less popular/older, mentioned in older accounts or not discussed at all (there are also more tools, see for example \url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_counter-vandalism_tools})
In general, previous research seems to make a distinction of degree? between ``more'' automated tools such as Huggle and STiki and ``less'' automated ones such as Twikle~\cite{GeiHal2013}.
Editors seem(check whether for which it's true) seem to need the ``rollback'' permission in order to use these tools(for Huggle:~\cite{HalRied2012}).
Huggle presents a pre-curated queue of edits to the user which can be classified as vandalism by a single mouse click which simultaneously take action accordingly: the edit is reverted, the offending editor is warned.
Moreover, Huggle is able to parse the talk page of the offending user where warnings are placed in order to issue a warning of suitable degree.
%Huggle
Huggle was initially released in 2008~\footnote{\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Huggle}}.
In order to use Huggle, editors need the ``rollback'' permission~\cite{HalRied2012}.
Huggle presents a pre-curated queue of edits to the user which can be classified as vandalism by a single mouse click which simultaneously takes action accordingly: the edit is reverted, the offending editor is warned~\cite{HalRied2012}.
Moreover, Huggle is able to parse the talk page of the offending user where warnings are placed in order to issue a next warning of suitable degree and also makes automated reports to AIV (Administrators Intervention Against Vandalism, explain!) if the user has exhausted the warning limit.
The software uses a set of heuristics for compiling the queue with potentially offending edits.
These are configurable, however, some technical savvy and motivation is need and thus, as~\.. warn, it makes certain paths of action easier to take than others.
According to~\cite{GeiHal2013} Huggle and STiki complement each other in their tasks, with Huggle users making swifter reverts and STiki users taking care of older edits.
%Huggle (note, current version is written in C++/Javascript)
"Huggle, one of the most popular
antivandalism editing tools on
Wikipedia, is written in C\#.NET
and any user can download and
install it. Huggle lets editors roll back
changes with a single mouse click,
but because the tool is so powerful,
rollback permission is restricted to
administrators and a few thousand
other Wikipedia users."
"Huggle makes it easy to review
a series of recent revisions by
filtering them according to the
user’s preferences."~\cite{HalRied2012}
huggle also sends out warnings to the offending editor on revert~\cite{HalRied2012}
\cite{GeiRib2010}
huggle description
"edits are contextually
presented in queues as they are made, and the user can
perform a variety of actions (including revert and warn) with
a single click. The software's built-in queuing mechanism,
which by default ranks edits according to a set of vandalism-
identification algorithms,"
"Users of Huggle's automatic
ranking mechanisms do not have to decide for themselves
which edit they will view next"
huggle's ranking heuristics:
"in the default „filtered" queue, edits that contain a significant removal of content are placed
higher; those that completely replace a page with blank text
are even marked in the queue with a red "X"."
"anonymous users are viewed as more suspicious than
registered users, and edits by bots and Huggle users are not
even viewed at all."
"Users whose edits have been previously
reverted by a number of assisted users are viewed as even
more suspicious, and those who have been left warnings on
their user talk page (a process explained below) are
systematically sent to the top of the queue."
"This edit was placed into the queues of many
Huggle users, as the software prioritizes mass removal of
content by anonymous users who have vandalism warnings
left for them. In fact, a green “1” appeared next to the
article's name in the edit queue, indicating that a first-level
warning had been issued."
"In reporting the anonymous user to
AIV, the Huggle program collected three edits which had been
marked as vandalism in the previously-issued warnings."
"The Huggle software took note of the
fact that a report existed for this user at AIV, and asked the
administrator if he wished to issue a temporary block."
"Yet with four warnings and an active report at AIV, there was
nothing else Huggle could do in the name of this non-
administrator except append this incident of vandalism to his
original report, further attempting to enroll a willing
administrator into the ad-hoc vandal fighting network."
The defaults include placing higher edits containing large removal of content or complete blankings of a page, edits made by anonymous users or users whose edits have been reverted in the past.
Edits by users with warnings on their user talk page are sent to the top of the queue, while edits made by bots and other Huggle users are ignored altogether\cite{GeiRib2010}.
One can reconfigure the queue, however, some technical savvy and motivation is need for this and thus, as~\cite{GeiRib2010} warn, it makes certain paths of action easier to take than others.
%STiki
\cite{WestKanLee2010}
"STiki is an anti-vandalism tool for Wikipedia. Unlike similar tools, STiki does not rely on natural language
processing (NLP) over the article or diff text to locate vandalism"
"STiki leverages spatio-temporal properties of revision metadata."
"The feasibility of utilizing such properties was demonstrated in our prior
work, which found they perform comparably to NLP-efforts while being more efficient, robust to evasion, and
language independent."
STiki was introduced by Andrew G. West in June 2010~\footnote{\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:STiki}}.
Its defining characteristic is relying on ``spatio-temporal properties of revision metadata''~\cite{WestKanLee2010} for deciding the likelihood of an edit to be vandalism.
According to the authors, this makes the tool's vandalism detection more robust and language independent.
One of the following conditions must be fulfilled for an editor to obtain a permission to use STiki:
(1) they must have the rollback permission, or
(2) they must have made at least 1000 article edits, or
(3) they must have obtained a special permission via their talk page~\footnote{\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:STiki}}.
"It consists of, (1) a server-side
processing engine that examines revisions, scoring the likelihood each is vandalism, and, (2) a client-side GUI
that presents likely vandalism to end-users for definitive classiffcation (and if necessary, reversion on
Wikipedia"
According to~\cite{GeiHal2013} Huggle and STiki complement each other in their tasks, with Huggle users making swifter reverts and STiki users taking care of older edits.
%Twinkle
\cite{GeiRib2010}
Twinkle description:
"user interface extension that runs inside
of a standard web browser. Twinkle adds contextual links to
pages in Wikipedia allowing editors to perform complex tasks
with the click of a button – such as rolling back multiple edits
by a single user, reporting a problematic user to
administrators, nominating an article for deletion, and
temporarily blocking a user (for administrators only)."
Twinkle, a javascript based ``user interface extension that runs inside of a standard web browser''~\cite{GeiRib2010} seems to be less automated than the previous tools~\cite{GeiHal2013}.
It adds contextual links to other parts of Wikipedia which facilitates fulfilling particular tasks (rollback multiple edits, report problematic users to AIV, nominate an article for deletion) with a single click~\cite{GeiRib2010}.
A prerequisite for using Twinkle is being an autoconfirmed registered user~\footnote{\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Twinkle}}.
%Lupin's anti-vandal tool
\cite{GeiRib2010}
"provides a real-
time in-browser feed of edits made matching certain
algorithms"
%TODO decide whether to elaborate more via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Twinkle/doc
%Lupin's anti-vandal tool
%VandalProof
\cite{HalRied2012}
"VandalProof, an early cyborg
technology, was a graphical user
interface written in Visual Basic that
let trusted editors monitor article
edits as fast as they happened in
Wikipedia and revert unwanted
contributions in one click."
Older tools which are not much used anymore include Lupin's anti-vandal tool which
``provides a real-time in-browser feed of edits made matching certain algorithms''~\cite{GeiRib2010}
and VandalProof which
``let[s] trusted editors monitor article edits as fast as they happened in Wikipedia and revert unwanted contributions in one click''~\cite{HalRied2012}.
%TODO: Note on collaboration semi-automated tools/edit filters. Maybe not the suitable chapter
\subsection{Bots}
...
...
@@ -322,6 +244,8 @@ AWB, DumbBOT, EmausBot
"“HBC AIV helperbot7” – automatically
removed the third vandal fighter's now-obsolete report."
%Note on collaboration bots/edit filters. Maybe not the suitable chapter
