Talk:WebCT

message: http://virtuelcampus.univ-msila.dz/facsegc/== Criticisms ==
The criticisms are kind of harsh... no? 165.230.46.149 18:14, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Other learning software being horrible as well doesn't justify WebCT being the most horrible.  Why do they need to use javascript links for documents?  It's already heavily server dependent and I'm not quite sure why it needs to be as bloated as it is.  All of the "features" it provides are shitty reinventions of things that have already been done on the internet, with open, well documented standards.  There is no reason for *anyone* to use WebCT *ever*, and I'm quite irritated that anyone does!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.168.2.47 (talk) 23:49, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

text: As a user of a of WebCT as well, its really really annoying that it doesn't work "like the rest of the internet" does, I can't open multiple lecture note file (PDF or otherwise) into multiple tabs and the inability to use the back button makes downloading lecture notes so much more tedious than it needs to be... many of my fellow classmates could attest to this! --58.107.3.35 (talk) 10:53, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

message: I saw Fa75 just kept reversing other people changes on the lawsuit regarding accessability in the criticisms section. I could see there are the other side information than those described currently by Fa75. I would love to see Fa75 bring his opinions to here rather than just plainly reversing other people edits and calling other people "naughty user". Calling other people "naughty" does not help improving the page and it does not conform with the general practice of wiki.
--ppa 20:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I also see this as needed to be included Shoesss. Spellmanloves67 has supplied links to actual court documents.71.195.62.213 (talk) 00:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Following a comment at WP:AN (see WP:AN#Spellmanloves67) I have reviewed your recent edits and comments to your talkpage. I concur with those who suggest that the courtcase and findings should only be considered notable with regard to the articles directly (i.e. named as parties) relating to the parties concerned. There is no need to edit other related articles with the details of the case; at the most make a brief note (with link to main article). In some cases there is no value to the article in mentioning the case, and I suggest then it is better that it isn't included. It is better to have all the information present in one area, with internal links to it. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:32, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lawsuit 

message: Validity of defunct comment. WebCT is not defunct. I am currently enrolled in such a class based on the WebCT system, even bearing it's logo and trademark.
--User:jackandmeg2001 20:10, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Same opinion here... I don't think the article should shift to the past tense until the vast majority of schools have shifted to the Blackboard brand name... which may never happen; my high school just moved from Blackboard to Desire2Learn. --Nucleusboy 22:35, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Defunct? 

message: I am here due to a request posted on Wikipedia:Third opinion. Please note that Third Opinons should be requested only for disputes involving more than two editors. I see more than two participating above.
That said, all I can do is add yet another opinion that will hopefully lead to a consensus. I agree that the lawsuit need not be mentioned in this article. However, in the context of criticism, the lawsuit might deserve a small mention - no more than a sentence - as an example of criticism. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:37, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note Amatulić clearly indicated Third Opinions shouldn't be requested for disputes involving more than two editors, and this article is the subject of much debate. He has done a fine job of coming in, weighing the evidence, and giving his opinion, but he freely admits the situation. His is just another opinion on the page, and as such, shouldn't be taken as a hard and fast ruling on consensus. The overwhelming consensus on this page is against the mention, and Spellmanloves67's comments that the matter is decided are not accurate. Redrocket (talk) 04:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Third opinion

message: Really really out of date guys,there doesn't appear to be a single working link on this aritcle. Spud Hai/watidone 07:28, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on WebCT. 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/20090204164850/http://brainify.com/ to http://www.brainify.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060321081953/http://booboo.webct.com/2001/papers/Gergely.pdf to http://booboo.webct.com/2001/papers/Gergely.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060314145538/http://www.webct.com/content/viewpage?name=company_content_partners to http://www.webct.com/content/viewpage?name=company_content_partners
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060113234803/http://www.webct.com/products/viewpage?name=products_demo_webinars to http://www.webct.com/products/viewpage?name=products_demo_webinars
*Added  tag to http://kumu.brocku.ca/webct/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:30, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on WebCT. 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  tag to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_1999_May_17/ai_54643876
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090204164850/http://brainify.com/ to http://www.brainify.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:26, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on WebCT. 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/20090204164850/http://brainify.com/ to http://www.brainify.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060819211246/http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw02/papers/refereed/alexander/paper.html to http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw02/papers/refereed/alexander/paper.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:08, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on WebCT. 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/20090204164850/http://brainify.com/ to http://www.brainify.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:55, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified