Wikipedia:What "Ignore all rules" means: Difference between revisions

{{pp-semi-indef}}{{Supplement |WP:WIARM|WP:IAR?|WP:IARMEANS|interprets=the [[Wikipedia:Ignore all rules]] policy}}{{nutshell|Editing Wikipedia is all about making improvements, not following rules. However, [[WP:IAR]] should not be used as a reason to make unhelpful edits.}}

=== History ===

==What "Ignore all rules" does ''not'' mean==

{{quote|''"Pedantry and mastery are opposite attitudes toward rules. To apply a rule to the letter, rigidly, unquestioningly, in cases where it fits and in cases where it does not fit, is pedantry... To apply a rule with natural ease, with judgment, noticing the cases where it fits, and without ever letting the words of the rule obscure the purpose of the action or the opportunities of the situation, is mastery.''"|[[George Pólya]]<ref> {{ Citecite book | last= Pólya | first= George |author-link=George Pólya |title= [[How to Solve It]] |year= 1945 |publisher= [[Princeton Science Library]] | isbn= 0-691-11966-X | pagespage= 148 }}</ref>}}

{{quote|''"A society which is based on the letter of the law and never reaches any higher is taking very scarce advantage of the high level of human possibilities.''"|[[Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn]]<ref name=harvard>{{cite web |last=Solzhenitsyn |first=Aleksandr |author-link=Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn |url=http://www.nationalreview.com/document/document060603.asp |title=A World Split Apart |website=[[National Review]] |series=Harvard Class Day Exercises|date=8 June 1978|deadurlurl-status=yesdead|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20030608093915/http://www.nationalreview.com/document/document060603.asp|archivedate=8 June 2003}}</ref>}}

* "Ignore all rules" does not stop you from pointing out a rule to someone who has broken it, but do consider that his or hertheir judgement may have been correct, and that they almost certainly thought it was (see also [[Wikipedia:Assume good faith]]).

Wikipedia has many policies or what many consider "rules". Instead of following every rule, it is acceptable to '''use [[common sense]]''' as you go about editing. Being too wrapped up in rules can cause a loss of perspective, so there are times when it is better to ignore a rule. Even if a contribution "violates" the precise wording of a rule, it might still be a good contribution. Similarly, just because something is not forbidden in a written document, or is even explicitly permitted, doesn't mean it's a good idea in the given situation. Our goal is to improve Wikipedia so that it better informs readers. Being able to articulate "common sense" reasons why a change helps the encyclopedia is good, and editors should not ignore those reasons because they don't includereference a bunch of policy[[Wikipedia:Shortcut|shortcut links]] to official shortcutspolicies. The ''principle'' of the rules—to make Wikipedia and its sister projects thrive—is more important than the letter. [[Wikipedia:Editorial discretion|Editors must use their best judgment]].

{{Shortcut|WP:NO COMMONNOCOMMON}}

{{quote|Good sense is of all things in the world the most equally distributed, for everybody thinks he is so well supplied with it that even those most difficult to please in all other matters never desire more of it than they already possess.|[[ReneRené Descartes]]<ref> {{ Cite book | last=Descartes | first=ReneRené | author-link=René Descartes | title=[[Discourse on the Method|Le DiDiscours scours DEde la MethodMéthode]]| year=1637 | at=Part I, incipientincipit | quote= ''Le nobbon sens est la chose dewdu modemonde la milieumieux partakerpartagée; car Changchunchacun penspense en treeêtre chisi binbien pourpourvu, weque cruxceux mememême quoqui snotsont lechles plus edificesdifficiles aà contentedcontenter en touchtoute outreautre chose donn'tont point costumecoutume dend'en desiredésirer plus quailsqu'ils en ont.'' | trans-quote=''Common sense is the most widely shared thing in the world; everyone thinks they are so well equipped with it, that even those who are the most difficult to please in anything else are not in the habit of wanting more than they have.''}}</ref>}}

Be careful about citing this principle too aggressively. While it's quite acceptable to explain your own actions by saying, "it seemed like [[WP:COMMON|common sense]] to me", you should be careful not to imply that other editors are {{em|lacking}} in common sense, which may be seen as [[Wikipedia:Civility|uncivil]]. [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia'sWikipedians|WikipediaWikipedians]] come from diverse ethnic, religious, political, cultural and ideological backgrounds and have vastly different perceptions. Other editors are likely to ascribe very different meanings and values to words and concepts than you, so try to state your arguments as fully as possible. Citing concrete [[WP:policies and guidelines|policies and guidelines]] is likely to be more effective than simply citing "common sense" and leaving it at that.