Changes

The only thing needed in this introductory section is Normally, [[:Category:Topic|topic pages]] are created by the current definition editors of the termencyclopedia to ensure that each topic is properly classified as definitional, descriptive, idea or theorem normative, that their central questions are formulated correctly, that topics are linked to correct parent topics, that your article is abouttheir authors are correctly entered, etc. This is the first point of information for readersHowever, often topic pages are ''stubs'', as they lack proper ''Prehistory'', ''History'', so it should tell them exactly whether or not this article will be and ''Description'' sections. Authors of use the encyclopedia can help to themfill in these gaps.Note that this section should only contain == Description ==While the editors usually enter a concisefew lines explaining the importance of the question, verbatim definition they don't normally illustrate the question with historical/hypothetical examples. This is where the authors can help. When editing the ''Description'' section of a concepts topic page, try to answer the following questions:* What makes this topic interesting or challenging?* Why is the answer to this question not trivial?* Can you given an example - historical or hypothetical?If necessary, a verbatim statement of a theorem diagram or axiom. It should two can be 1-3 lines maximum. You do not need added to to include any explanation or justification for your topic in this sectionmake the question as clear as possible.

In this This section, you will is meant to describe how past philosophers or and scientists dealt with the subject of your articletopic. This section has the potential to be the largest and least boundedFor instance, due to the fact that lots of the resulting concepts and theorems of scientonomy began as vague or implicit proto-ideas in other philosophical dialogues. So use your judgment and try to keep it as constrained as possible to relevant ideas. Great resources for this section can be found in the non-TSC readings listed on the syllabus of the seminar. Also check the references cited in any relevant section in Barseghyan's 'Prehistory'Laws of Scientific Change'' or the references cited in any relevant article in the ''Journal section of Scientonomy''. Please make sure to cite any references that you use, carefully following the instructions given [[Guidelines:Citations|hereMechanism of Method Employment]]. This section topic page outlines what some famous philosophers of the article will be collapsed upon a reader’s entry science had to the webpage, so they will have to click to expand this section if they want access to this pre-historical information say on the subject. == History == In this section, you will describe any changes to the subject topic of your article since its establishment in the TSCmethod employment. Unlike the Prehistory sectionSpecifically, this section will make no mention of philosophical discussion of the topic occurring prior to the creation of scientonomy. Portions of this section will be generated using summarizes the semantic wiki software. The nature views of what is generated depends on what kind of theoretical article you are writing. There are three general sorts: [[:Category:Topic|topics, or questionsThomas Kuhn]], [[:Category:Theory|theoriesPaul Feyerabend]], and [[:Category:Modification|modificationsDudley Shapere]]. We will begin with , [[:Category:Topic|topicsLarry Laudan]], etc. For all topics As a general rule, the history section will have classics of the following four automatically generated sections:===Acceptance Record===You will need to indicate the acceptance history philosophy of science are a great resource for this section. Also check the definition following the instructions given===All Theories===This part is compiled using information entered with proposes modificationsreferences cited in respective scientonomic literature.===Accepted Theories======Suggested Modifications===

A definition This section of the article will be collapsed upon a reader’s entry to the webpage, so they will have two automatic sections; an '''Acceptance Record''', and '''Suggestions to Reject'''click to expand this section if they want access to this pre-historical information on the subject.

== History ==   For topics, it will include four sections automatically compiled by The goal of this section is to outline developments in the wiki, topic within the ''scientonomic'' context. Large chunks of this section are generated by the encyclopedia automatically. This includes ''Acceptance Record''', a list of '''All Theories'', ''Accepted Theories'' that have attempted to answer the question,   The process of tracking these changes will be described first by highlighting the open question that the change resolved, as well as who proposed that change and in what year''Suggested Modifications''. You will also mention proposed changes that were Authors are only required to provide additional information if the automatically generated tables are not acceptedsufficient. Also, as well as the reason why. An example it is often helpful to provide a few line summary of the content expected major transitions in this section would be our scientonomic views on the case of Rory Harder’s proposed change to [[The Zeroth Law|the zeroth law]]topic. You would begin by stating For example, the problem with the zeroth law prior to 2013. You would then describe the proposed solution (the change from ''consistencyHistory'' to ''compatibility''). Make sure to cite any references needed, according to the instructions given section of [[Guidelines:Citations|hereMechanism of Method Employment]]. Typically, in this section, citations will be to topic page explains how Barseghyan's ''Laws original formulation of Scientific Change'' or the third law was deficient and came to articles in the ''Journal of Scientonomy'be replaced by Sebastien's formulation. Even if If there have been no changes made to your topic since on the TSC was first proposed, you still need to include in this section a definition of your topic as it was first proposed in the TSC (along the lines of "In 2013scientonomic context, Barseghyan initially proposed <nowiki> [insert topic] as being/stating/claiming [insert definition]</nowiki>"). For cases where no changes have been made since the TSC's initial proposal, we realize then it is quite likely that this section will look almost identical to what you write in the opening of the Current View section and Introductionbe rather short. However, we We anticipate in future years the ''Current View'' (and subsequently the ''Introduction'') of our accepted theories on any given topic will change frequently, and thus the ''History '' section will serve its purpose of showing how the now-changed axiom or theorem was originally formulated. For a sample article see [[Scientific Mosaic]]these transitions took place.

In By default this section, you will re-state the current definition of currently accepted theory on the subject, going into more detail than was allowed in topic; this is generated by the introductory section. You will also state system automatically from the definition acceptance record of all terms associated with your article subject, insofar as they are required to fully understand it. If you need to cite references, follow the instructions [[Guidelines:Citations|here]]. == Open Questions == In the current, semantic version of scientowiki, the wiki compiles a list of all the questions pertaining to your subject and indicates those that have not yet been solved. In order for the software to make this compilation, when entering a topic, you must indicate parent topics and related topics. When entering a respective theory, you must indicate the questions that the theory aims to solve. The semantic wiki can then make the needed compilations and will track all attempts made to solve each question. This section should include in its compilation any relevant open questions that have been entered. If it does not, please make any needed changes to those entries. The editors keep track of all open questions raised in the seminar and other discussions and upload the questions weekly Sometimes authors may want to the [[List of Open Questions]]. Make this your second stop as a resource for open questions relevant add some additional content to your topic. Note that in order to qualify as an open question, a questions needs to be discussed in a paper or, at minimum, be raised in the seminarautomatically generated content. Please make sure that all the open questions are properly referenced to respective papers or iterations of the seminar.  This section should display a list of questions in bullet point form. For example:=== Question 1 === Formulation of the question.* Solution [x] proposed by [author 1] only do so if there is no longer pursued. * Solution [y] proposed by [author 2] is still being pursued. === Question 2 ===Formulation an important piece of the question.* No solutions have been proposed at this point; the question remains openinformation not rendered automatically.

This section is meant to help direct readers of the Wiki encyclopedia to other relevant information on your topic. If you have made the proper entries for related topics the semantic Wiki will compile this list automatically. For example, an article on the definition of [[Theory]] might list [[Theory Acceptance]] as a related article. Please make changes as needed to ensure that the proper listing is automatically compiled. == Notes ==This section is similar to a Wikipedia article’s Notes section. You can collect all of your footnotes here. 

<div class="user-block">= References ==Please make sure to cite any references that you use, carefully following the [[FileGuidelines:Bulbgraph.png|18pxCitations|Note|link=citation guidelines]] '''Note:''' While it might be tempting to include many examples to help illustrate the definition of your topic (for example, illustrating the third law means of by describing the transition from the Aristotelian-Medieval to the Hypothetico-Deductive method). We would ask that you minimize the use inclusion of examples in your article. While they do serve the purpose of reifying the utility of whatever axiom or theorem you are writing about, that role is largely served by the respective books and articles. If you do feel the need to provide an example or historical case, please keep it brief or reference it only superficially (for example, "The third law has proven effective in explaining such historical cases as the transition from the Aristotelian-Medieval method to the Hypothetico-Deductive method." and leave it at that). Remember, the role of the Encyclopedia is not to mount an argument as to the effectiveness of the TSC. It is only meant to be an efficient resource for those looking for concise and up-to-date information about the TSC.</div>