Paradigm

For other uses, see Paradigm (disambiguation). lowing description of the term to Thomas Kuhn's The
Structure of Scientic Revolutions:
In science and philosophy, a paradigm /prdam/ is
a distinct set of concepts or thought patterns, including Kuhn suggests that certain scientic works,
theories, research methods, postulates, and standards for such as Newtons Principia or John Daltons
what constitutes legitimate contributions to a eld. New System of Chemical Philosophy (1808),
provide an open-ended resource: a framework
of concepts, results, and procedures within
which subsequent work is structured. Normal
1 Etymology science proceeds within such a framework or
paradigm. A paradigm does not impose a rigid
See also: paradeigma or mechanical approach, but can be taken more
or less creatively and exibly.[7]
Paradigm comes from Greek (pa-
radeigma), pattern, example, sample[1] from the
verb (paradeiknumi), exhibit, repre- 2 Scientic paradigm
sent, expose[2] and that from (para), beside,
beyond[3] and (deiknumi), to show, to point Main articles: Paradigm shift, Sociology of knowledge,
out.[4] Systemics, Commensurability (philosophy of science),
In rhetoric, paradeigma is known as a type of proof. The and Conrmation holism
purpose of paradeigma is to provide an audience with an See also: Paradigm (experimental) and Scientic con-
illustration of similar occurrences. This illustration is not sensus
meant to take the audience to a conclusion, however it
is used to help guide them there. A personal accountant The Oxford English Dictionary denes the basic mean-
is a good comparison of paradeigma to explain how it is ing of the term paradigm as a typical example or pat-
meant to guide the audience. It is not the job of a personal tern of something; a pattern or model.[8] The historian of
accountant to tell their client exactly what (and what not) science Thomas Kuhn gave it its contemporary meaning
to spend their money on, but to aid in guiding their client when he adopted the word to refer to the set of concepts
as to how money should be spent based on their nan- and practices that dene a scientic discipline at any par-
cial goals. Anaximenes dened paradeigma as, actions ticular period of time. In his book The Structure of Scien-
that have occurred previously and are similar to, or the tic Revolutions (rst published in 1962), Kuhn denes a
opposite of, those which we are now discussing.[5] scientic paradigm as: universally recognized scientic
The original Greek term (paradeigma) was achievements that, for a time, provide model [9] problems
used in Greek texts such as Plato's Timaeus (28A) as the and solutions for a community of practitioners, i.e.,
model or the pattern that the Demiurge (god) used to cre-
ate the cosmos. The term had a technical meaning in the what is to be observed and scrutinized
eld of grammar: the 1900 Merriam-Webster dictionary
denes its technical use only in the context of grammar the kind of questions that are supposed to be asked
or, in rhetoric, as a term for an illustrative parable or fable. and probed for answers in relation to this subject
In linguistics, Ferdinand de Saussure used paradigm to re-
how these questions are to be structured
fer to a class of elements with similarities.
The Merriam-Webster Online dictionary denes this us- what predictions made by the primary theory within
age as a philosophical and theoretical framework of a the discipline
scientic school or discipline within which theories, laws,
and generalizations and the experiments performed in how the results of scientic investigations should be
support of them are formulated; broadly: a philosophi- interpreted
cal or theoretical framework of any kind.[6] how an experiment is to be conducted, and what
The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy attributes the fol- equipment is available to conduct the experiment.

1
2 3 PARADIGM SHIFTS

In The Structure of Scientic Revolutions, Kuhn saw the cault used the terms episteme and discourse, mathesis and
sciences as going through alternating periods of nor- taxinomia, for aspects of a paradigm in Kuhns original
mal science, when an existing model of reality domi- sense.
nates a protracted period of puzzle-solving, and revolu-
tion, when the model of reality itself undergoes sudden
drastic change. Paradigms have two aspects. Firstly,
within normal science, the term refers to the set of ex- 3 Paradigm shifts
emplary experiments that are likely to be copied or em-
ulated. Secondly, underpinning this set of exemplars are Main article: Paradigm shift
shared preconceptions, made prior to and condition-
ing the collection of evidence.[10] These preconceptions
In The Structure of Scientic Revolutions, Kuhn wrote that
embody both hidden assumptions and elements that he
the successive transition from one paradigm to another
describes as quasi-metaphysical;[11] the interpretations of
via revolution is the usual developmental pattern of ma-
the paradigm may vary among individual scientists.[12]
ture science. (p. 12)
Kuhn was at pains to point out that the rationale for the
Paradigm shifts tend to appear in response to the accu-
choice of exemplars is a specic way of viewing reality:
mulation of critical anomalies as well as the proposal of a
that view and the status of exemplar are mutually rein-
new theory with the power to encompass both older rele-
forcing. For well-integrated members of a particular dis-
vant data and explain relevant anomalies. New paradigms
cipline, its paradigm is so convincing that it normally ren-
tend to be most dramatic in sciences that appear to be
ders even the possibility of alternatives unconvincing and
stable and mature, as in physics at the end of the 19th
counter-intuitive. Such a paradigm is opaque, appearing
century. At that time, a statement generally attributed to
to be a direct view of the bedrock of reality itself, and ob-
physicist Lord Kelvin famously claimed, There is noth-
scuring the possibility that there might be other, alterna-
ing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains
tive imageries hidden behind it. The conviction that the
is more and more precise measurement.[16] Five years
current paradigm is reality tends to disqualify evidence
later, Albert Einstein published his paper on special rel-
that might undermine the paradigm itself; this in turn
ativity, which challenged the set of rules laid down by
leads to a build-up of unreconciled anomalies. It is the lat-
Newtonian mechanics, which had been used to describe
ter that is responsible for the eventual revolutionary over-
force and motion for over two hundred years. In this case,
throw of the incumbent paradigm, and its replacement by
the new paradigm reduces the old to a special case in
a new one. Kuhn used the expression paradigm shift (see
the sense that Newtonian mechanics is still a good model
below) for this process, and likened it to the perceptual
for approximation for speeds that are slow compared to
change that occurs when our interpretation of an ambigu-
the speed of light. Many philosophers and historians of
ous image ips over from one state to another.[13] (The
science, including Kuhn himself, ultimately accepted a
rabbit-duck illusion is an example: it is not possible to
modied version of Kuhns model, which synthesizes his
see both the rabbit and the duck simultaneously.) This is
original view with the gradualist model that preceded it.
signicant in relation to the issue of incommensurability
Kuhns original model is now generally seen as too limited
(see below).
.
An example of a currently accepted paradigm would be
Kuhns idea was itself revolutionary in its time, as it
the standard model of physics. The scientic method al-
caused a major change in the way that academics talk
lows for orthodox scientic investigations into phenom-
about science. Thus, it may be that it caused or was itself
ena that might contradict or disprove the standard model;
part of a paradigm shift in the history and sociology
however grant funding would be proportionately more
of science. However, Kuhn would not recognize such a
dicult to obtain for such experiments, depending on the
paradigm shift. Being in the social sciences, people can
degree of deviation from the accepted standard model
still use earlier ideas to discuss the history of science.
theory the experiment would test for. To illustrate the
point, an experiment to test for the mass of neutrinos or
the decay of protons (small departures from the model) is
more likely to receive money than experiments that look 3.1 Paradigm paralysis
for the violation of the conservation of momentum, or
ways to engineer reverse time travel. Perhaps the greatest barrier to a paradigm shift, in
some cases, is the reality of paradigm paralysis: the
Mechanisms similar to the original Kuhnian paradigm inability or refusal to see beyond the current models
have been invoked in various disciplines other than the of thinking.[17] This is similar to what psychologists
philosophy of science. These include: the idea of ma- term Conrmation bias. Examples include rejection
jor cultural themes,[14][15] worldviews (and see below), of Aristarchus of Samos, Copernicus', and Galileo's
ideologies, and mindsets. They have somewhat similar theory of a heliocentric solar system, the discovery of
meanings that apply to smaller and larger scale exam- electrostatic photography, xerography and the quartz
ples of disciplined thought. In addition, Michel Fou- clock.
5.1 Imre Lakatos and research programmes
4 Incommensurability
Kuhn pointed out that it could be dicult to assess
whether a particular paradigm shift had actually led to
progress, in the sense of explaining more facts, explain-
ing more important facts, or providing better explana-
tions, because the understanding of more important,
better, etc. changed with the paradigm. The two ver-
sions of reality are thus incommensurable. Kuhns ver-
sion of incommensurability has an important psychologi-
cal dimension; this is apparent from his analogy between
a paradigm shift and the ip-over involved in some optical
illusions.[18] However, he subsequently diluted his com-
mitment to incommensurability considerably, partly in
the light of other studies of scientic development that did
not involve revolutionary change.[19] One of the examples
of incommensurability that Kuhn used was the change in
the style of chemical investigations that followed the work
of Lavoisier on atomic theory in the late 18th Century.[13]
In this change, the focus had shifted from the bulk prop-
erties of matter (such as hardness, colour, reactivity, etc.)
to studies of atomic weights and quantitative studies of
reactions. He suggested that it was impossible to make
the comparison needed to judge which body of knowl-
edge was better or more advanced. However, this change
in research style (and paradigm) eventually (after more
than a century) led to a theory of atomic structure that
accounts well for the bulk properties of matter; see, for
example, Bradys General Chemistry.[20] According to P
J Smith, this ability of science to back o, move side-
ways, and then advance is characteristic of the natural
sciences,[21] but contrasts with the position in some so-
cial sciences, notably economics.[22] 5.2 Larry Laudan: Dormant anomalies,
This apparent ability does not guarantee that the account
is veridical at any one time, of course, and most modern
philosophers of science are fallibilists. However, mem-
bers of other disciplines do see the issue of incommen-
surability as a much greater obstacle to evaluations of
progress"; see, for example, Martin Slatterys Key Ideas
in Sociology.[23][24]
5 Subsequent developments
Opaque Kuhnian paradigms and paradigm shifts do ex-
ist. A few years after the discovery of the mirror-neurons
that provide a hard-wired basis for the human capacity for
empathy, the scientists involved were unable to identify
the incidents that had directed their attention to the issue.
Over the course of the investigation, their language and
metaphors had changed so that they themselves could no
longer interpret all of their own earlier laboratory notes
and records.[25]
3
5.1 Imre Lakatos and research pro-
grammes
However, many instances exist in which change in a disci-
plines core model of reality has happened in a more evo-
lutionary manner, with individual scientists exploring the
usefulness of alternatives in a way that would not be possi-
ble if they were constrained by a paradigm. Imre Lakatos
suggested (as an alternative to Kuhns formulation) that
scientists actually work within research programmes.[26]
In Lakatos sense, a research programme is a sequence
of problems, placed in order of priority. This set of pri-
orities, and the associated set of preferred techniques, is
the positive heuristic of a programme. Each programme
also has a negative heuristic; this consists of a set of fun-
damental assumptions that temporarily, at least takes
priority over observational evidence when the two appear
to conict.
This latter aspect of research programmes is inher-
ited from Kuhns work on paradigms, and represents
an important departure from the elementary account of
how science works. According to this, science pro-
ceeds through repeated cycles of observation, induc-
tion, hypothesis-testing, etc., with the test of consistency
with empirical evidence being imposed at each stage.
Paradigms and research programmes allow anomalies to
be set aside, where there is reason to believe that they
arise from incomplete knowledge (about either the sub-
stantive topic, or some aspect of the theories implicitly
used in making observations.
fading credibility, and research tradi-
tions
Larry Laudan[27] has also made two important contribu-
tions to the debate. Laudan believed that something akin
to paradigms exist in the social sciences (Kuhn had con-
tested this, see below); he referred to these as research
traditions. Laudan noted that some anomalies become
dormant, if they survive a long period during which no
competing alternative has shown itself capable of resolv-
ing the anomaly. He also presented cases in which a dom-
inant paradigm had withered away because its lost credi-
bility when viewed against changes in the wider intellec-
tual milieu.
6 In social sciences
Kuhn himself did not consider the concept of paradigm
as appropriate for the social sciences. He explains in his
preface to The Structure of Scientic Revolutions that he
developed the concept of paradigm precisely to distin-
guish the social from the natural sciences. While visiting
the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences
4 7 OTHER USES

in 1958 and 1959, surrounded by social scientists, he ob- most standard and widely held at a given time. Dominant
served that they were never in agreement about the nature paradigms are shaped both by the communitys cultural
of legitimate scientic problems and methods. He ex- background and by the context of the historical moment.
plains that he wrote this book precisely to show that there The following are conditions that facilitate a system of
can never be any paradigms in the social sciences. Mattei thought to become an accepted dominant paradigm:
Dogan, a French sociologist, in his article Paradigms in
the Social Sciences, develops Kuhns original thesis that Professional organizations that give legitimacy to the
there are no paradigms at all in the social sciences since paradigm
the concepts are polysemic, involving the deliberate mu-
tual ignorance between scholars and the proliferation of Dynamic leaders who introduce and purport the
schools in these disciplines. Dogan provides many ex- paradigm
amples of the non-existence of paradigms in the social
sciences in his essay, particularly in sociology, political Journals and editors who write about the system of
science and political anthropology. thought. They both disseminate the information es-
However, both Kuhns original work and Dogans com- sential to the paradigm and give the paradigm legit-
mentary are directed at disciplines that are dened by imacy
conventional labels (such as well as sociology). While
Government agencies who give credence to the
it is true that such broad groupings in the social sciences
paradigm
are usually not based on a Kuhnian paradigm, each of
the competing sub-disciplines may still be underpinned Educators who propagate the paradigms ideas by
by a paradigm, research programme, research tradition, teaching it to students
and/ or professional imagery. These structures will be
motivating research, providing it with an agenda, den- Conferences conducted that are devoted to dis-
ing what is and is not anomalous evidence, and inhibiting cussing ideas central to the paradigm
debate with other groups that fall under the same broad
disciplinary label. (A good example is provided by the Media coverage
contrast between Skinnerian behaviourism and Personal
Construct Theory (PCT) within psychology. The most Lay groups, or groups based around the concerns of
signicant of the many ways these two sub-disciplines of lay persons, that embrace the beliefs central to the
psychology dier concerns meanings and intentions. In paradigm
PCT, they are seen as the central concern of psychology;
Sources of funding to further research on the
in behaviourism, they are not scientic evidence at all, as
paradigm
they cannot be directly observed.)
Such considerations explain the conict between the
Kuhn/ Dogan view, and the views of others (including
Larry Laudan, see above), who do apply these concepts
7 Other uses
to social sciences.
The word paradigm is also still used to indicate a pattern
Handa,[28] M.L. (1986) introduced the idea of social
or model or an outstandingly clear or typical example or
paradigm in the context of social sciences. He identied
archetype. The term is frequently used in this sense in
the basic components of a social paradigm. Like Kuhn,
the design professions. Design Paradigms or archetypes
Handa addressed the issue of changing paradigm; the pro-
comprise functional precedents for design solutions. The
cess popularly known as "paradigm shift". In this respect,
best known references on design paradigms are Design
he focused on social circumstances that precipitate such
Paradigms: A Sourcebook for Creative Visualization, by
a shift and the eects of the shift on social institutions,
Wake, and Design Paradigms by Petroski.
including the institution of education. This broad shift in
the social arena, in turn, changes the way the individual This term is also used in cybernetics. Here it means (in
perceives reality. a very wide sense) a (conceptual) protoprogram for re-
ducing the chaotic mass to some form of order. Note the
Another use of the word paradigm is in the sense of
similarities to the concept of entropy in chemistry and
"worldview". For example, in social science, the term
physics. A paradigm there would be a sort of prohibition
is used to describe the set of experiences, beliefs and
to proceed with any action that would increase the total
values that aect the way an individual perceives real-
entropy of the system. To create a paradigm requires a
ity and responds to that perception. Social scientists have
closed system that accepts changes. Thus a paradigm can
adopted the Kuhnian phrase paradigm shift to denote
only apply to a system that is not in its nal stage.
a change in how a given society goes about organizing
and understanding reality. A dominant paradigm refers Beyond its use in the physical and social sciences, Kuhns
to the values, or system of thought, in a society that are paradigm concept has been analysed in relation to its
applicability in identifying 'paradigms with respect to
 5

worldviews at specic points in history. One exam- Mindset

ple is Matthew Edward Harris book The Notion of Pa-
pal Monarchy in the Thirteenth Century: The Idea of Set (psychology)
Paradigm in Church History.[29] Harris stresses the pri-
marily sociological importance of paradigms, pointing Schema (psychology)
towards Kuhns second edition of The Structure of Sci-
Basic beliefs
entic Revolutions. Although obedience to popes such as
Innocent III and Boniface VIII was widespread, even writ-
ten testimony from the time showing loyalty to the pope
does not demonstrate that the writer had the same world- 9 References
view as the Church, and therefore pope, at the centre. The
dierence between paradigms in the physical sciences
and in historical organisations such as the Church is that
9.1 Citations
the former, unlike the latter, requires technical expertise
[1] , Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A
rather than repeating statements. In other words, after Greek-English Lexicon, on Perseus Digital Library
scientic training through what Kuhn calls 'exemplars',
one could not genuinely believe that, to take a trivial ex- [2] , Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A
ample, the earth is at, whereas thinkers such as Giles Greek-English Lexicon, on Perseus Digital Library
of Rome in the thirteenth century wrote in favour of
the pope, then could easily write similarly glowing things [3] , Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-
about the king. A writer such as Giles would have wanted English Lexicon, on Perseus Digital Library
a good job from the pope; he was a papal publicist. How-
[4] , Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-
ever, Harris writes that 'scientic group membership is
English Lexicon, on Perseus Digital Library
not concerned with desire, emotions, gain, loss and any
idealistic notions concerning the nature and destiny of [5] Sampley, J. Paul (2003). Paul in the Greco-Roman World:
humankind...but simply to do with aptitude, explanation, A Handbook. Trinity Press International. pp. 228229.
[and] cold description of the facts of the world and the ISBN 9781563382666.
universe from within a paradigm'.[30]
[6] paradigm - Denition from the Merriam-Webster Online
Dictionary

8 See also [7] Blackburn, Simon, 1994, 2005, 2008, rev. 2nd ed. The
Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford Uni-
Concept versity Press. ISBN 0-19-283134-8. Description & 1994
letter-preview links.
Conceptual framework
[8] Paradigm denition from Oxford English Dictionary On-
Conceptual schema line

Contextualism [9] The Structure of Scientic Revolution, Kuhn, Thomas

S. The Structure of Scientic Revolutions, 3rd edition.
Dogma Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996. page 10

Heuristic [10] Kuhn, T S (1970) The Structure of Scientic Revolutions

(2nd Edition) University of Chicago Press. Section V,
Perspectivism pages 43-51. ISBN 0-226-45804-0.
Programming paradigm [11] Kuhn, T S (1970) The Structure of Scientic Revolutions.
(2nd Edition) University of Chicago Press. Pages 88 and
The history of the various paradigms in evolutionary
41, respectively.
biology (Wikiversity)
[12] Kuhn, T S (1970) The Structure of Scientic Revolutions.
Metanarrative
(2nd Edition) University of Chicago Press. Page 44.
Methodology
[13] Kuhn, T S (1970) The Structure of Scientic Revolutions.
Poststructuralism (2nd Edition) University of Chicago Press. Page 85.

World view [14] Benedict, R (1971) Patterns of Culture. Routledge and

Kegan Paul.
Mental model
[15] Spradley, J (1979)The Ethnographic Interview. Harcourt
Mental representation Brace Jovanovich.
6 9 REFERENCES

[16] The attribution of this statement to Lord Kelvin is given in 9.2 Sources
a number of sources, but without citation. It is reputed to
be Kelvins remark made in an address to the British As- Clarke, Thomas and Clegg, Stewart (eds). Changing
sociation for the Advancement of Science in 1900. See Paradigms. London: HarperCollins, 2000. ISBN 0-
the article on Lord Kelvin for additional details and refer- 00-638731-4
ences.
Handa, M. L. (1986) Peace Paradigm: Transcend-
[17] Do you suer from paradigm paralysis?
ing Liberal and Marxian Paradigms Paper pre-
[18] Kuhn, T S (1970) The Structure of Scientic Revolutions sented in International Symposium on Science,
(2nd Edition) University of Chicago Press. Page 85. Technology and Development, New Delhi, India,
[19] Haack, S (2003) Defending Science within reason: be-
March 2025, 1987, Mimeographed at O.I.S.E.,
tween scientism and cynicism. Prometheus Books. ISBN University of Toronto, Canada (1986)
978-1-59102-458-3.
Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientic Rev-
[20] Brady, J E (1990). General Chemistry: Principles and olutions, 3rd Ed. Chicago and London: Univ.
Structure. (5th Edition.) John Wiley and Sons. of Chicago Press, 1996. ISBN 0-226-45808-3 -
Google Books Aug. 2011
[21] Smith, P J (2011) The Reform of Economics. Taw Books.
ISBN 978-0-9570697-0-1. Page 129. Masterman, Margaret, The Nature of a Paradigm,
[22] Smith, P J (2011) The Reform of Economics. Taw Books. pp. 5989 in Imre Lakatos and Alan Musgrave.
Chapter 7. Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge:
Cambridge Univ. Press, 1970. ISBN 0-521-09623-
[23] Slattery, Martin (2003). Key ideas in sociology. OCLC 5
Number: 52531237. Cheltenham : Nelson Thornes. pp.
151, 152, 153, 155. ISBN 978-0-7487-6565-2. Encyclopdia Britannica, Univ. of Chicago, 2003,
[24] Nickles, Thomas (December 2002). Thomas Kuhn. ISBN 0-85229-961-3
Cambridge University Press. pp. 1, 2, 3, 4.
Dogan, Mattei., Paradigms in the Social Sciences,
doi:10.2277/0521792061. ISBN 978-0-521-79206-6.
Thomas Kuhn (19221996), the author of The Structure in International Encyclopedia of the Social and Be-
of Scientic Revolutions, is probably the best-known and havioral Sciences, Volume 16, 2001)
most inuential historian and philosopher of science of
JSTOR: British Journal of Sociology of Education:
the last 25 years, and has become something of a cultural
icon. His concepts of paradigm, paradigm change and in- Vol. 13, No. 1 (1992), pp. 131-143. Retrieved
commensurability have changed the way we think about 2007-06-18.
science.
The Fourth Paradigm: Data-Intensive Scientic
[25] Iacoboni, M. (2008), Mirroring People: The New Sci- Discovery, Microsoft Research, 2009, ISBN 978-
ence of How We Connect with Others. Farrar, Straus and 0-9825442-0-4 http://fourthparadigm.org
Giroux. Page 17.
Harris, Matthew Edward. The Notion of Papal
[26] [16] Lakatos, I. (1970), Falsication and the Methodol- Monarchy in the Thirteenth Century: The Idea of
ogy of Scientic Research Programmes, in Lakatos, I. and
Paradigm in Church History. Lampeter and Lewis-
Musgrave, A. (eds.) (1990), Criticism and the Growth of
ton, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 2010. ISBN 978-0-
Knowledge. Cambridge.
7734-1441-9
[27] Laudan, L. (1977), Progress and Its Problems: Towards
a Theory of Scientic Growth. University of California Popper, Karl. The Logic of Scientic Discovery,
Press, Berkeley. 1934 (as Logik der Forschung, English translation
1959), ISBN 0-415-27844-9.
[28] Handa, M. L. (1986) Peace Paradigm: Transcend-
ing Liberal and Marxian Paradigms. Paper presented
in International Symposium on Science, Technology
and Development, New Delhi, India, March 2025,
1987, Mimeographed at O.I.S.E., University of Toronto,
Canada (1986)
[29] Harris, Matthew (2010). The notion of papal monarchy
in the thirteenth century : the idea of paradigm in church
history. Lewiston, N.Y.: Edwin Mellen Press. p. 160.
ISBN 978-0-7734-1441-9.
[30] Harris, Matthew (2010). The notion of papal monarchy
in the thirteenth century : the idea of paradigm in church
history. Lewiston, N.Y.: Edwin Mellen Press. p. 118.
ISBN 978-0-7734-1441-9.
 7

10 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

10.1 Text
Paradigm Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm?oldid=764049845 Contributors: The Anome, Heron, Stevertigo, Bdesham,
Michael Hardy, Nixdorf, BoNoMoJo (old), Tgeorgescu, CesarB, Card~enwiki, Ahoerstemeier, Stan Shebs, Angela, Glenn, AugPi, Timwi,
Prumpf, Markhurd, Banno, Robbot, Jmabel, Baldhur, Goethean, Conrad Leviston~enwiki, Marc Venot, Mikeroodeus, Dissident, Ben-
saccount, WHEELER, Sundar, Darrien, Andycjp, Yardcock, Sh~enwiki, JimWae, Sam Hocevar, Joyous!, Adashiel, Guppynsoup, Chris
Howard, Maksym Ye., Antaeus Feldspar, Bender235, Bayang, Kjoonlee, Kwamikagami, Shanes, RoyBoy, Peter Greenwell, Bobo192,
DJ Ecto, PWilkinson, Mdd, Lysdexia, Alansohn, LtNOWIS, Caesura, Wtmitchell, Melaen, Maqs, Sciurin, Richwales, Ott, Skeejay,
Hojimachong, Novacatz, Mjpotter, Sburke, Kzollman, MGTom, Bunthorne, TotoBaggins, Ralpedia, Spwicy, Paullb, Dysepsion, Mana
Excalibur, Phileas, Quiddity, FlaBot, Truman Burbank, Le Anh-Huy, BMF81, YurikBot, Bhny, Qwertzy2, Ksyrie, Chaos, LandoSr, Aeu-
soes1, Ragesoss, Retired username, GracieLizzie, M3taphysical, Haemo, BazookaJoe, Arthur Rubin, Bondegezou, Spliy, Allens, Ageless,
SmackBot, Lcarsdata, Unyoyega, Bomac, Mmeri, Eskimbot, Spilla, LinguistAtLarge, EncMstr, MalafayaBot, Silent SAM, Sbharris, Can't
sleep, clown will eat me, Snowmanradio, Xyzzyplugh, Kazov, RandomP, Kotjze, Shushruth, Acdx, Ugur Basak Bot~enwiki, Ceoil, Sasha-
toBot, Ehheh, Optakeover, Mere Mortal, JForget, CmdrObot, Wikifried, WATP, El aprendelenguas, Shandris, Gregbard, HalJor, Cyde-
bot, Khatru2, Anthonyhcole, Tawkerbot4, SteveMcCluskey, Lindsay658, Thenode, Thijs!bot, Brokenbeaker, Wompa99, Cosuna, Odon-
caoa, AntiVandalBot, Cacahuate, Doc Tropics, DekuDekuplex, Deective, EmersonLowry, Penubag, Magioladitis, Daniel Cordoba-Bahle,
Chrisdel, Caesarjbsquitti, Cpl Syx, Drewcifer3000, Edward321, Shadowrep, MartinBot, KarBOT, CommonsDelinker, Mike.lifeguard,
NerdyNSK, Penguinwithin, Carolfrog, Belovedfreak, DadaNeem, Laager, JavierMC, Landrumkelly, Barnham, ABF, Macedonian, Alnok-
taBOT, Someguy1221, Piperh, Mardhil, PDFbot, Jvbishop, Modocc, Andrewaskew, Andy Dingley, Sylent, Zeugitai, Kafkasmurat, Ro-
muald Wrblewski, Enkyo2, Danielloyw, SieBot, WereSpielChequers, Dinglu14, OKBot, Abmcdonald, Martarius, ClueBot, Der Golem,
Maresa.zingo, Niceguyedc, Orthoepy, Lbertolotti, Heathbellfanatic, Jusdafax, Goodone121, Eeekster, Eustress, Editor2020, DumZiBoT,
RMFan1, XLinkBot, Gerhardvalentin, Dr sign, Framistan, Addbot, MrOllie, Baboon126, Tide rolls, Lightbot, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Pt-
botgourou, TaBOT-zerem, Amirobot, Nallimbot, A Stop at Willoughby, AnomieBOT, CurtisOrr, Crecy99, Materialscientist, Ndawes,
Citation bot, La comadreja, Capricorn42, BurntSynapse, Hanberke, Almabot, Omnipaedista, SassoBot, Mathonius, The Wiki ghost, Fres-
coBot, LucienBOT, Elcidia, Steve Quinn, Meaghan, Mehrunes Dagon, Jordgette, CostaPPPR, Etincelles, Dinamik-bot, LilyKitty, DASH-
Bot, J36miles, EmausBot, Cognaq, Helenetvnguyen, Yt95, F, Josve05a, Alpha Quadrant (alt), Elektrik Shoos, Ocaasi, Staszek Lem,
L Kensington, Lorem Ip, Mr man1951, Rangoon11, Jlofgren3, ClueBot NG, JimsMaher, K33K5, Snotbot, Widr, Helpful Pixie Bot,
BG19bot, Toyoda.fengtian.pungjeon, ElphiBot, CitationCleanerBot, Mdann52, QurantaVG, Dexbot, Etchacan, Mr. Guye, Lugia2453,
Frosty, AeroByte, Debouch, Dave1989en, Bryanandrews, Shankers1, BlueFenixReborn, Azealia911, KasparBot, GNU is alive, Brachney
and Anonymous: 342

10.2 Images
File:Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/48/Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg License: Cc-by-
sa-3.0 Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:Portal-puzzle.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fd/Portal-puzzle.svg License: Public domain Contributors: ?
Original artist: ?
File:Symbol_book_class2.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/Symbol_book_class2.svg License: CC
BY-SA 2.5 Contributors: Mad by Lokal_Prol by combining: Original artist: Lokal_Prol
File:Wiktionary-logo-v2.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/Wiktionary-logo-v2.svg License: CC BY-
SA 4.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Dan Polansky based on work currently attributed to Wikimedia Foundation but originally
created by Smurrayinchester

10.3 Content license

Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0