Talk:Springs Preserve
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Fuortu in topic Requested move 19 October 2016
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Funding
editDoes anyone know how this thing is being funded? Is it just being paid for by the Water District, or what? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 02:36, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- Based on the reporting from KLAS last night, it was privately funded, mostly. KLAS was one of the underwriters for the 5,000 gallon flash flood feature. This allows most of the site to be free to the public. Apparently there are about 3 or 4 areas that will charge based on the reporting as I recall hearing it. Vegaswikian 02:46, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! We're really looking forward to seeing it. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 02:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- I think it is terrible that they are charging so much. Most of the site is not free. The LVRJ reports that the trails have a $6/person "suggested dontion" and the rest costs $14.95 for locals. A family annual pass is $75 and is only good for a family of four. The pricing really shows they don't really expect low income families to want to come and learn about the area's history, ecology, and experience the "green living" exhibits. The pricing also inhibits repeat business, since the surrounding national recreation areas offer the similar types of exhibits for less than $10/car. The best learning and cultural facilities in the country, and world, are either free or under $20 for the whole family. The people in charge of pricing for the Springs Preserve have their priorities in the wrong place if they are expecting a profit while descriminating against larger or lower-income families. Furhter, none of those fees cover special events or programs. Educational facilities should not be in it for the money. Perhaps they need to refocus and reprice.
- The previous statement is full of misinformation - no wonder the person who posted it is frustrated! The Springs Preserve is a tax-exempt nonprofit organization; there is no "profit" involved in the pricing. Also, most of the site IS free; only two of the exhibit spaces (OriGen and the Sustainability Gallery) require admission. Of the 180 acres on the site, all of the buildings make up 25 acres, and only two of those buildings require an admission fee. I'd say that hardly qualifies as the majority of the site. The suggested donation is not pushed or enforced. Additionally, the Springs Preserve toured 23,000 school children, mostly from CCSD, in its first year FREE OF CHARGE, thus reaching a large number of low-income students and their families. Finally, the $75 annual pass fee covers two parents and ALL of their dependent children, with NO limit on the number of children. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.234.61.45 (talk) 00:43, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
- I think it is terrible that they are charging so much. Most of the site is not free. The LVRJ reports that the trails have a $6/person "suggested dontion" and the rest costs $14.95 for locals. A family annual pass is $75 and is only good for a family of four. The pricing really shows they don't really expect low income families to want to come and learn about the area's history, ecology, and experience the "green living" exhibits. The pricing also inhibits repeat business, since the surrounding national recreation areas offer the similar types of exhibits for less than $10/car. The best learning and cultural facilities in the country, and world, are either free or under $20 for the whole family. The people in charge of pricing for the Springs Preserve have their priorities in the wrong place if they are expecting a profit while descriminating against larger or lower-income families. Furhter, none of those fees cover special events or programs. Educational facilities should not be in it for the money. Perhaps they need to refocus and reprice.
- Thanks! We're really looking forward to seeing it. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 02:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Split out the springs
editI'm likely going to split the springs out into a separate article. I believe that this was the case in the past. The springs are notable on their own and deserving of an article. The springs importance fits into several other articles. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
- OK, no objections so I'll do the split. Vegaswikian (talk) 04:56, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Move to Springs Preserve
editRequested move 19 October 2016
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) Fuortu (talk) 19:40, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Las Vegas Springs Preserve → Springs Preserve – Official name, as shown on https://www.springspreserve.org/ is just the Springs Preserve, not the Las Vegas Springs Preserve. There doesn't seem to be any need for disambiguation at this time; even then Springs Preserve (Las Vegas) or some other variation on that would be better. Prosfilaes (talk) 16:16, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.