Splitting a H/T page
When is it not the same hypothesis or theory anymore?
If there are different H/T versions that make different predictions, i.e. what falsifies one version does not falsify them all, it is time to split that H/T page. This includes creating a new H/T page, editing the old one by cutting out the modifications that creates different predictions, and pasting them into the newly created H/T page.
Having the exact same material copied onto many articles, which may lead to penalties from search engines, is not recommended. Cutting and linking is better than copying and pasting, see below.
Common material that is the basis for both H/Ts may be addressed by leaving them up in the first article and adding links to relevant parts of it in the new article. A short summary of such common material in the new article is advisable for readability of the article. Each H/T page should represent one H/T, with one set of falsifiable predictions that, if falsified, falsifies that H/T. Links to such other versions may be added as "you may also be looking for" at the top of the article.
These functions are also useful when you are creating a new H/T article that is inspired by an earlier hypothesis and/or theory without cutting anything or copying any material. Links to specific parts of another article in select parts of the text in which the linked material further explains what is summarized in the article itself is useful, as may notes that you may also bee looking for something else be at the top of an article.
False hypotheses can inspire correct theories
New H/Ts that are inspired by falsified, false H/Ts but differs from them in regards that makes said falsifications inapplicable, should be written on new H/T pages. These must, by the criterion of falsifiability, make other falsifiable predictions instead. Falsified H/Ts should be marked as false, but left up (i.e. not be deleted) to show that they are false. Knowing that a hypothesis or theory is false is scientific progress that allows science to move on and test new hypotheses and theories that may be true.
False inspirations are not false predictions
It is always important to remember that hypotheses and theories can never be rejected merely because of inspiration from or any similarity with a falsified hypothesis or theory that does not include sharing the same false predictions. This also means that Richard Feynman's criticism of Popper's falsifiability criterion, that falsifiability would kill hypotheses before they have the time to develop into theories, is misframed. In fact, the more developed hypothesis or theory, insofar its falsifiable differs from those of the original hypothesis or theory in any way, is a new, novel hypothesis or theory. Falsificative is decent.