Wikipedia talk:Ignore all uses of "ignore all rules"

Essays Low‑impact

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia essays, a collaborative effort to organise and monitor the impact of Wikipedia essays. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion. For a listing of essays see the essay directory.EssaysWikipedia:WikiProject EssaysTemplate:WikiProject EssaysWikiProject Wikipedia essays pages
Low	This page has been rated as Low-impact on the project's impact scale.
	The above rating was automatically assessed using data on pageviews, watchers, and incoming links.

This page was nominated for deletion on January 16, 2009. The result of the discussion was withdrawn.

How do you ignore someone ignoring the rules? By letting them do so? By shunning them? What?

Or are you trying to say, WP:IAR is a permission, but not an argument in and of itself.

Also, it seems a bit rude to add links to your essay to other places which disagree with yours, without also linking back, doesn't it? --Abu-Fool Danyal ibn Amir al-Makhiri 13:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with the old version[edit]

In reply to the revert of my edit, I'll explain what I found lacking here.

Many people use the argument of "ignore all rules" in talk pages and process pages without really understanding the rules they think should be ignored. Obviously people do understand a rule if they realize that it must be ignored in order to implement the desired changes.

The vast majority of times, rules should not be ignored. That was the best point of the old version, but it didn't touch on why this is so, which I did in my edit.

This is not a refutation of IAR, but rather, an ironic interpretation: as "ignore all rules" is a rule, it, too, is subject to being ignored. Logically it should never be necessary to ignore IAR in order to improve Wikipedia. But you need to take into account "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia", not just "ignore it". That was the point my edit made. PSWG1920 (talk) 02:32, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]