it and post their thoughts here, cheers aLii 10:05, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok so i am not the best at editing pages- what do you expect?? i didnt think i had signed out. give me some slack this is one of the first contributions which i'm trying to make. What harm can adding a decent fansite [http://www.stevengerrard.com] do anyway?? gunner 10:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

http://www.stevengerrard.com is cool and no harm it rocks ! Gerrad should buy it !

The point isn't to do with whether a link harms the article or not, but whether it adds enough to be considered worthwhile. Wikipedia isn't meant to be used to advertise your own site, hence you shouldn't add it yourself. The above unsigned comment carries no weight either I'm afraid. aLii 10:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

can i just add that http://www.stevengerrard.com is *not* my site. i helped my client with the setup and design. that is all. gunner 10:49, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I really don't see the problem here. I'm gonna keep puttin ght elink back, it's a fansite, it's relevant. I'm more than willing to edit war over this. AIias Flood 15:26, 5 June 2006 (UTC) Note: this guy was banned for impersonating Alias Flood and general vandalism so this comment carries zero weight. aLii 19:50, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Not all fansites are relevant, otherwise we'd end up with pages and pages worth of links. This one may be pretty well done, but to list it as "Popular" is certainly very disingenuous. One glance at the forums shows that there's only 1 topic! As decent as the page is (and it certainly has a great URL) it isn't a "major fansite" in my eyes, see WP:EL. It looks like blatant self-advertising of his new site to me. aLii 16:10, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Alii none else seems to have a problem with it, why are you being so awkward? if you search for any other footballer on wiki you will find they list fansites. to what reason would http://www.stevengerrard.com be considered not to add enough to make it worthwhile?? The site is informative, kept up to date, active, constantly checked, well designed??? Someone who was to come accross the steven gerrard wiki might well want to meet up with other "fans", they may even be looking for fansites? Also, I would just like to inform you that the reason for the forum having few posts is due to the site being redesigned and old posts within the forum being cleaned out. If you look at the whois information on the domain and read the above posts you will find this is not my site- therefore it wouldnt really effect me if it was added or not. P.s.I dont mean to come accross rude or abrasive in my post, i just dont understand your awkwardness. Thanks.gunner 17:31, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, no-one seems to want to add it other than you... If a fan comes to wikipedia looking for info, then I'm sure they're also able to google to find your fansite. The only real useful part of your site is it's mining of the BBC and google news for articles. What I don't like about your site is the fact that you are simply using wikipedia to advertise your, as yet, unused site. Again, I'll say please don't add the site again yourself. Please wait until some more regular users vet it. I will remove it again pending this, cheers. aLii 19:12, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

This is the first time I have done this, so if it is added incorrectly, then I apoligise. I use Wikipedia regularly to research my favourite sports stars, and I think that the external links add a lot to the articles. I also think that a link to a website with the latest news, especially in the build-up/during the world cup, is a good idea. I agree with AIias Flood that the site is relevant. David Kent 19:26, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Look Gunner007, I've already told you many times that we're going to have a discussion, and YOU are not going to add the site yourself. Creating a second account, or logging in anonymously to add the site still isn't on, infact it's worse! David Kent, if you are not affiliated with this guy in any way, then I'm sorry, but your contribution count of zero lends me to thinking that you are Gunner007.

Let's make this clear: No matter how the discussion goes here do not add your site yourself. It is clearly against policy, WP:EL. aLii 19:45, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I am not "affiliated with this guy" nor am I "Gunner007". My contribution count does not affect my ability to comment on this. I feel it is kind of harsh to remove a link, when many other articles have external links to fan sites. But let's take your POV on the situation "If a fan comes to wikipedia looking for info, then I'm sure they're also able to google to find your fansite." Surely that would mean that all external links should be removed as "they're also able to google"

I could understand the dispute if the website was stored on Geocities (for example) or very bad and not kept up to date, but in my opinion it's a good site and does not seem to be stored on free space.

Maybe I am misunderstanding your reasons for removal, but as I stated earlier, I would think that this link is relevant to an article regarding Steven Gerrard. David Kent 20:11, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The problem with fan sites is that they are answerable to no-one. This site could be fine today, and full of trash tomorrow.

Wikipedia pages always rank very highly within search engines, and so adding a link to your site on the relevant wikipedia pages is a great way of increasing traffic to your site, thus making me always very cynical of such sites. It isn't just this particular Gerrard fansite that I remove. The way it should be done is the page should be listed here, and a discussion had about it's various merits. Otherwise if we add this site, then why shouldn't we also add X, Y and Z? The over-riding problem here is wikipedia shouldn't be used to advertise yourself or your site.

My personal take on this site is:

• It's new with very few users. It is attempting to use wikipedia to advertise itself.
• It's main feature in my eyes it the way it aggregates BBC and Google news. However it does it no better (probably worse) than a link to either search, e.g. Google Steven Gerrard news. Surely the actual google link is more useful? It can be relied upon... note that the aggregator on the fan site was last working on 31 May.
• It has a forum, but so what? The official LFC site also has a forum, shouldn't we link to that instead?

aLii 21:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Why link to the LFC forum it is an article regarding Steven Gerrard not Liverpool, users (like myself) maybe a fan of Gerrard but not Liverpool. Your comment Alii of "Otherwise if we add this site, then why shouldn't we also add X, Y and Z?" can be turned the other way around, why should we have have links to soccerbase and FootballDatabase? Surely they could equally be fine today, and full of trash tomorrow.

I personally have never heard of footballdatabase.com, looking at said website the guestbook throws up a mysql error, the about us page is "under construction".....

If I am required to list the various things I like about this website, like Alii has done regarding the things he dislikes, somebody will have to let me know.

I don't know what happens now, as yourself and Gunner007 seem to be at a stalemate, but I must say I support Gunner007 in this matter.

I feel that this link, and maybe others, would add to the article, and if the links were checked regularaly would stop the article being "full of trash tomorrow". David Kent 23:02, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Noted, and although both links worked fine for me I've removed them. They are replaced by the Official LFC profile and the BBC Sport profile - something that should have been done ages ago to be honest. Checking this page even with notifications is plenty enough work for me. Checking multiple links every day too? It isn't a realistic way to run things, and until I see you copy-editing and helping out I don't see that you can complain at me for not wanting to do it :)

I notice that since my complaint about it's news section not being up-to-date an update has been done! Well it's now only 1 hour and 30 minutes out of date, but it's still always going to be behind linking to the actual pages, thus making it pretty pointless. aLii 00:03, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I've re-added the soccerbase link. It's not a fansite and it has a different kind of stat to the BBC site. You can see all the matches he's played and look at different seasons etc. SLUMGUM  yap  stalk  23:55, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Firstly, I want to confirm that the AIias Flood that impersonated me was not me. I am the more conventional spelling of ALias Flood The imposter has now been banned. Now onto something much more important, this article and the external links it contains. As I have stated on this talk page under External Links (below), my understanding is that the litmus test should be that the information contained in the external link should enhance or confirm the details given in the article as well as being reliable, reputable and having a degree of longevity. Fan sites, other than the main official site, and fanlistings are generally not informative and should not ordinarily be included. My view is that this should also apply to forums. WP:EL gives more details on this. I would add that I applaud the webmaster of the unofficial website in question for their dedication but, as editors, we must be careful not to let Wikipedia become a repository for links WP:NOT. If the information on a website is notable, reliable and has a high degree of permanence, then let us put it into the article and cite that url as its source. Fan websites and fanlistings, by their very nature, do not portray a neutral point of view WP:NPOV and will rarely merit inclusion in my opinion. -- Alias Flood 02:02, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Alii, I stil dont understand your point of view. I'm yet to see anyone post on here with the same opinion. news and articles on http://www.stevengerrard.com are as neutral as possible. IMO http://www.stevengerrard.com is a great example of how a fansite should be.

I understand that wiki should not be used as a 'link repositry' but as long as new links are regulary checked and duff ones removed i cant see why a few fansites cant be added to the link section. Maybe a set of guidelines/rules for fansites would be a good idea in order to judge sites? In previous post you question the popularity of http://www.stevengerrard.com, I can get the figures to prove the sites popularity. gunner 15:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

What needs to be understood here is that those opposed to the link are interpretting a Wikipedia guideline which clearly explains that fan sites are not readily included in what should be linked. Again it is pointed out that links of this type only should be acceptable occasionally. It seems to me that the argument in favour of including these links should be made under the actual external links guidelines, although I doubt that it would gain any ground. -- Alias Flood 17:36, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

England Captaincy

I've deleted the line that states Steven Gerrard is 4th Choice england captain. There is no 3rd or 4th choice captain, only vice-captain. If neither is available then a one-off choice is made. The same for if the acting captain is substituted, the captains armband is passed onto a player of his choice. Jamie 10:55, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Image?

We need to finds a profile picture of steven gerrard as the previous ones have not conformed to the non-copyright policy. Any ideas? Jamie 08:46, 18 January 2006 (UTC) the picture of gerrard in the corner is excellent no other photos are needed

Removal of links

Hi folks. When attempting to combat some rife vandalism of the Steven Gerrard page I had trouble saving the corrected page due to alleged 'spam links' in the article. To get the article back to a sensible state I simply removed the offending links. Perhaps someone with knowledge of the subject can reinstate appropriate ones. Kcordina 09:34, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

England National School?

Does this make sense to anyone else? Makes none to me. Should it be England Schoolboys? Stu 11:55, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps a reference to the FA's School of Excellence? Dunno though... -- Arwel (talk) 12:31, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Growing up supporting Everton?

• It was not Steven Gerrard that grew up supporting Everton, but Jamie Carragher and Michael Owen.

• • I thought he was a Liverpool supporter growing up. Kingjeff 19:02, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

• • • Gerrard was definitely a Liverpool supporter growing up...someone who thinks otherwise keeps popping up on the page and posting their comments.

 Kinda crazy 08:09, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

• • • • I can guarantee ya'll that Steven Gerrard grew up support Liverpool FC, not Everton FC! Anyone who thinks otherwise is thinking completely wrong!

User:Mazito 4:00, 11 August 2006 (BST/GMT+1) ::

whoever's been saying that stevie grew up as an everton supporter, must ovbiously be a jealous everton supporter him/herself!

• • • • • i have read that stevie ws not an everton fan but his uncle was and made him wear an everton kit

Proof he was a Everton fan - www.bluekipper.com/.../toffee_gerrard.jpg No self respecting Red would wear this and pose with the trophies. Not for a joke or anything. Carlito777 (talk) 15:31, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Cap His Year

The article states that Gerrard is looking to cap his year with an FA Cup winners medal. What about a World Cup winners medal, or is the FA Cup more important?!? Gretnagod 01:51, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

It's an editor's commentary anyway, so it's not appropriate (see WP:NOR). I've removed it. Stephen Turner (Talk) 09:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Second Youngest Captain

"became the second youngest captain ever to lift the European Cup when Liverpool won the competition in 2005."

Fair enought, but who was the youngest then? I mean an addtion like "second to ___" would be good wouldn't it? --Skully Collins 14:25, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Good point. Added. Seb Patrick 15:52, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

• • Didier Deschamps was the youngest-winning European Cup captain of all-time, with Olympique de Marseille in the 1992/93 season, which was the first season that it got renamed to the [UEFA] Champions League. They was lucky to win it though, and cheated domestically at least, and eventually got their French top League title stripped from them, and they also got relegated I think. But anyway, there's ya' answer. You change it how you want, just make it good! I'm amazing at a lot of history, especially UEFA European Cup history, and lots more!

User:Mazito 4:08, 11 August 2006 (BST/GMT+1) ::

The Didier Deschamps page needs to be edited then - "He is the second youngest captain to lead his team to the Champions League title (behind Steven Gerrard in 2005)"

---

Orius76

Stupid dates war

Linking every date on a page does absolutely nothing to help the clarity or level of information on a page. Is every date on this page linked? No. If I do 5 tildes does it give a linked date? No. Does saying "Steven Gerrard scored a goal on 4 July", which I could then click and think "hey that's American Independence Day, cool!" add anything to Steven Gerrard? No.

It's dumb. That's why I reverted all dates that weren't birthdates. The link to date format page doesn't mention anything about linking every possible date. aLii 19:20, 11 May 2006 (UTC) (note it isn't linked!!!)

The point is not whether you think it is dumb or stupid. The point is to write articles to a high standard within Wikipedia's guidelines. By formatting dates that contain days, months and years, we enable the program's software to sort the dates according to a user's preferences. I have already asked you to visit WP:DATE and Help:Preferences#Date_format which support my reasons. Your reasons of dumb, stupid and bold text does little to strengthen your case. In the light of this, I have reverted as per wikipedia guidelines. Alias Flood 19:33, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, I've rewritten the article to be less specific. Those sections were poorly edited anyway. aLii 20:58, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

European Super Cup

As I understand it, to qualify for a medal in a cup competition you have to be in the starting 11 or on the bench. If a player outside of this gets a medal it's usually out of pity from the manager or a coach. But, in my eyes, officially not as a career honour. Steven Gerrard was not in the squad for the Euro Super Cup due to injury, therefore didn't officially win this honour. It's like saying Crouch and Kewell, who were both injured, or even an unknown reserve at that time winning it. They didn't, I must have removed this honour from the list over a half a dozen times. SG73 09:30, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Well it's debatable, isn't it - Particularly with European Competitions, as UEFA give out 25 medals, with the clear implication that some will he given to players outside the 18. My feeling is that if you were involved in winning the competition¹, and you have a medal, that counts - e.g. you couldn't really say that Roy Keane didn't win the Champions League in '99. The main issue, I guess, is that these sort of things are not usually officially recorded, and are often hard to prove. But where it can be proved, I'd add it, with a note.

¹ Obviously with one-off competitions like the ESC, this equates to featuring in the competition that led to it. ArtVandelay13 19:24, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I have to disagree, Liverpool's official WWW would not have Gerrard as winning the Super Cup, if so Neil Mellor could say he won as he played in the champions league as he scored against Olypiakos. As for Roy Keane and Paul Scholes, they didn't win it either.SG73

His official biography should now clarify the situation. (SG73 14:23, 13 September 2006 (UTC)).

Roy Keane and Paul Scholes got medals, just cos they didnt play in the final doesnt mean they didnt win it. Keano's legendary performance in the semi-final against Juventus was what got us there so he was influential in united winning the champions league!81.154.127.146 12:34, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

From what I know any player that takes part in the competition at some time is considered as a winner in the competition.Scot Carson won one because he had played in the Champions League against Juventus.So I must say Neil Mellor has won the champions cup if he has played.Someone should edit it.Gerrard cannot be considered for the European Super cup winner's medal because he never played a part in it.I want to make one thing clear a medal and a honour is different.For a medal you have to play in the final match and in that case Roy Keane and Paul Scholes have not got the medal but have won it because they had previously played a part in the competition.A medal is no proof that a player has won the competition its just an extra award.To get the English Premiership medal you have to take part in 10 games as a sub or regular from the 38 games.You then officially win the League Title and it is listed as a honour you have won but for the medal you have to be a part of the squad that played the game when the trophy was awarded.It means Louis Saha won't get a medal when Man Utd are awarded the Premier League trophy when they play Chelsea at Stamford bridge but he has officially won it but will not get a medal.Since the European Supercup has only one game you have to be a part of the squad to get it but since UEFA considers it to be an extension match then if you have played a part in the team's UEFA Cup or Champions Cup victory then you are listed as a winner of the European Supercup.The list in Wikipedia list medal winners instead players who have won it.So yes Steven Gerrard has won the European Supercup and I am editing it right now.Hope this clears up everything.(3E933333Boy)

External Links

As people keep adding and removing links every day I thought it'd be nice to get some clarification here as to what is and what isn't appropriate. aLii 09:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

My understanding is that the litmus test should be that the information contained in the external link should enhance or confirm the details given in the article as well as being reliable, reputable and having a degree of longevity. Fan sites, other than the main official site, and fanlistings are generally not informative and should not ordinarily be included. My view is that this should also apply to forums. WP:EL gives more details on this. I hope that this helps. Alias Flood 00:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Gerrard's Height?

As I keep on editing it back to what I believe him to be, 185cm, from 183cm. I thought that perhaps we should have a discussion about this. The BBC site lists Gerrard as 185cm [1], which is 6'1". I can believe this. The Official Liverpool website lists him as 6'0", which isn't crazy, but this is the same site that thinks Jamie Carragher is 5'9"(!) [2] and that Robbie Fowler doesn't have a height [3]. I tend to believe the BBC site to be honest.

A few others:

• Yahoo, 188cm, [4]
• 4thegame, 6'1", [5]
• PremierLeague.com, 188cm, [6]

aLii 23:53, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I have also reverted the height to 185cm (6'1") and I agree that the BBC is a creditable and verfiable source. Alias Flood

The 4thegame article says he's 6ft later down. I met both him and Cisse at the same time and there was no differece between the two. Look at this: http://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/gallery-year/images/2005/051118_liverpool/051118_liverpool_05.jpg. Prince Charles is 5'11. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.42.124.247 (talk • contribs) 01:11, 29 May 2006 .

I am quite sure gerrard is 183 cm which around 6 ft

One of the keys to writing good encyclopedia articles is to understand that they should refer only to facts, assertions, theories, ideas, claims, opinions, and arguments that have already been published by reputable publishers. As counterintuitive as it may seem, the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. Wikipedia concerns itself with verifiable information from reliable sources. The information given in this article is quoted from Gerrard's stats on BBC Sport - Football which would qualify as 'reliable' in my opinion. -- Alias Flood 00:40, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

The photo, as interesting as it is, is not good proof of height. To my eyes it looks like the horizon is tilted (look at the seats) and who knows where their feet actually were, shoes they were wearing, etc... you get the point. aLii 14:11, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not going to change anything until I've read further the rules for creditable and verifiable sources but watching tonight's game, as they lined up singing the National Anthem, you could see clearly that Carragher was an inch or two smaller than Gerrard, who was in turn an inch or two smaller than Terry. Sesame Rambler 20:36, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I think hes equal or shorter to Lampard, and Lamps is 1.83 m--Yu5uF 16:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Scoring in cup finals

To whomever was questioning whether Gerrard is indeed the only player to have scored in the finals of the FA Cup, League Cup, UEFA Cup and UEFA Champions League, just think for a moment of other players that have even played in those finals? I'm guessing it's a pretty select bunch of (probably only) Liverpool players... Now from that which Liverpool players have even scored in both european finals?

I'd say it's a pretty fair assumption even without looking up the exact facts. aLii 12:01, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Martin Tyler seems to agree.
Slumgum | yap | stalk | 13:47, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I think that this is a notable fact worthy of inclusion in the article citing the Martin Tyler source for reference. -- Alias Flood 23:25, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

sorry, just to verify, you claim that this select few who would have only played in all four would come from liverpool, also thierry henry has played in all four for arsenal.just thought i'd include this after what is possibly gerrard's worst performance to date in a major cup final against milan.

Death threats

As far as I am aware, the 'death threats' story started in an article in the Evening Standard. It was obviously written by a Chelsea fan, and had a sort of 'Chelsea are the best club in the world, therefore no-one would turn down a move there unless there was a sinister reason' attitude. I believe his real reason for staying was an unwillingness to uproot his family. (This is just FYI, I don't think there any online sources for this.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.64.27.80 (talk • contribs) 23:02, 18 June 2006.

Next England Captain

Is it worth mentioning that his is considered a strong contender to be next England captain? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.13.202.147 (talk • contribs)

If Steve McLaren starts saying it. More relevant might be the fact that he's continually snubbed by Liz for an MBE.
 SLUMGUM  yap  stalk  03:31, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Only if you can find citation that says so. Otherwise it's unverifiable speculation. After all, just because everyone in the country whose surname isn't "Beckham" (rightly) thinks Stevie G should be captain, it doesn't mean he's necessarily in with a shout ;-) Seb Patrick 08:11, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree this can't really be added. I think it'll either be Gerrard or Terry who gets it, and I do think McLaren will install a new captain as one the first things he does... make his mark n all. aLii 12:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Weasel words

One person (Pele) makes him 'widely regarded'. Skinnyweed 14:29, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

While I understand the problem of weasel words, I also don't think that to use the word "widely" would always need a list of a few hundred signees. What is your point? aLii 22:13, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, so I just decided to remove "widely" (replaced by "some") and to create a wikiquote page to collate some instances of major people in football saying good things about Gerrard. Much better. aLii 23:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Stop wrongly-changing the amount of appearances and goals SG has made/scored for LFC!

I corrected it (ages ago) after it was not just out-of-date, but about 6 seasons out-of-date! I can be in charge of that, I'm the only one who seems to get it right! Right now, I'm banned off the computer, so it won't get updated straight away at first, but I'll try me best for it not to be too long, and when I'm actually allowed back on, it'll get updated quite quick. As soon as I finish this message, I'm gonna' change the profile now so it's correct! I'ts actually naturally in my mind, the total amount of LFC first team official appearances and the total amount of first team official goals. At this current moment, he's made 337 appearances and scored 64 goals. Good record.

User:Mazito 4:15, 11 August 2006 (BST/GMT+1) ::

Actually Mazito, it is you who is "wrongly changing" the numbers. Just near the bottom of the infobox it says: Professional club appearances and goals counted for the domestic league only. You put Gerrard's total number of appearances/goals there, and so it is you that made the bad edit. I am happy for your effort in editing various Liverpool FC related pages, but you really ought to be a bit more careful and a little less angry :) aLii 08:30, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

On that topic, though, perhaps we should break the convention? I'm sure Wikipedia readers would benefit much more from career totals rather than just league totals.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.168.108.225 (talk • contribs) 00:00, 13 August 2006

Personally I feel that for comparison reasons it's best to use the league appearances only. Liverpool play far more cup matches than most teams. aLii 19:08, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

There is provision for all goals and appearances under the Club statistics section but the infobox requires only domestic league matches as I have explained to User:Mazito on their talk page. -- Alias Flood 19:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Well now I know, but I'm just gonna' say that my browser text size is set at 'Smallest', so I don't get to read that under them circumstances. The total should actually be there though anyway man! -- User:Mazito 03:52, 14 August 2006 (BST/GMT+1)

SG's 'Club Performance' data under the Club Statistics

In this part, it doesn't include this season's statistics, involving two games already. I don't know if they're only added at the end of the season, it doesn't make it clear, but it probably isn't, and I'm going to update it now. User:Mazito 03:56, 14 August 2006 (BST/GMT+1)

Good work! I think it's best to keep it as up-to-date as possible. cheers, aLii 02:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

number

is his number 8 or 4?

8 for Liverpool, 4 (usually) for England. Seb Patrick 09:40, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

citation needed

i removed a citation needed tag from where it says he pressured liverpool into giving him a contract as it clearly states it's from his autobiography. if someone can verify this by actually reading the autobiography, it would be appreciated. --Scott w 20:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

also removed the one regarding his captaincy. same reason --Scott w 20:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I added those extracts and also at the time cited the News of the World page that contained them. Unfortunately said paper doesn't keep articles long term and so it has disappeared. After this happened someone else changed the broken link to "citation needed". I haven't actually read the autobiography, but the quotes should be correct — I can't see the NotW quoting a book incorrectly when they are serialising it... aLii 10:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually just thought, I haven't got anything to do the Owen's autobiography/captaincy bit. aLii 10:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, i just thought someone was being annoying ;) i would have thought that people would remove the citation needed tags when they provide one =/

stats

can someone confirm that he played 28 epl games in? some places say he only played 21 games. Chensiyuan 17:46, 23 December 2006 (UTC)