Talk:Günther Prien

Recent edit
What’s exactly is the problem? That I wrote the unit he was part off and cut the book review in the section. That’s not what the section is for, pls see other sections of popular culture (ex:Zhukov). In popular culture means portrayal in film, television, radio and other media. It’s not a book review section.

Don’t act like a Wikipedia owner and message me “do not remove information from articles, as you did to Günther Prien” as I didn’t removed but improved the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DiorandI (talk • contribs) 08:58, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You are right; I should not have left a templated message. I saw the red-linked Talk page and had assumed that you were a brand new user. I apologise. It's still unclear why this material is being removed:


 * The edit summary, "not a book review section", does not explain things. Books are "other media". --K.e.coffman (talk) 18:34, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * “In popular culture” section should contain portrayal from the film, television, radio and other media. Inclusion of coverage in works of minor significance is enough. Inclusion of reviews (or what other scholars have to say) about the Günther Prien, der Wolf und sein Admiral including in this example, the German scholar Hans Wagener and the Canadian historian Michael Hadley comments on the narrative's goals and quote, is completely unnecessary and is not useful to anyone. Also they seem extraneous. These types of details should be on the wikipedia respective book page (if exists) under section Reviews and Legacy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DiorandI (talk • contribs) 00:10, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

November 2021 edit
Preserving here by providing this link; my rationale was: "Per the Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history/Archive_163, such lists are undue in skippers' bios". --K.e.coffman (talk) 05:02, 27 November 2021 (UTC)