Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
Select Git revision
  • master default protected
1 result
Blame Permalink
Code owners
Assign users and groups as approvers for specific file changes. Learn more.
20190131-p.md 3.90 KiB

Meetings notes 31.01.2019

My approach

  • describe Status Quo

    • what is an Edit filter?
    • how / why was it introduced?
    • how does it work? (from an editor's perspective; as a MediaWiki extention; Governance process)
    • State of the art on EN Wikipedia: how many filters, how often have they been triggered over the years, etc.
    • QUESTION: What kinds of filters are there: manual labeling <-- Grounded theory? Start with some basic categories and elaborate label system as I go? How do we proceed from there? After finished: go over all the filters again and refine categorisation?

  • evaluation:

    • do filter solve effectively the task they were conjured up to life to fulfil?
    • what kinds of biases/problems are there?
    • who is allowed to edit edit filters?

Discussion during consultation hour

Grounded theory:

  • Used to find out how do people handle a specific phenomenon?

  • Hypothesis are constructed underway

  • Otherwise, (if we start with a main hypothesis) there's danger of distortion and finding over proportionally many examples of our "favourite" sort

  • Suitable for answering questions like: how do things relate to each other?

  • Describing filter functionality is a static enterprise

  • GT is interested in processes/development

    • e.g. the historical development of filters? of the "vandalism" notion in the Wikipedia community (however, we have to ask to what extend is this a question for the computer science)

  • Classification is a basic tool for GT, but we use classification to answer a question, not as an end in itself

    • do not sort everything is small precise drawers!
    • ask yourself: why do I do this work? what do I want to achieve with this categorisation?
    • where are potential problems in this process?: e.g. is a sensible distinction between vandalism and good faith edits even possible?
    • do not dissipate energy on every possible thought and question; think about: what am I interested in? what's my mission? theoretical sensitivity: what interests me; which questions are interesting and where can we potentially unearth interesting previously overlooked phenomenons?
    • define focal points

  • GT is good for tackling controversial questions: e.g. are filters with disallow action a too severe interference with the editing process that has way too much negative consequences? (e.g. driving away new comers?)

  • During research: ask yourself on an ongoing basis: what do I want? why am I doing things?

GT approach to my research

  • What can we study?

    • Discussions on filter patterns? On filter repercussions?
    • Whether filters work the desired way/help for a smoother Wikipedia service or is it a lot of work to maintain them and the usefullness is questionable?

  • Comparison between different language versions can be used for theoretical Sampling: if we have an intuition/suspicion about something, e.g. a notion has very different ideological connotations in different languages/communities; in order to confirm a story..

  • Vandalism and Good faith edits are opposing poles from a social dynamic perspective (Antagonists vs Helpers)

Random questions for me

  • Question: Is it worth it to use a filter which has many side effects?
  • What can we filter with a REGEX? And what not? Are regexes the suitable technology for the means the community is trying to achieve?
  • Can filter editors introduce each filter they feel like introducing? Or is a community consensus due when a new filter is introduced?