From 4397a657e67a721eb852b3f3dd4d540aac9afc86 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Lyudmila Vaseva <vaseva@mi.fu-berlin.de>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 11:19:45 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Think about T's feedback

---
 thesis/2-Background.tex | 3 +++
 todo                    | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/thesis/2-Background.tex b/thesis/2-Background.tex
index 2856fd6..2d67561 100644
--- a/thesis/2-Background.tex
+++ b/thesis/2-Background.tex
@@ -190,6 +190,9 @@ removed the third vandal fighter's now-obsolete report."
 
 \section{Semi-automated tools}
 
+Semi-automated tools are similar to bots in the sense that they provide automated detection of potential low-quality edits.
+The difference however is that with semi-automated tools humans do the final assessment and decide what happens with the edits in question.
+
 Semi-automated tools used for vandalism fighting on Wikipedia are discussed by:
 more popular/widely used:
 STiki~\cite{WestKanLee2010}
diff --git a/todo b/todo
index 77616a3..52513cc 100644
--- a/todo
+++ b/todo
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
 * filters: BEFORE an edit is published; everything else: AFTER
 * filters: REGEX!
 * die wichtigsten erkenntnisse mehrmals erwähnen: intro, schluss, tralala; nicht dass sie unter gehen weil ich von lautern Bäumen den Wald nicht mehr sehe
-* do bots check also entire article text and not only single edits? as a clever person with malicious intentions I could split my malicious stuff into several edits to make it more difficult to discover
+* do bots check also entire article text and not only single edits? as a clever person with malicious intentions I could split my malicious stuff into several edits to make it more difficult to discover -- unklar. ich hab das gefühl, die sind schon edit-basiert
 
 
 # Papers I still want to read
-- 
GitLab