Talk:E-learning (theory)

message: Upon encountering this article, it was evident that both the definition in the article lede and the content of the article were speaking to the topic name of the article from a particular and very specific perspective, namely the cognitive THEORY of said topic. There was pertinent material to that specific perspective in Learning platform that has been looking for a "good home" (that article is being worked toward a merge with VLE). I believe this article is strengthened by this material, BUT a lot of work is needed to tidy up what was here, as well as to clean up what is being brought over. A decision will need to be made subsequently whether this article should be entitled in a way that reflects what it addresses, or whether it is actually yet another fork of VLE (or, alternatively, VLE a fork of this article.) FeatherPluma (talk) 02:54, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: This article is about multimedia learning theory, not multimedia learning, which is covered in e-learning. I intend to rename, but solicit comments. FeatherPluma (talk) 18:43, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Renamed. Appropriate redirects added /checked. FeatherPluma (talk) 20:19, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/tjmccue/2018/07/31/e-learning-climbing-to-325-billion-by-2025-uf-canvas-absorb-schoology-moodle/#40bb0d463b39. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  GermanJoe (talk) 19:49, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: The article seems overly academic in its style and tone. I'm not entirely sure if the tag I added describes the issue best, but my point is that the article needs to be reworked (IMO) to be reading less like an essay or literature review. Abraxxass12 (talk) 14:57, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone and style 

message: It would be useful to include historical data around content such as Mayer's CTML theory and when the Pre-training Principle was incorporated.  jhengstler(talk) 23:55, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Provenance of parts of theories