Talk:Sharable Content Object Reference Model

message: It would be nice to have some links to free SCORM modules? Is there a repository? Hirzel 17:09, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Free SCORM modules 

message: I have moved this information off the main page because it is a mismash of junk: 
       Sharable Content Object/
	   SCO/
	   Tagged SCO
        
       Content Structure Format/
	   CSF/
	   Tagged Content aggregation/
           Block/
	   Tagged Block/
           AICC
       
        Metadata/
           Course Meta-data/
           Content Meta-data/
           Content Asset/
	   Tagged Asset/
           Raw Media Meta-data/
       SCORM Sequencing/
           IEEE 1484.11.1/
           IEEE 1484.11.2/
Please reformat it using wiki formatting, and please try to provide some kind of sense to this before returning it to the home page.
Also, please do not link every word of this stuff unless there is a real need for standalone Wikipedia pages to define this stuff.
Nova SS 16:00, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mishmash junk 

message: Some of the external links in this article should be listed as references and linked to the information in the article. See :WP:CITE and :WP:Footnotes. The external links section is not intended to be used to verify the information in the article -- see :WP:External links. This article is currently unsourced, so I'm tagging it for references. --SueHay 15:01, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am trying to understand how this article can be better sourced. At the same time, I am trying to see what SCORM actually is. I do not understand your statement that "the external links section is not intended to be used to verify the information in the article". This would imply that all knowledge in WP would have to come form WP. But WP is not the source of all knowledge. It has to refer, for verification purposes, to things outside itself. Or do I mis-understand your comment. Also, the :WP:External links document says "this guideline concerns external links that are not citations to sources supporting article content." This seems to go against your point in referring to the page. What kinds of references do you think would be good? ADLNet seems to be the main source of information about SCORM. If a creator cannot be a reference for the thing created, who can be? I want to help add better sources to the article, but I am not sure what those would be. Thanks. RayKiddy (talk) 16:59, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I would agree that this article needs more references. I think the point is putting the references as footnotes in the text, not just in the external links section at the end. I'm a Wikipedia newbie but from my point of view, the ADL website would be the most sensible source for anything non-controversial (which is probably everything). Rustici software's website www.scorm.com also has a good introduction to SCORM that could form a source in addition to ADL itself. I'll have a look at adding some references myself if I get time this week.Garemoko (talk) 07:18, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: In my opinion, this article could benefit from further information on the following items. I plan to work through this list myself. Please provide feedback if you do not feel any of this is appropriate or any other comments.
*Add references to existing article
*Links to Wikipedia articles of LMSs that support SCORM (possibly as a separate page depending on length of list)
*Links to Wikipedia articles of rapid e-learning tools that support SCORM (possibly as a separate page depending on length of list)
*Further details about changes in each new version of SCORM
*Brief technical details about implementing SCORM calls (be careful this doesn't turn into a how-to guide)
*Project tin-can
*SCORM editors list, such as Reload and eXe  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.118.51.66 (talk) 10:09, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  To do list 

message: I am adding a legitimate compatible software package to this part of the page, but my entry is always removed.  Why is my entry repeatedly removed? 2601:193:4100:6E10:8C71:FF3A:DFD6:F9E9 (talk) 01:28, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Compatible Software Edits 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Sharable Content Object Reference Model. 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/20071111025107/http://aicc.org/ to http://aicc.org/
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) 04:19, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified