Talk:Ignore all rules

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

"Ignore all rules is a tradition in the English Wikipedia. It is embodied in the follow statement:"[edit]

IAR is not phrased "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining a project, ignore it." on I specifically broadened it to apply to all Wikimedia projects. Is there a reason it's being categorized in English Wikipedia if it's in the main namespace? --MZMcBride 01:02, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't know why it was ever changed back to refer to enwiki, but I changed it to refer to all Wikimedia projects and Hillgentleman has reverted me with a reason that makes no sense to me. Given that IAR is a foundational principle in all our communities, his edits baffle me. I think it's clear that the page should once again be changed to refer to all projects, not simply English Wikipedia.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:59, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Mike, I don't know if it has been, but it certainly is not in the current list of foundation issues. And we certainly do not ignore all rules on Meta. For an example, a consensus on Meta is not to snowball (a consequence of ignoring rules) discussions, not even a few minutes early. Hillgentleman 02:14, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
That is not ignoring all rules. Perhaps those who understand the policy should write it.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 00:43, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

founding principles[edit]

IAR has been a founding principle since Larry suggested it long long ago. I reckon it should be added to that page, just as it is in the 5 pillars and a core part of many founding wiki groups. But it would be fascinating to get different perspectives from wp's and other projects where it isn't considered a founding principle. [note that there have also even been small wp's where NPOV isn't considered a founding principle until there's some cross-wiki debate about that] -- sj | help translate |+ 17:41, 9 April 2009 (UTC)