* 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?
**Computer science focus**
* What's a computer scientist's perspective on this topic? "How can we optimise a system"?
* Maybe talk to 2-3 people from different fields (management? sociology?) and ask them what their interest in the topic would be in order to find own position in contrast to these;
* it could be useful to generate background knowledge and identify potentially interesting literature
