Talk:Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of the San Francisco Bay Area WikiProject, a collaborative effort to build a more detailed guide on Wikipedia's coverage of San Francisco and the Bay Area. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

[edit] recent annexations should be mentioned

Recently much new area has been added to the MROSD through annexation. This was highly controversial because a number of possible complications including possible reduction in assessments to local schools and wildfires which have occured in the District. How much currently developed space should be considered "open" and how that boundary with developed areas should be managed is contentious and this should be mentioned. -- M0llusk 01:52, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Hey, be bold. Have you got any references (newspaper articles and the like, I'm assuming) to work from? -- Scott e^iπ 05:34, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Importance

stems from significant change in land use in this major part of urbanized northern calif associated with this entity. there is a large amount of capital in flux surrounding this agency's actions. the conservation biology implications of this agency on northern calif are quite high. Anlace 05:38, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Mprosd.JPG

Image:Mprosd.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 14:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)