Talk:Munich/Archive 1

Archive 1

Scattered sentences

At certain points, the article briefly loses focus, lapsing into dead-end sentences and strange tangents - for example, a one-sentence invocation of the Night of the Long Knives, and a passing comment about the swastika. 71.196.193.154 11:36, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

The Name

Munich is the proper name of this city. Lir 00:09 Oct 23, 2002 (UTC)

Yes it is, in English. "München" is the proper name of the city in German. --Brion 00:35 Oct 23, 2002 (UTC)

Brion-that is the name of the city. Munich is not the name of the city in English. It is not an English city.

Well, Lir, I suggest you move the Beijing article were it belongs. With the proper chinese Unicode characters, please. And, of course, replace each appearance of "Beijing" in the text by the same chinese characters. Otherwise people might believe "Beijing" is the proper name of the city in english -- no, 北京 is the proper way to name the city in any english text. FvdP

And make sure you pronounce it with the correct tones, or else you're spitting your toxic Anglo-americentric neocolonialism in the collective face of a billion 中国人. --Brion 00:47 Oct 23, 2002 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice-I will be sure to update the Chinese article as well. I am glad we are all in agreement. Lir 00:52 Oct 23, 2002 (UTC)

As long as we're in agreement about which of us are kidding. ;) --Brion 00:53 Oct 23, 2002 (UTC)

Somehow I don't think she's kidding.David de Paoli

Can I just say that Wikipedia invites that sort of complaint. München ought to be listed under Munich, Köln (is the accent right?) under Cologne and Roma under Rome. But Beijing or 北京 ought be called Peking (regardless of what the Chinese government wants), and Madras, Bombay and Calcutta used for those cities. Why the inconsistency? Avalon 06:48, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

"Peking" is no more valid a name for Beijing than "Beijing" is - they're both transliterations. "Peking" is four hundred years out of date, however, and no one says that any more unless they're talking about the duck. The rule is to use English, and "Beijing" is the accepted name for those cities in English. As for Madras, Bombay, Calcutta, and so on (it's not confined to India, either - Kiev and Turin come to mind), well, that's a perennially open question, and one that's definitely open for debate on the appropriate talk pages. However, the big difference there is that Germany has never asked the world community to start calling Munich "München", while India has specifically said "please call Madras 'Chennai' from now on." The Germans, as far as I know, are quite happy with it being called Munich. Indeed, I'm sure that Germans would be appalled to hear the million horrible pronunciations of "München" Anglophones would promptly inflict on the world if they were foolish enough to rename the city. ("Have you ever been to ['mʌnʧən]?" "Oh, yeah, ['munhɛn], beautiful city.") 69.140.12.199 08:38, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

---

Didn't the Wittelsbach family take over control of the city from the bishops of Freising, as opposed to the "Freising family?" --User:JohnWebber

Yes, this doesn't seem right. I have corrected it, and clarified a few things according to http://www.muenchen.de/referat/direktorium/stadtarchiv/stadtgeschichte/mittelalter.htm . I also cut out the "alarm".

---

Munich was not Hitler's Hometown. He was Austrian. Chris G.

---

By longstanding convention, when writing an English language article about this city, its name is Munich. When writing a German language article, its name is Munchen. 130.13.4.241 (talk) 13:39, 31 January 2008 (UTC)John Paul Parks130.13.4.241 (talk) 13:39, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

---

Regardless of Beijing, someone ought to find out and document what the "anglophonic" origin of "munich" is all about. Who started calling it "munich" in English, why and when? Hence Jewish Anderstein (talk) 13:24, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipdia naming convention

If a Polish city of Gdansk has a German name bolded: Danzig; so Munich can also have a Polish name bolded: Monachium.

Any coment on compromise:

• Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(disputed_place_names)
• Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/Polish_cities,_etc_archive

Mestwin of Gdansk 00:51, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I would agree with you if Munich had any history of polish settlement,alas it hasn't. A moot point. Count Uebles (talk) 23:09, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Danzig is bolded due to the naming change in use (formerly Danzig, now G'Dansk) - Monachium is nothing more than Munich translated. There is a difference. And FYI G'dansk is still known as "Danzig" in the German world. Rarelibra (talk) 20:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Retaliation action for blocking Gdansk and Szczecin

Please don't call it vandalism because this wouldn't be very polite. This is a retaliation action is response to blocking editing in Gdansk and Szczecin. The goal of this action is just to enter in edit war, block editing, and make the Germans angry. I am very sorry for any inconveniences. Don't blame me. Blame User:Nico. I will stop these actions as soon as Gdansk and/or Szczecin are released. - Mestwin of Gdansk 02:08, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

---

corrections

"The Olympiaturm recalls the Munich massacre, which occurred at the 1972 Summer Olympics held in Munich..."

This cannot be correct: The Olympiaturm was built for the Olympics, so it was completed before the massacre.

"The 1974 Soccer World Cup was also held in the city."

The World Cup took place in various German cities and only some matches (including, I think, the finale) were in Munich.

Fallwein 14:10, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

History of the name

I'm not sure that I might miss something from the main page. But I could not find what's the reason that "München" became "Munich" not "Munchen"--manop 09:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Most likely adopted from French, like so many European geographic names. Not sure about the French etymology though. Pardon my French, but it could have some phonetic reasons ;-) Jbetak 11:32, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you --manop 20:58, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Modern Munich

I tried to correct the English in the description of "modern Munich" (skyscrapers expelled outside the inner city???) but I think this paragraph could be fleshed out a bit. I would like to see some mention somewhere of the modern building that was attached to the ruins of the war museum. When I was a student in Munich in the mid-Seventies I thought this was the most moving memorial I had ever seen, and I think what they've done to it since then (adding modern wings to it to make it some kind of government building) is an abomination. IP129.55.27.4 15:58, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I have expanded the paragraph a bit and have hopefully clarified what was meant with skyscrapers being expelled, but I agree that the section could still do with some more information. The new Staatskanzlei which you mention probably even deserves an article of its own since the building has a pretty interesting history and the building of the two additional wings was (mildly put) controversial; I'll see what I can do over the next couple of days, but I won't mind if someone else jumps in :) -- Ferkelparade π 16:31, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for you additions. I'm not sure that Munich has any "skyscrapers" however (none come to mind when I think of Munich). According to what I am reading on wikipedia, the Frauenkirche is the tallest building in Munich, and it's not tall enough to be considered a "skyscraper". IP129.55.27.4 21:10, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

The tallest buildings are the de:Highlight Towers. They are 126 m tall, according to skyscraper this does not make them skyscrapers. In fact the Olympiaturm is with 291 m the tallest building, but it doesn't qualify as a skyscraper either. Markus Schmaus 22:11, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the highest building is Uptown Munich at 146m, but it also barely fails the skyscraper requirements...I'll change all occurrences of "skyscraper" to "high-rise building" -- Ferkelparade π 14:02, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Origin

The first paragraph describing the origins of Munich is confusing. This guy Henry founded the city, but he didn't, but the village developed around the bridge that he built, after he destroyed the other bridge, etc. etc. Why not just say something like "Munich was an early roman village on the Isar dating from as early as 123 AD (or whatever) at a point where the river was easy to cross..."? IP129.55.27.4 13:47, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Because it would be factually incorrect to say that :) While there are traces of settlements going back to the neolithic and there were some smallish Roman villages on the area that is now occupied by the city of Munich, the city proper was founded by Henry the Lion. I agree, however, that the paragraph is not exactly brilliant prose and sounds quite confusing...I'll try to think of a way to rephrase it -- Ferkelparade π 14:05, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I would revise it myself if I knew anything about the topic. :-). I would try to find a more common word than "spoilation". Stylistically the entire article tends to suffer from overuse of the passive voice as well as some peculiar diction (e.g. "before the 8th-century monks were putting the St.Peter church on the map."). It's hard to explain how odd some passages sound, although they make for interesting reading. :-) IP129.55.27.4 16:14, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

"Enough Already"

In English, the word "already" is not used as often or in the same way that the word "schon" is used in German, except by those whose native language is Yiddish (as in the expression "enough already"). It actually sounds comical to see it used in English sentences composed by Germans. I mention this purely for the benefit of those who would want to improve their English composition skills. :-) 129.55.27.4 16:43, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

A rising of the guilds in 1397 was thrown down the following years.

That sentence does not make much sense to me. I'd say either "the following year" or "in the following years" - but I lack access to historical info to choose between those options. Agathoclea 15:17, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Climate - this section needs re-writing

The section on climate seems vague and self-contradictory. For example - "because of the distance to the sea . . . precipitation is rather high" What does this mean ? Is it suggested that Munich is close to the sea ? In which case I would suggest this is not true - I estimate Munich is about 300km from the Adriatic - many large cities in Germany and the rest of Europe are much closer to the sea. Or alternatively, is it suggested that Munich is far from the sea ? If so, why should this great distance lead to high precipitation ? The next sentence - "Rain storms often come violently and unexpectedly" is vague and could be truthfully said about many places in Europe. The rest of the section is similar. I suggest that unless we can add more detailed information, and quote sources, then we should delete this section completely. In its current form it provides practically no useful information. Anyone agree / disagree ? GeraldH 08:42, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Föhn needs mentioning, as it is a unique feature. Agathoclea 09:42, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree on both points. It certainly rains a lot in Munich, but why that is exactly I don't know. I think I'll check to see what Wikipedia says about the climate in Seattle... I've also looked at the German Wikipedia article. I think the Fohn needs a lot more description. Although it has its own wikipedia article, the Fohn in Munich is a really big deal. JoppaFlats 20:46, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Pronunciation Sound File Error

Is it me, or does the German pronunciation of "München" in the .ogg sound file sound a bit inaccurate? Take a listen.

The pronunciation sounds okay to me (native german speaker). It might be a little confusing because the german pronunciation is quite different from the english one. Cinnamon42 19:01, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Munich

I've created WikiProject Munich. Anyone interested can go to the linked page and sign up. Kingjeff 16:05, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Famous people born in Munich

I created and after a while deleted an entry for the "Mad King" Ludwig II since the place of his birth was not a part of Munich at the time of his life. Maybe it should be added despite this fact for the Nymphenburg castle is in Munich today and an interesting place for tourists to visit. Comments, please. --Einemnet 20:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Flags

Deleted flags as per this diff, this article WP:FLAGS, this debate, and this admin. One down, umpteen thousand to go. Pedro |  Talk  20:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Why have flags when they're not going to be used? Kingjeff 22:22, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Calling Fröttmaning a suburb

Under Olympic Park and Allianz Arena, Fröttmaning is described as a "northern suburb." I realize that in some usage, outer parts of cities can be called suburbs, but I think in American usage, suburb implies a separate city, which Fröttmaning is not. See Etymology on Suburb. I think the article would be clearer with different wording, but I can't think of a good English word for Stadtteil. Neighborhood? Quarter? It's not a Borough, as it is part of the Borough of Schwabing-Freimann --Pete 10:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, so this discussion page (and associated article) indicate that Bezirk should be translated as Borough, while Stadtteil should be translated locality if it is not equivalent to a Bezirk. This is the usage on the Berlin article, so I'll start using it until I hear otherwise. --Pete 13:23, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not aware of the connotation you associate with suburb - as far as I'm concerned, this term fits well. Also note that Fröttmaning does have a Bezirksrat, and hence some political autonomy. Alternatively, the standard translation for "Stadtteil" would be "quarter" (even if there are more than 4 ;-). --Stephan Schulz 14:09, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

The connotation of suburb I'm concerned about is that suburb to me usually means a separate city or town. Fröttmaning is part of the city of Munich, so using the term suburb isn't clear. I just polled a few American friends over IM and they generally think of a location outside the city when they hear suburb out of context. Since it's not unheard of for a sports stadium to be outside the city proper (The Washington Redskins play in Maryland, the New York Giants play in New Jersey), I think it would just be clearer if a word was used that clearly indicated the Stadium was still inside the city. It's not a big deal, I'm just bored on a Saturday. :-) --Pete 16:17, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I wouldn't call the stadium to be "inside the city". The old Olymic Stadium is, sure, but the new one is rather far outside the city proper (while legaly on ground belonging to the city of Munich). It also stands fairly isolated, with not much beyond the subway station and the garbage disposal works closeby. --Stephan Schulz 16:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

MVV/MVG

I just reverted an edit from an anonymous user who exchanged MVV with MVG. That is not correct, both organisations exist, here is their statement:

• MVV: The MVV (Munich Transport and Tariff Association) is a transport association that ensures regional public transport (ÖPNV) is convenient and easy to use. There is only one timetable. You can travel throughout the entire association network with only one ticket and you pay according to the same tariff system, irrespective of how many transport companies’ services you use.
• MVG: The Munich Verkehrsgesellschaft (MVG) has played, and still plays, an important role in this story of success as the operator of the Underground, buses and trams. (...) The MVG as a strong partner in the Munich Verkehrs- and Tarifverbund (MVV) has grown into every nook and cranny of Munich. Without MVG and its one million-plus passengers the famous style of the city on the Isar would not be what it is. And so should it stay.

That's something many people in Munich also confuse, but both citations tell the same story. Einemnet 14:16, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Modern Munich - tower referendum

The part about the referendum and newly planned office towers is less than optimal... a german article about the topic is at sueddeutsche.de, the new building (german project description) of the newspaper's publishing house will have 28 floors instead of 39 as planned initially. Plans for other office towers were also affected by this referendum, namely SIEMENS stopped their project but that was also due to the overall bad market situation for office buildings. The referendum couldn't stop other towers already in construction (two towers at Donnersberger Brücke, one tower close to the Olympic stadium, one other at the end of Leopoldstrasse). At least one of these buildings had no single paying hirer for years. I don't know their actual height but can find that out if neccessary. Background of the referendum: some people just don't want other buildings to be built higher than the cathedral (99 meters). Munich already had this restriction of 100 meters but only for new buildings inside the old fortification. Now this also affects planning in the outskirts. Bit long, isn't it? Not sure how that could fit in one or two sentences. IMHO the whole topic just gives everyone a picture of how small people are thinking in Munich. So, who has an idea how that section can be optimised? --Einemnet 16:16, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

GA failed

I have reviewed this article according to the GA criteria and have failed the article at this time mainly for a lack of citations. There are a few footnotes, but many sections are lacking inline citations. Go through the article and make sure to add inline citations to any statements that may be questioned about their verifiability. The great thing about this article is that it is very broad, as you have covered a large variety of topics associated with the city. Consider getting a peer review to help you get some feedback on how to further improve the article. Once you have added more sources, please look over the rest of the criteria to see if the article is ready to be nominated again. If you disagree with this review, then you can seek an alternate opinion at Wikipedia:Good article review. If you have any questions about this review, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Nehrams2020 19:37, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Munich's Peer Review

Main page: Wikipedia:Peer review/Munich/archive1

A peer review was done and I think we should go through with it. I've already started. Kingjeff 19:47, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Linux

There is nothing about Munich Council adopting Linux software. At the time this made for a lot of comment. [1]--Aspro 15:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC) OK, have you considered adding the section yourself? I would like to see someone FROM Munich comment. Possibly just linking to the Linux V Microsoft battle is enough? The City is pretty famous already, but I suppose the Linux thing is pretty important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.72.217.96 (talk) 12:06, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm from Munich, and to anyone not involved in the free software movement, it's a minor and obscure point barely noteworthy. It got some national press coverage when the programme was started, and I recently saw a followup article in a local newspaper, but all in all I'd say it's not prominent enough to get a section of its own.Brazzy (talk) 12:49, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

BMW Tower "built from the top to the bottom" ??

Per the article about the tower, I think the caption for the BMW tower is false.

The building's page says that "During the construction, individual floors were assembled on the ground and then elevated", which clearly is bottom up, since each new floor was placed on top of the previous floor.

I found text matching the caption here, but it's based on this article.

Hope nobody gets mad, but I'm removing the text.

65.169.210.66 20:24, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

The exact wording might only appear on wikipedia in English but the process is rather well explained in the German counterpart of the article. It was built top to bottom in the sense that floors where hoisted up to be suspended underneath the next floor up. As far as the term bowl is concerned is apparently is nicknamed Salatschüssel or Weißwurstkessel both meaning bowl/pot. Agathoclea 21:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge with Boroughs of Munich article

The boroughs of Munich article must be merged with the subdivisions section of this article since the section is not explained thoroughly. It only says there that there are 25 boroughs comprising Munich without information what are these boroughs. Any additional short information about these boroughs can be helpful for readers; however, do not expound on those info. -Pika ten10 (talk) 06:03, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

But I think this would only require a partial merger. If the whole thing is mergered, then the Boroughs of Munich should be a redirect to that section in the Munich article. Kingjeff (talk) 21:53, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm against a complete merger. Keeping the other article boroughs of Munich makes sense since the list of the older division is far too long for a section in the Munich article. This older division is important for historical reasons and I'm sure this will be expanded soon enough: Munich celebrates a "birthday" in 2008. Pika ten10, can you give us a reason why there is a must to merge both articles? --Einemnet (talk) 13:13, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm also against a merger. It is often the cases that city articles become too long and therefore sections must be given their own articles. This is taking a backwards step. Welshleprechaun (talk) 16:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

"Austro-Bavarian: Minga"

I've never heard "Minga" and I live in Munich (and speak Bavarian)... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.154.21.189 (talk) 09:48, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I live in Munich and while one rarely hears "Minga" in the city itself, in surrounding areas the use of "Minga" is quite common. In Regensburg a common expression is, Hoaste puivah? Fahr'ma na' Minga ("Hast du Pulver? Fahren wir nach München" -- where Pulver (powder) is archaic regional slang for Geld/money). BadDoggie (talk) 11:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Hitler Did Not "Take" Power; It was Given to Him by Hindenburg

The article contains the comment, "The city would once again become a Nazi stronghold when the Nazis took power in Germany in 1933."

The phrase "took power" is wrong, as that suggests or implies some sort of forcible change of government. Hitler was appointed Chancellor by President Paul von Hindenburg. It was all done quite legally and according to "the rule of law," pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the Weimar Republic. 130.13.4.241 (talk) 13:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)John Paul Parks130.13.4.241 (talk) 13:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

If threatening or arresting leagally elected members of parliament in order to gain political momentum is considered legal, yes... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr.Mister (talk • contribs) 23:21, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Breze aka Bretzel, Brez'n etc.

According to the "Bayerisches Kochbuch" (ISBN 3-920105-01-X) the term Brezel (Brezeln is the plural form) is correct. This cookbook also mentions Wurstsalat instead of the fantasy term Wurschtsalat. Auszogene is imho the right term, let's avoid Deppen-Bayerisch here, see this sueddeutsche.de article (in German). I reverted an edit and have a look at the complete section. --Einemnet (talk) 12:24, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Gamma World City?

Should this "Gamma World City" concept be in the introductory paragraph?

It seems to be presenting an obscure, subjective, and advocatory (of globalism) concept developed by some random scholar as if it were vital, standard information everyone should know about a place.

It looks like this is violating both advocacy and neutral point of view principals of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.36.155.15 (talk) 09:30, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Freddie Mercury, Resident??

I always thought of a resident as somebody who lives in an area at present - to this end, Freddie Mercury can't be a resident, because he's dead (unless he is buried in Munich, which I'm not sure if he was). The term 'resident' implies he is there at the moment, and its a little misleading. I assume I've misunderstood this. TheMoridian 20:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I think the list includes past and present residence. Kingjeff (talk) 14:27, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Kingjeff is right, and this is actually mostly a list of past (and passed away) residents: Thomas Mann, Lenin, Hitler, Stuck, Wagner, Lola Montez... Moridian, please just follow the links and read about those persons! --Einemnet (talk) 21:28, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Twin cities

Munich has seven twin cities: Bordeaux, Cincinnati, Edinburgh, Harare, Kiew, Sapporo, Verona - --Einemnet (talk) 16:36, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Motto

München mag dich — "Munich loves you" — or is it "Munich likes you" — ??

Sca (talk) 19:39, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

You're quite right - the word 'mag' stems from the verb 'mogen', which translates as 'to like'. I've corrected that. TheMoridian 11:02, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

In Bavarian though doesn't mogen mean to love e.g i mog di = i love you (differing with standard german) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.67.4 (talk) 03:07, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

That might be the reason why the official translation of the motto used by the city of Munich in advertisements (see http://www.muenchen.de/home/163628/munichlovesyou.html) is "Munich loves you" and not "Munich likes you". I think that the official englisch motto should at least be mentioned in the article. 85.181.85.164 (talk) 17:22, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Urban & metro area population

6,000,000?? I suspect population vandalism. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 20:48, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Feldmoching

The Munich-Feldmoching railway station page describes "the Feldmoching quarter" in "the north-west of Munich." However, the Munich page makes no explicit mention of Feldmoching. Is it actually a quarter, or borough, neighborhood, or other municipal division? -- Deborahjay (talk) 07:13, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Please refer to Boroughs of Munich and you'll see that Feldmoching-Hasenbergl is indeed the 24th borough of Munich. Greetings --OCTopus (talk) 07:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Austro-Bavarian language

I have added a bit of information about Austro-Bavarian language as a very important fact of the own culture of Munich.--Auslli (talk) 07:52, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Demographics

The article states that "47.4% of Munich's residents are not affiliated with any religious group," and that "as of 31 December 2008, 38.3% of the city's inhabitants were Roman Catholic, 14.0% Protestant, and 0.3% Jewish." It cannot be the case that the non-affiliated, mainstream Christians, and Jewish people together make up 100% of the population of Munich. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.64.22.132 (talk) 18:48, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Lord Mayor/Oberbürgermeister

Lord Mayor? Is that how you translate Oberbuergermeister? Not correct... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.152.206.121 (talk) 21:48, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

File:MunichCetre-Map2.jpg Deleted

	An image used in this article, File:MunichCetre-Map2.jpg, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons by Túrelio for the following reason: Copyright violation: Derivative of non-free map content What should I do?
	A different bot should have (or will soon) remove the image code from the article text (check if this has been done correctly). If you think the image deletion was in error please raise the issue at Commons. You could also try to search for new images to replace the old one. This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotification (talk) 18:52, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Climate chart

The climate chart is based on three different sites: the WMO, this and this one (using NOAA data) I suggest to use WMO data only, at least for the city center; the NOAA dataset seems to refer to the airport (München Flughafen).--Carnby (talk) 11:27, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Could use some information on München vs Munich.

München isn't the only place in the world that has one name in the native language and another in English. Sometimes the English name seems to stem from historic bastardization of the name by speakers of other languages that took root (Bombay/Mumbai), other times it's a historic name that didn't quickly take root with some outsiders (like Germany/Deutschland).

It seems plausible to me that the city was once called Munich. The "ch" sound at the end seems way more like Deutsch than it does like bastardized English. What I mean is that if someone were going to anglicize/bastardize the name München, they likely wouldn't settle upon "Munich." Something more like "Moonkin" or something perhaps sounding a bit more like an English city name.

Am I incorrectly surmising that the city was at some point in its history locally known as "Munich" which changed at some point? And that English speakers didn't pick up on the change until the name was "set in stone" in both languages? I recognize that the etymology of foreign names for cities isn't customarily a part of city articles, but if Munich is a historical name it seems like it would be fitting to include some information on that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.65.63.33 (talk) 19:57, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

It appears to have been called Munichen (and still is in some places) Agathoclea (talk) 22:45, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Exaggeration?

Did Munich really grow at an alarming rate? Who was alarmed? - Leidolf

corrections

"The Frauenkirche's towers (109 meters or 358 feet tall) are also the measurement for a new rule which limits the height of new buildings to the same height"

109 meters is the length of the church; the towers are 99 meters resp. 100 meters tall. See also http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frauenkirche_%28M%C3%BCnchen%29

"The Olympiaturm (Olympic Tower) (...) was built for the 1972 Summer Olympics which were held in Munich."

This is not correct. The tower was planned and built for broadcasting and telecommunication purposes ("Fernsehturm"); construction started in 1965, one year before anyone thought of Olympic Games in Munich. After Munich was declared the site of the 1972 Olympic Summer Games, the growing tower became part of the "Olympiagelände" (Olympic Park) and was renamed "Olympiaturm". The tower was finished in 1968.

Source: "München. Heimat und Weltstadt." Munich, 1982, page 153 f.

"Despite its name, Oktoberfest actually begins in September. It lasts two weeks and always finishes on the first Sunday in October."

Nitpicking: except in years when the "Tag der Deutschen Einheit" (German National Holyday) Oct 3rd is a monday (like this year) - then the Oktoberfest lasts one day longer.

Franz X. Fackler, Munich, Germany 28 August 2005

Sports Clubs

Why is Unterhaching listed as one of Munich's sports clubs. It's simply not one of them. Do you also want to list clubs of other cities in the vicinity of Munich (such as Dachau, Fuerstenfeldbruck, Puchheim, Gauting, etc.)? I think it should be removed.

I agree with that. As Unterhaching is not a part of Munich, the SpVgg should be removed from the list of the sport clubs.

Houses of worship

A mosque is planned not too far from the city center on a vacant lot used now as a parking lot and directly face to face with a catholic church (St. Korbinian at Gotzinger Platz, borough of Sendling). This would be the first "real" mosque inside Munich and is a controversial topic. This is an important fact since the new synagogue just opened. Should this article about the Mosque in Sendling not be integrated here?

Infobox

How would people feel about using this infobox instead?

Munich München
Coat of arms
Motto:  München mag Dich (Munich loves you)
Munich
Coordinates: 48.133333°N 11.566667°E / 48.133333; 11.566667
Country	Germany
State	Bavaria
Province	Upper Bavaria
District	Munich
Founded	1158
Boroughs	List Altstadt-Lehel Ludwigsvorstadt-Isarvorstadt Maxvorstadt Schwabing-West Au-Haidhausen Sendling Sendling-Westpark Schwanthalerhöhe Neuhausen-Nymphenburg München-Moosach Milbertshofen-Am Hart Schwabing-Freimann Bogenhausen Berg am Laim Trudering-Riem Ramersdorf-Perlach Obergiesing Untergiesing-Harlaching Thalkirchen-Obersendling-Forstenried-Fürstenried-Solln Hadern Pasing-Obermenzing Aubing-Lochhausen-Langwied Allach-Untermenzing Feldmoching-Hasenbergl Laim
Government
• Type	Mayor-council
• Body	Münchner Stadtverwaltung
• Lord Mayor	Christian Ude (SPD)
Area
• City	310.43 km2 (119.86 sq mi)
Elevation	519 m (1,703 ft)
Population  (31 December 2008)
• City	1,326,807
• Rank	3rd
• Density	4,274/km2 (11,070/sq mi)
• Urban	2,606,021
• Metro	5,203,738
Demonym	Münchner
Time zone	UTC+1 (CET)
• Summer (DST)	UTC+2 (CEST)
Postal code	80331–81929
Area code	089
Vehicle registration	M
Website	www.muenchen.de

X Games Munich 2013

An article on the X Games held in Munich in 2013 would be really nice, compare to X Games Los Angeles 2013. Cheers! Horst-schlaemma (talk) 22:56, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Global city

According to an article "Global city" here:Global city Munich is global city... Kartasto (talk) 11:54, 18 September 2014 (UTC)Kartasto (talk) 11:55, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Tourism in Munich

Hi, a basic section on Tourism in Munich would be favourable, see de:München#Tourismus. Thanks, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 09:18, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

That would make sense. Tourism is important in Munich. --Maxl (talk) 12:27, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Climate - absolute maximum temp in Nov and a few others

The table of Munich's climate says the maximum temp for Munich in November is 18,8 °C. However, according to my records, Munich had a tmax of 20,0 °C on Nov 17, 2009. Also, the maximum in the table has been cracked several times this November. On Nov 2 it was 19,4°C, Nov 3 19,2°C, and today at 13:OO CET Munich recorded 22,5 °C which may not be the end of it for today. It can all be fount on http://www.wetteronline.de. --Maxl (talk) 12:26, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

TMax in Munich today 22,9°C. Should be a record for November. See here: http://www.wetteronline.de/wetter-aktuell-toplisten?day=04&month=11&paraid=TXLD&time=2000&year=2014 --Maxl (talk) 21:05, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

One more thing - the record for October was shattered this year as well, 27,0° on Oct 9: http://www.wetteronline.de/wetter-aktuell-toplisten?day=09&month=10&paraid=TXLD&time=2000&year=2014 --Maxl (talk) 21:26, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

And yet another one: Over the last few years I found three instances where the Tmax for Munich was higher than the figures state in the list. The highest was May 11, 2012 with 31,2°C http://www.wetteronline.de/wetter-aktuell-toplisten?day=11&month=05&paraid=TXLD&time=2000&year=2012 I've put the new figures into the list. --Maxl (talk) 21:52, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

And still something else - according to this source: http://www.focus.de/wissen/natur/meteorologie/russenkaelte-man-nennt-es-winter_aid_709710.html the all-time low temperature for Munich is -31,6°C, recorded on Feb 12, 1929. How can it be that the list is so faulty? --Maxl (talk) 22:15, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

pronunciation

in what language is munich pronounced /mjunIx/? certainly not in english or german... 76.102.137.73 (talk) 01:52, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Agreed and changed to /k/. If anything, since English doesn't even have /x/ as a phoneme. I've certainly never heard anything other than [mju:nik]. Maybe there are some Germanophile who use [x] as a form of hypercorrection, but it would be pretty odd considering "Munich" isn't even German.

Peter ^Isotalo 22:21, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Maybe your dialect of English doesn't have /x/ as a phoneme. But Wikipedia's IPA system is diaphonemic, not phonemic: an abstract set of symbols that is supposed to map to different phonemes in each dialect. Scots, Irish, and Welsh English speakers would find /x/ no problem. In others, /x/ should be pronounced /k/ or /h/ usually depending on position. In order to confirm it, you need a dictionary that includes /x/ in its pronunciation key, which I don't think any of the ones you linked do. The OED does, however, and offers both /k/ and /x/ pronunciations: a perfect match for our /x/ diaphoneme. DavidPKendal (talk) 07:24, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm not a native speaker and I don't have a "problem" with it. I just know that it is a marginal sound that seems to occur only in certain loanwords in certain dialects. Either way, the [x]-pronunciation does not appear to be very common, so [k] should clearly not be removed. Description of pronunciation should always be descriptive, not prescriptive.

Peter ^Isotalo 07:51, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

John and DavidPKendal seem to have introduced the [x].[2][3] I can't find any references to confirm anything but [k], however.[4][5][6][7][8]

Peter ^Isotalo 22:37, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Timeline of Munich

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content. Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 13:57, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 8 external links on Munich. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140228091612/http://monocle.com:80/film/Affairs/most-liveable-city-munich/ to http://monocle.com/film/Affairs/most-liveable-city-munich/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150811001640/http://www.mercer.com/qualityoflivingpr to http://www.mercer.com/qualityoflivingpr#city-rankings
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120724163530/http://www.greenpeace-muenchen.de:80/index.php/archiv/aktuelle-themen/358-gesunde-luft-fuer-gesunde-buerger-stoppt-dieselruss-greenpeace-misst-feinstaub-und-dieselruss-in-muenchen.html to http://www.greenpeace-muenchen.de/index.php/archiv/aktuelle-themen/358-gesunde-luft-fuer-gesunde-buerger-stoppt-dieselruss-greenpeace-misst-feinstaub-und-dieselruss-in-muenchen.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090325105755/http://www.mstatistik-muenchen.de/themen/bevoelkerung/jahreszahlen/jahreszahlen_2008/p_jt090114.pdf to http://www.mstatistik-muenchen.de/themen/bevoelkerung/jahreszahlen/jahreszahlen_2008/p_jt090114.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150419043055/http://www.gamesbids.com/eng/winter_olympic_bids/future_bids_2018/1216135909.html to http://www.gamesbids.com/eng/winter_olympic_bids/future_bids_2018/1216135909.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120619061243/http://www.icm-muenchen.de/en/Home/cn/kongressstadt/daten_fakten to http://www.icm-muenchen.de/en/Home/cn/kongressstadt/daten_fakten
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080204035948/http://www.literaturhaus-muenchen.de:80/english/house/index.htm to http://www.literaturhaus-muenchen.de/english/house/index.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120529141017/http://www.bavaria-film.de/index.php?id=3 to http://www.bavaria-film.de/index.php?id=3

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:17, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Infobox

There seems to be a problem with the infobox. In normal view the infobox displays an obsolete number as far as the population is concerned. When you edit the infobox you see, however, that the current population figures have been added already. How can that be? --Maxl (talk) 19:08, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Since the infobox template has "Gemeindeschlüssel = 09 1 62 000" as a parameter, it is accessing Template:Population Germany for the population data. If you drill down from there, Template:Metadata Population DE-BY includes "09162000 = 1407836", which is where the "old" figure is coming from. This is supposed to be updated from the German Wikipedia, but does not appear to have been updated since 2013-12-31. The update procedure is described on Template:Population Germany, but I can't quite follow it - I don't see the obvious source files on de.wiki. It is certainly confusing that the template does not complain if the number is specified in both places. Rwessel (talk) 05:19, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Munich. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120306014325/http://www.stmf.bayern.de/ueber_uns/ausstellung_foyer/muenchner_pfennig/ to http://www.stmf.bayern.de/ueber_uns/ausstellung_foyer/muenchner_pfennig/
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140410072417/http://www.mercerhr.com/costofliving to http://www.mercerhr.com/costofliving
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140325203820/http://www.muenchen.de/rathaus/dms/Home/Stadtinfos/Statistik/bevoelkerung/aktuelle-jahreszahlen/jt140120.pdf to http://www.muenchen.de/rathaus/dms/Home/Stadtinfos/Statistik/bevoelkerung/aktuelle-jahreszahlen/jt140120.pdf
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090703125113/http://www.munichsl.com:80/ to http://www.munichsl.com/
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090415161904/http://www.lrz-muenchen.de:80/~Mineralogische.Staatssammlung/ to http://www.lrz-muenchen.de/~Mineralogische.Staatssammlung/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120614133841/http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/info/695/council_information_performance_and_statistics/685/european_international_and_parliamentary_relations/3 to http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/info/695/council_information_performance_and_statistics/685/european_international_and_parliamentary_relations/3

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:46, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Munich. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gamesbids.com/eng/winter_olympic_bids/future_bids_2018/1216135909.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:27, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

List of largest employers faulty

Although it gives a source, the list of the largest employers in Munich is faulty. It doesn't make sense that the smaller Technichal University of Munich should have >9000 employers, while the larger Ludwig-Maximilian Universität doesn't even make the list. Both universities are state-run, so that can't be the issue.

Sure enough, the Wikipedia entry lists >16.000 employees for the LMU (the German page lists 6000 without the university hospital and >10.000 for the university hospital - note that such a distinction is not shown for the Technical University, which also has a hospital). It gets worse, because not all of the employees are actually employed in Munich, since especially the Technical University has a majority of institutes in Garching (not Munich) and Weihenstephan (Freising, not Munich).

Next, the airport seems weird. It's not in Munich, so do we count only the people working there who actually come from Munich? Then the number is approximately correct according to [[9]], but all those people work for many different employers at the airport. That seems weird. If we count any other way, the numbers are just plain wrong.

Other firms not listed but which could make the list include infineon: If the technical university fits the list, although most of its people work outside Munich (and many of those also live outside of Munich), then why not count infineon with 3300 employees at Neubiberg near Munich? 217.84.236.226 (talk) 23:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Munich. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150204092217/http://www.bahnhof.de/file/6511088/data/M%C3%BCnchen%20Hbf_de_PDF.pdf to http://www.bahnhof.de/file/6511088/data/M%C3%BCnchen%20Hbf_de_PDF.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:56, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Pulling rank

I see, it's the capital of "the second most populous German federal state of Bavaria" So, which German federal state of Bavaria is the first, then? 212.203.0.54 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:00, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Since I could not find the first most populous German federal state of Bavaria, I changed the article.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:47, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Saying that Munich is the capital of "the second most populous German federal state of Bavaria" is equivalent to saying that "Austin is the capital of the second most populous U.S. state of Texas". Neither of these statements would refer to a state within either Bavaria nor Texas; rather, they refer to the Federal State of Bavaria and the State of Texas, respectively. Statistically, Bavaria is the second most populous German federal state (after North Rhine-Westphalia, which is the most populous), just as Texas is the second most populous U.S. state (after California). Hence, in fact, Munich is the capital of "the second most populous German federal state of Bavaria" — just as Austin is, likewise, the capital of the second most populous U.S. state of Texas. #ThinkOutsideTheBox Key of Now (talk) 23:25, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Alps behind the skyline of Munich

Picture captioned "Alps behind the skyline of Munich" is edited and does not represent a real life image of Munich. You cannot see the Alps from Munich (except possibly on the clearest days from a very high point) as Munich is 80km from the Alps.

If, to your perception, this image was constructed from more than one original image, with the intention of deceiving the viewer, please report it to Wikimedia Commons.--Quisqualis (talk) 07:44, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

No, you are wrong. I'm siting in the 10th floor of a Munich city building and can confirm that at least in 3 in 10 days, the sky is clear enough to watch the alpine skyline. distance is not 80 but 50km, ie 30-40 miles. There are zillions of Munich images with the alps in the background, preferably taken on a clear automn day with "Fön". BR Ulrich --Nillurcheier (talk) 08:10, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Festivals

I've removed the section on Oktoberfest (there were zero citations or references) and replaced it with a much larger section on festivals as a whole. This is for a class assignment. BethanyJJohnson (talk) 02:38, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Scottish flag

Nillurcheier, the Scottish flag had been in the article before an IP editor decided to replace it with the Union jack. See random previous version. I simply reverted him. Your "no exceptions" doesn't make sense and isn't a policy-based reasoning. I'm not being nationalistic as it isn't my flag but the more specific that you get on information the better it is. If you are pairing with a Scottish city, it makes sense to use the Scottish flag. This does not deny that Edinburgh is in the UK. Actually, to be more specific there is a city flag for Edinburgh although I don't know if we have an image for it...yes, File:Flag of Edinburgh.svg
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 11:49, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

• Please note that the conventions being used on List of twin towns and sister cities in Germany is to use the Scottish flag where appropriate and if the city is in England then the English flag but not the Union jack. I'm following the convention that already exists. It was the Scottish flag that was presented to Munich when the twinning occurred, right?
   — Berean Hunter (talk) 12:00, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Berean Hunter, thanks for the info. It seems that using the "country" flags for England, Scotland and Wales is widely accepted on the English Wikipedia, whereas the German Article on Munich uses the UK-flag. Of course this should be discussed on a general level rather than on the Munich page. And it is obviously an unlogical exception to use subnational flags for just one UN-member. But maybe this has been discussed and decided before? --Nillurcheier (talk) 12:28, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Nillurcheier, I had left a note at Talk:List of twin towns and sister cities in Germany#Talk:Munich#Scottish flag to invite other editors here. The United Kingdom appears to be an exception in other ways. With FIFA World Cup, the English flag is used in the German article rather than the Union jack. The individual countries, Scotland and England, are allowed to compete under their own flags but I cannot think of another situation like that.

I can see the convention of using discrete flags for the UK is widespread here on en.wiki (and would take quite a bit of effort to change) and I also see what you mean about the convention of using the Union jack on de.wiki as I've spot checked several articles there. I've tried to find guidance on this from Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities but I'm not finding it. This 2012 discussion is old and really long. Perhaps a couple of that project's veteran editors may know the answers. @Northamerica1000 and SilkTork: do you know where such guidance is codified? If it isn't, your guidance/opinions would be helpful here.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 14:20, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

It seems that the convention is that when Scottish cities twin with another city, they present the Scottish St. Andrews flag in ceremony and not the Union jack. See this photo at ceremony with the Scottish national flag. This is from a different ceremony. This on a plaque.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 15:45, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

There is no general agreement or guidance on placement of twinning information. There are some editors who are interested in twinning and they will tend to create a separate section especially for twinning information, though there is no guidance for that. Some editors prefer to place the twinning information within the governance section as almost always the twinning is done as part of governance - it is a local authority thing. Outside of the local council, there is very little or no interest in twinning. Twinning is done by the local council, and advertised by the local council - such as on the settlement sign at the borders of the settlement. I have rarely seen twinning mentioned by individuals or organisations outside the local authority. Example of how twinning is dealt with as part of governance: Southampton#Governance. This also avoids the necessity of having a discussion about flags, as in cases like this flag icons are actually discouraged as they appear to be mere decoration: WP:ICONDECORATION. If we have the name Scotland, why do we also need a flag symbol? They are both saying the same thing. Though most people would recognise the name more readily than the flag, so if there is to be a choice between the two, then in running prose the country name is more useful. Flags tend to be used in lists such as sporting events like the Olympics, where the name of the country has already been given, and the flag icon serves as a quick and easy shortcut identifier. Flag icons are not helpful to those who are unsighted and use reading machines. So, my suggestion is that the twinning details be turned into prose without the icons per MOS:LISTBASICS, WP:ICONDECORATION, and WP:ACCESSIBILITY and used within the Governance section. It's clean, informative, encyclopedic, follows existing guidelines, and avoids arguments and confusion. SilkTork (talk) 17:57, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

 Done
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 22:59, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Council elections

Can someone explain why in a city with a population of 1.5 million a party is getting 11 million votes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackwater-Bradfield1900 (talk • contribs) 21:58, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi,

that results from the fact that each voter does have as many votes to distribute as there are members in the city council. Which means that each of the around 1.1 millon (if I'm correct) people eligible to vote had 80 votes. The total number of valid votes cast sums up to 40.408.200. Btw the Bavarian voting system on the communal level is very flexible: You can place up to 3 votes onto a single candidate (Cumulative voting) and additionally it is possible to place votes on candidates from different parties (Panachage).

InfoBroker2020 (talk) 19:09, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Neues Rathaus and Frauenkirche image in Infobox

Recently, @KaiMartin has changed (edit) an image in Infobox displaying Neues Rathaus (New Townhall) and Frauenkirche from File:Stadtbild München.jpg (existing) to File:Frauenkirche and Neues Rathaus Munich March 2013.JPG (new). The existing image has both Rathaus and Frauenkirche in portrait and has a clear display with abundant sunshine. The new image cuts off the Rathaus in half and also has less sunshine compared to the existing image. From the metadata of the images on Commons, both the images are taken in 2013 with just 20 days apart, giving them no distinguishable ageing. I think the older image should be used. -- DaxServer (talk) 09:59, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I think that both images are equally suitable. However, the image might also have been changed due to the following discussion in the German Wikipedia. --Rio65trio (talk) 22:43, 15 April 2021 (UTC)