User talk:Leafman

Hi

Hi, we've been in touch via email. I'm just touching base here to establish on-wiki contact. I've mentioned your work on my talk page (this section), and been asked to share it with the Mediation Cabal. This is exciting stuff! -GTBacchus^(talk) 01:58, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting research

I was quite interested to read about your research. It is definitely something I am interested in, as you can see from some of our discussions and brainstorming here.--Filll (talk) 02:01, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I left a note for you at Wikipedia_talk:Mediation_Cabal#Research_in_conflict_resolution, about places where to get some quantity of (anecdotal) data to start with. Drop me a line if you need more, or are looking for more specific data.

I'm not sure where to get quantitative data directly related to conflict resolution from. There have been some papers and presentations on quantitative data in general though, if you need any. Some might be indirectly related.

I'm interested in the topic you are researching from the practical angle of solving everyday problems on wikipedia.

Have you tried signing up for Wikimania as a speaker yet? Some of your older papers look interesting. If you haven't yet, and hurry, you may just be able to slip in.

--Kim Bruning (talk) 05:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I would have presented one of your older papers, as those are still darn interesting, and marked as "can only come if expenses paid". Worst case you spend 60 minutes on it and they say no. I don't know if the submissions system is still open now. You need to learn to act fast. (I know I still do)

Maybe this is irrational, but I would feel awkward getting expenses paid for -- it just seems like the foundation would have better things to spend their money on than grad students ;)

Yes I agree, it is irrational. People always like you when you agree with them, right? ;-) Kidding aside: next year, let the committee decide. I think that you'd likely be able to make a positive contribution, and they should invite you. :-)

In other news: is Wikipedia:Requests for Arbitration better structured for study, perhaps?

And/or how can things be structured better for study purposes? --Kim Bruning (talk) 19:08, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is definitely structured data across RfCs, RfMs, and RfArbs. The issue is the complexity of the data for automatic parsing purposes. It would help (and may help not just for automatic processing, but for readers as well...) would be to have a template that summarized a number of things such as involved parties, mediators/arbitrators, article(s) where dispute occurred, date of dispute, etc. Does this exist for any of the cases? I haven't seen it yet...

Urk. Not that I'm aware of, no. And it doesn't help that I've been introducing the human element wherever possible. <sigh> Sounds like heavy duty handwork. .oO(Gosh, I wonder if we could get some graduate student mad enough to do it for us [*] ). Hmph, I suppose if we could get information together, it should cut down on the amount of work. The only remaining problem is that some cases really take up huge amounts of text. Perhaps we could get a computer to pre-sort on small amounts of text (I know, I know, it introduces bias... but I have no idea how long you intended to work on this, and you might want to be done before your hair turns grey) --Kim Bruning (talk) 12:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC) [*] Moral of the story: never admit to being a graduate student O:-)[reply]

If you have or can get ahold of Skype, it would be great to have a conference call with you, GTBacchus and anyone else interested in this topic. If you just want to use PTSN (regular phone service) I can patch you in as you are in the US. --Filll (talk) 19:21, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possible interview?

Would you consider appearing on [1]? It is easiest with a headset, or you can use a microphone and speakers. It is also possible to do it with a telephone in the US and Canada. I have done it twice so far and it was sort of fun. --Filll (talk) 14:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Filll, I would definitely like to. I've got myself a macbook pro, so there's a mic built in :)

I'm going to be pretty busy until after 4/14. Also, perhaps it would be most useful to have it a joint interview with GTBacchus; I can mention that to him. Let me know how you'd like to schedule it!Leafman (talk) 03:11, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seattle meetup this thursday (6/19)

Hi Leafy, just a reminder that you've signed up to attend the Seattle meetup this Thursday (6/19). This one's going to take place at 7:30PM at Thaiku -- a restaurant\bar in Ballard. See the meetup page to add more agenda items, see attendees, etc. Hope to see you there! Bestchai (talk) 02:29, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interview

Good to hear from you again. I'd be happy to do an interview if you like. Let me know what you have in mind, in-person, email, whatever. --Michael Snow (talk) 23:10, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interview

My sincere apologies for the long delay in my reply; I have been off Wikipedia for a while. Since the meeting I moved down to Tempe, AZ, and haven't really been much on Wikipedia for a few months. I'd be happy to do an interview by phone, if that would be helpful. Again, sorry for the delay in getting back to you on this. --TeaDrinker (talk) 05:13, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Research and RFA

Hi Leafman, Based on your interesting stuff in Buenoa Aires I wondered if you would be interested in a problem area on the Wiki that would benefit from research - see Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship#Admin retention Ϣere SpielChequers 16:16, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! There is definitely some interesting possibilities for researchers to get involved in that work. I've let some of my colleagues know about the demand for research there. Cheers, Leafman (talk) 04:02, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]