Talk:Munich Metropolitan Region

Germany: Munich High‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Munich (assessed as Top-importance).

Bavaria Top‑importance

	Bavaria portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bavaria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bavaria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BavariaWikipedia:WikiProject BavariaTemplate:WikiProject BavariaBavaria articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Seriously over-inflated

This is one of the most inflated metro claims I have seen, and this field is chronically prone to exaggeration and boasting. 6 million certainly must not be taken as being in any way a city population figure. This "metro region" barely has higher population density than Bavaria as a whole. For context, this so called metro is more than a fifth of the size of England, but has a population density 40% lower than England as a whole, including all the rural areas of England. Mowsbury (talk) 21:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Totally agree. This is not in any way a classical metropolitan area, this is a comitee creation. Richiez (talk) 21:19, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am also somewhat dubious of the catchment areas the region as defined here encompass, however this appears to be the only article for a Greater Munich area which should be significant enough to warrant an article. My suggestion would be to check German Wikipedia and see if there is a better spatial definition or better sources that can be added to the article. From a casual glance elsewhere on the web it appears the OECD may use a very similar, if not the same, definition for the Munich metropolitan area. If not I see no reason to delete the article, it should, at least, be transformed into an article about Eurostat's Munich LUZ.

Remember that metropolitan areas vary widely depending on a number of factors, not the least of which is how the country itself sets the definition. If significant numbers of people commute daily from Augsburg to Munich or vice-versa then the entire Augsburg Metro Area may be lumped together with Munich for statistical purposes. Similarly, if a Landkries or Regierungsbezirk has a large population concentrated near Munich and a large rural portion farther away the entire area would likely be classified with the Metropolitan Region for ease of use. I'm not sure how Germany itself defines metropolitan regions.

Knowing a little about how the US Census Bureau classifies Metropolitan Areas I would guess they would use a very similar spatial area as a Combined Statistical Area consisting of the individual metropolitan areas of Munich, Augsburg, Ingolstadt, Landshut, and Rosenheim. Perhaps a better way would be to make the article about the Munich LUZ and mention the wider Metropolitan Region in a dection of the article. The reverse of how it is now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.255.210.95 (talk) 07:58, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The German page states that the "metropolitan area" was "designated" as such by some ministerial comitee. The only practical effect of this designation up to date appears to be a Verein of the same name that is supposed to do something but as far as I can see it has zero notability even in local media. As such the German page already has the problem that it is not clear whether it is about the Verein or the area. I do not think the Enlgish WP needs to include pages on Vereins that nobody in Bavaria has heard about.

As of the georgaphical area, directly quoting the article it includes "40 % of the state of Bavaria" and "42% of the Bavarian population". From this it follows easily that the population density of this "metropolitan area" is the average population density of Bavaria or only about 3/4 of average population density in Germany.

So if this article is about some German Verein it should clearly say so - and pass notability criteria. If it is about a metropolitan area it is a hoax. Richiez (talk) 11:21, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prpoposing deletion

Reasons:

title misleading: this is not a well known or notable metropolitan area but the name of a comitee which created this area.
few sources, one of them seems irrelevant to subject, the other hardly notable and does not say anything useful about the subject
no notability
comments above regarding population density and overinflation

Richiez (talk) 21:22, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, the metropolitan are as shown on the map is nonsense

There obviously is such a thing as a Munich metropolitan area. But actually, the region is shown on the map simply has nothing to do with what people would understand as a "Munich metropolitan area". A real Munich metropolitan area would consist of City of Munich, County of Munich, counties of Freising, Erding, Ebersberg, Dachau, Fürstenfeldbruck, Starnberg, and Aichach-Friedberg. It might include, additionally, Landshut (city; county minus the parts that formerly belonged to counties Vilsbiburg, Rottenburg, Mallersdorf, and also minus Essenbach and Niederaichbach), Augsburg (city and county), Bad Aibling (former county now mostly part of the county of Rosenheim), Wolfratshausen (former county now mostly part of the county of Bad Tölz), Rosenheim (just the city, not the county), Landsberg am Lech. Mühldorf, Weilheim-Schongau and Pfaffenhofen are dubious. Allgäu, Altötting, Traunstein, Dingolfing-Landau (!), Kelheim (!!), Ingolstadt, Eichstätt (which belongs to the metropolitan region of Ingolstadt), Donau-Ries (!!), Dillingen (!!) are right out. And with Bad Tölz apart from the Wolfratshausen part, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Miesbach, county of Rosenheim minus the parts mentioned, you don't get the feeling either that you are living in any sort of metropolitan area (though you might get the feeling to live in a high-priced tourist area, but that's another story).--2001:A61:20EC:CD01:E040:4962:D974:C204 (talk) 13:42, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, if we consider Rosenheim, Landshut and Ingolstadt Metropolitan areas in their own right, then it might make sense to include Dingolfing-Landau (for Landshut), Traunstein (for Rosenheim) and so on. But if we consider them w.r.t. Munich, which the name of a Munich metropolitan region implies, then Ingolstadt is right out, and while it can be defended to include Rosenheim and Landshut, not all areas that would be part of an agglomeration of them can be said to part of a Munich agglomeration.--2001:A61:20EC:CD01:E040:4962:D974:C204 (talk) 13:47, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]