diff --git a/thesis/4-Edit-Filters.tex b/thesis/4-Edit-Filters.tex
index 84c99c7e838ccdd2a07aea2a06f1871b46ee82ed..35d4f112dcfd30bc12cfd04ad97c2884686b8de6 100644
--- a/thesis/4-Edit-Filters.tex
+++ b/thesis/4-Edit-Filters.tex
@@ -388,29 +388,26 @@ Concerns | - powerful, can in theory block |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\end{verbatim}
-\subsection{Alternatives}
-%TODO: where should this go? Already kind of mentioned in the introducing a filter part
+\subsection{Alternatives to Edit Filters}
-Since edit filters run against every edit saved on Wikipedia, it is generally adviced against rarely tripped filters and a number of alternatives is signaled to edit filter managers and editors proposing new filters.
-%TODO: number of filters cannot grow endlessly, every edit is checked against all of them and this consumes computing power! (and apparently haven't been chucked with Moore's law). is this the reason why number of filters has been more or less constanst over the years?
-\begin{comment}
-\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_filter/Requested}
-"Each filter takes time to run, making editing (and to some extent other things) slightly slower. The time is only a few milliseconds per filter, but with enough filters that adds up. When the system is near its limit, adding a new filter may require removing another filter in order to keep the system within its limits."
-\end{comment}
+Since edit filters run against every edit saved on Wikipedia, it is generally adviced against rarely tripped filters and a number of alternatives is offered to edit filter managers and editors proposing new filters.
For example, there is the page protection mechanism that addresses problems on a single page.
Also, title and spam blacklists exist and these might be the way to handle problems with page titles or link spam~\cite{Wikipedia:EditFilter}.
+Moreover, it is adviced to run in-depth checks (for single articles) separately, e.g. by using bots~\cite{Wikipedia:EditFilterRequested}.
-%************************************************************************
\subsection{Collaboration with bots (and semi-automated tools)}
-"There is a bot reporting users tripping certain filters at WP:AIV and WP:UAA; you can specify the filters here."
-\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DatBot/filters}
+So far we have juxtaposed the single quality control mechanisms and compared them separetly.
+It is however worth mentioning that they not only operate alongside each other but also cooperate on occasions.
+%TODO see Geiger's paper (banning of a vandal?) where the process of tracing the same malicious editor throughout Wikipedia and reverting their eidts with various tools (and issuing them warnings) leads to the (temporary) block of the editor
-* consider collaborations filters/bots (e.g. MrZ Bot which puts editors found on the abuse log often on the AIV noticeboard.) are there further exampled for this kind of collaborations?
-
-\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism}
-\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/Mr.Z-bot_7}
+For instance, DatBot~\cite{Wikipedia:DatBot} monitors the abuse log\footnote{\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog}}
+and reports users tripping certain filters to WP:AIV (Administrator intervention against vandalism)\footnote{\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism}} and WP:UAA (usernames for administrator attention)\footnote{\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Usernames_for_administrator_attention}}.
+It is the successor of Mr.Z-bot\footnote{\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mr.Z-bot}}.
+which used to report users from the abuse log to WP:AIV, but has been inactive since 2016 and therefore recently deactivated.
+%\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/Mr.Z-bot_7}
+%TODO are there further examples of such collaborations: consider scripting smth that parses the bots descriptions from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:All_Wikipedia_bots and looks for "abuse" and "filter"
Apparently, Twinkle at least has the possibility of using heuristics from the abuse filter log for its queues.
%TODO check. how about other tools
@@ -421,6 +418,8 @@ Apparently, Twinkle at least has the possibility of using heuristics from the ab
(Interesting side note: editing via TOR is disallowed altogether: "Your IP has been recognised as a TOR exit node. We disallow this to prevent abuse" or similar, check again for wording. Compare: "Users of the Tor anonymity network will show the IP address of a Tor "exit node". Lists of known Tor exit nodes are available from the Tor Project's Tor Bulk Exit List exporting tool." \url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism})
\end{comment}
+%************************************************************************
+
\section{Fazit}
%Conclusion, resume, bottom line
diff --git a/thesis/5-Overview-EN-Wiki.tex b/thesis/5-Overview-EN-Wiki.tex
index 6314abfa4c09ed55d1ffaa91f348ad0aa53467bb..7e9d399634794c024d4e454d067ee55c076e4bd2 100644
--- a/thesis/5-Overview-EN-Wiki.tex
+++ b/thesis/5-Overview-EN-Wiki.tex
@@ -213,6 +213,11 @@ owing to quarries we have all the filters that were triggered from the filter lo
data is still not enough for us to talk about a tendency towards introducing more filters (after the initial dip)
+%TODO: number of filters cannot grow endlessly, every edit is checked against all of them and this consumes computing power! (and apparently haven't been chucked with Moore's law). is this the reason why number of filters has been more or less constanst over the years?
+\begin{comment}
+\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_filter/Requested}
+"Each filter takes time to run, making editing (and to some extent other things) slightly slower. The time is only a few milliseconds per filter, but with enough filters that adds up. When the system is near its limit, adding a new filter may require removing another filter in order to keep the system within its limits."
+\end{comment}
\textbf{Most frequently triggered filters for each year:}
10 most active filters per year:
diff --git a/thesis/references.bib b/thesis/references.bib
index 6cd289642d5bfb2bdf2ca313736ff4ef4508590c..205cd1d6bbdde8d26e250241b94ac99746a7171f 100644
--- a/thesis/references.bib
+++ b/thesis/references.bib
@@ -252,6 +252,15 @@
\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism}}
}
+@misc{Wikipedia:DatBot,
+ key = "Wikipedia DatBot",
+ author = {},
+ title = {},
+ year = 2019,
+ note = {Retreived June 12, 2019 from
+ \url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DatBot}}
+}
+
@misc{Wikipedia:DisruptiveEditing,
key = "Wikipedia Disruptive Editing",
author = {},
diff --git a/todo b/todo
index 4a94da35577644c0d6806165f7725fc76c92e573..e381c5c96b9db5be29a1e2918553c0208175e082 100644
--- a/todo
+++ b/todo
@@ -26,6 +26,9 @@ for fun
# Next steps
+* are there further examples of such collaborations: consider scripting smth that parses the bots descriptions from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:All_Wikipedia_bots and looks for "abuse" and "filter"
+* consider adding permalinks with exact revision ID as sources!
+* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_bot_operators
* an idea for the presi/written text: begin and end every part (section/paragraph) with a question: what question do I want to answer here? what question is still open?
* How many of the edit filter managers also run bots. How do they decide in which case to implement a bot and in which a filter?
* Why are there mechanisms triggered before an edit gets published (such as edit filters), and such triggered afterwards (such as bots)? Is there a qualitative difference?