Draft:Angela Potochnik: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:04, 22 November 2024

Review waiting, please be patient.

This may take 8 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 1,821 pending submissions waiting for review.

If the submission is accepted, then this page will be moved into the article space.
If the submission is declined, then the reason will be posted here.
In the meantime, you can continue to improve this submission by editing normally.

Where to get help

If you need help editing or submitting your draft, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. These venues are only for help with editing and the submission process, not to get reviews.
If you need feedback on your draft, or if the review is taking a lot of time, you can try asking for help on the talk page of a relevant WikiProject. Some WikiProjects are more active than others so a speedy reply is not guaranteed.

How to improve a draft

Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia – a basic overview on how to edit Wikipedia.
Help:Wikitext – how to use the markup
Help:Referencing for beginners – how to include references
Wikipedia:Article development – how to develop your article
Wikipedia:Writing better articles – how to improve your article
Wikipedia:Verifiability – make sure your article includes reliable third-party sources

You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article.

Improving your odds of a speedy review

To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags.

Add tags to your draft

Editor resources

Easy tools: Citation bot (help) | Advanced: Fix bare URLs

Reviewer tools

Instructions · What links here · Angela Potochnik (talk: + · bio) · (log) · Copyvios report · reFill · Citation Bot · (Search: Google, Wikipedia) · Submitted 38 days ago by MountainDew512 (talk: D · +) · Last edited 32 days ago by 129.137.96.16

Submission declined on 12 October 2024 by KylieTastic (talk).

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you have not resolved the issues listed above, your draft will be declined again and potentially deleted.
If you need extra help, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors.
Please do not remove reviewer comments or this notice until the submission is accepted.

Where to get help

If you need help editing or submitting your draft, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. These venues are only for help with editing and the submission process, not to get reviews.
If you need feedback on your draft, or if the review is taking a lot of time, you can try asking for help on the talk page of a relevant WikiProject. Some WikiProjects are more active than others so a speedy reply is not guaranteed.

How to improve a draft

Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia – a basic overview on how to edit Wikipedia.
Help:Wikitext – how to use the markup
Help:Referencing for beginners – how to include references
Wikipedia:Article development – how to develop your article
Wikipedia:Writing better articles – how to improve your article
Wikipedia:Verifiability – make sure your article includes reliable third-party sources

You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article.

Improving your odds of a speedy review

To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags.

Add tags to your draft

Editor resources

Easy tools: Citation bot (help) | Advanced: Fix bare URLs

Declined by KylieTastic 2 months ago. Last edited by 129.137.96.16 32 days ago. Reviewer: Inform author.

This draft has been resubmitted and is currently awaiting re-review.

Angela Potochnik is Professor of Philosophy, Head of the Philosophy Department, Founder, and Director of the Center for Public Engagement with Science at the University of Cincinnati^[1]^[2]. Her research addresses the nature of science and its successes, the relationships between science and the public, and methods in science, especially biology. She is the author of Idealization and the Aims of Science (2017)^[3] and Science and the Public (2024)^[4] and coauthor of Recipes for Science: an introduction to scientific methods and reasoning (2018, 2nd Ed. 2024)^[5]. She earned her PhD from Stanford University in 2007.

Publications

Potochnik, A. (2017). Idealization and the Aims of Science. University of Chicago Press.
Potochnik, A., & McGill, B. (2012). The limitations of hierarchical organization. Philosophy of Science, 79(1), 120-140.
Potochnik, A. (2015). The diverse aims of science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 53, 71-80.
Potochnik, A. (2010). Levels of explanation reconceived. Philosophy of science, 77(1), 59-72.
Potochnik, A. (2015). Causal patterns and adequate explanations. Philosophical Studies, 172, 1163-1182.
Potochnik, A. (2010). Explanatory independence and epistemic interdependence: A case study of the optimality approach. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.
Potochnik, A. (2007). Optimality modeling and explanatory generality. Philosophy of Science, 74(5), 680-691.
Potochnik, A. (2020). Idealization and many aims. Philosophy of science, 87(5), 933-943.
Potochnik, A. (2016). Scientific explanation: Putting communication first. Philosophy of Science, 83(5), 721-732.
Potochnik, A. (2009). Optimality modeling in a suboptimal world. Biology & Philosophy, 24, 183-197.
Potochnik, A. (2021). Our world isn't organized into levels.
Potochnik, A., & Sanches de Oliveira, G. (2020). Patterns in cognitive phenomena and pluralism of explanatory styles. Topics in Cognitive Science, 12(4), 1306-1320.
Potochnik, A. (2011). A Neurathian conception of the unity of science. Erkenntnis, 74, 305-319.
Potochnik, A., & Yap, A. (2006). Revisiting Galison's 'Aufbau/Bauhaus' in light of Neurath's philosophical projects. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 37(3), 469-488.
Potochnik, A., Colombo, M., & Wright, C. (2018). Recipes for science: an introduction to scientific methods and reasoning. Routledge.
Potochnik, A. (2024). Science and the Public. Elements in the Philosophy of Science.

References

^ "People + Partners". UC Center for Public Engagement with Science. April 12, 2019.
^ "UC Center for Public Engagement with Science". UC Center for Public Engagement with Science. November 5, 2024.
^ Potochnik, Angela. Idealization and the Aims of Science. University of Chicago Press.
^ Potochnik, Angela (March 16, 2024). "Science and the Public". Elements in the Philosophy of Science. doi:10.1017/9781009049474. ISBN 978-1-009-04947-4 – via www.cambridge.org.
^ "Recipes for Science: An Introduction to Scientific Methods and Reasoning". Routledge & CRC Press.

[1] "People + Partners". UC Center for Public Engagement with Science. April 12, 2019.

[2] "UC Center for Public Engagement with Science". UC Center for Public Engagement with Science. November 5, 2024.

[3] Potochnik, Angela. Idealization and the Aims of Science. University of Chicago Press.

[4] Potochnik, Angela (March 16, 2024). "Science and the Public". Elements in the Philosophy of Science. doi:10.1017/9781009049474. ISBN 978-1-009-04947-4 – via www.cambridge.org.

[5] "Recipes for Science: An Introduction to Scientific Methods and Reasoning". Routledge & CRC Press.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 * Potochnik, A. (2011). A Neurathian conception of the unity of science. Erkenntnis, 74, 305-319.
 * Potochnik, A., & Yap, A. (2006). Revisiting Galison's 'Aufbau/Bauhaus' in light of Neurath's philosophical projects. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 37(3), 469-488.
-* Potochnik, A. (2011). Explanation and understanding: An alternative to Strevens' Depth. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 1, 29-38.
 * Potochnik, A., Colombo, M., & Wright, C. (2018). Recipes for science: an introduction to scientific methods and reasoning. Routledge.
-* Dunlap, L., Corris, A., Jacquart, M., Biener, Z., & Potochnik, A. (2021). Divergence of values and goals in participatory research. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 88, 284-291.
 * Potochnik, A. (2024). Science and the Public. Elements in the Philosophy of Science.