Wikiversity talk:Ignore all rules

From Wikiversity

[edit] Votes

• Contra Mirwin 03:32, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
• Contra Messedrocker 06:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
• Pro --Gau 02:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
• Contra Robert Horning 06:00, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
• Contra Cormaggio 08:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
• Contra --HappyCamper 10:38, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
• Contra -- sebmol ^? 12:09, 20 August 2006 (UTC) Doesn't need to be a policy.
• Contra TimNelson 13:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC) Great idea -- it already exists at everything2.com
• Contra Blast Too much grief on WP; we don't need it here. 11:46 13 March 2007 (UTC)
• Pro--Sir James Paul 05:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comments

• This is neither a policy nor a guideline on Wikipedia, with very good reason! This text is not acceptable here as one of those. Awolf002 01:38, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
• This "rule" was allegedly a joke at Wikipedia a year after project originated. It caused a great deal of problems and undermined the credibility of knowledgeable and regular contributors with newcomers as they tried to welcome newcomers and coach them on community practices. A much better policy would be to point out problems to the project hiearchy and then undertake either changing the problematic areas for the better via due process, negotiating or coordinating an exemption, or ignore the problem (after reporting it) until someone else takes responsibility for fixing it. In a large diverse project (such as we intend to become) policies and guidelines are necessary so people can know how to proceed efficiently. Saddling ourselves with a contradictory rule of no rules so an underinformed newcomer feels comfortable with deleting entire sections of the database on a whim or trolling wiklars as they try to be helpful to others while simultaneously doing serious critical work is very counter productive. We could establish a large sandbox area and let newcomers know there are no rules there in the sandbox .... except this is also quite untrue. We will expect civil behavior in the sandbox; so it is destructive to imply newcomers can kick sand in each others faces in the sandbox and then demand arbitration for the unnecessary strife and conflict this creates when affected people get to the regular project space; as we ardently wish them to for everyone's benefit. Mirwin 03:31, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
• One of the most important pages, but wasn't designed to be policy (it's neither policy nor guideline on Wikipedia, but it's listed as an important page). Messedrocker 06:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

If nobody objects, I will change the text according to the above sentiment. Awolf002 00:20, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. Awolf002 02:34, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

• This advice exists because it encourages the creation of new content, something that is severely needed at Wikiversity at the moment. If we scare away our best potential contributors with loads of seemingly arcane rules right from the beginning, we're going to start with the second string. Furthermore, we're not even really sure of a lot of our policies right now, and like it says, mistakes can be fixed. Oh, and for the record, "wiklars" is a horrible word. --Gau 02:37, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes, but don't we need to be promoting good practice in the generation of good content? I don't think anything here is to restrictive, and we encourage people to be bold. (Also agree that "wiklars" isn't a particularly good name.) Cormaggio 08:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
• I don't want to see this institutionalized here on Wikiversity. It should be apparent and self evident that policies do not codify everything - one simply needs to write that we need to encourage mature and reasonable actions and thinking. Smart Wikipedians would recognize how to do this carefully without it being explicitly written. --HappyCamper 10:38, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
• "Smart Wikipedians would recognize how to do this carefully without it being explicitly written" <-- I agree with this, but I do not think this means that "ignore all rules" should not be written down. Any rule (written or unwritten) can sometimes work against the purpose of the wiki. When that happens, it can be best for the wiki that wiki participants ignore the rule and get on with the business of the wiki. "caused a great deal of problems" <-- Yes, ignoring rules can cause problems. Following rules can cause problems. People look at the problems and select a course that is best for the project. Sometimes people make the wrong choice. Its called being human. It is better to make some mistakes (anything can be reversed in a wiki) than have everyone mindlessly following rules without continually thinking about the impact of those rules on project. When you write down "ignore all rules" it liberates wiki participants acts as a reminder to give human thoughtfulness and judgment a chance to compete with slavish devotion to rules. "wasn't designed to be policy" <-- I really do not care if it is called a guideline, a policy, a stated principle, a safety valve, a friendly reminder, common sense, or uncommon sense. "better policy would be to point out problems" <-- if you want to write a policy called "point out problems", feel free. But remember, working on the wiki project's mission does not require policy and should not be inhibited by rules. "not acceptable here" <-- If this is true, then maybe we should have a policy that says "we slavishly apply rules even when doing so damages the project". "Be bold" <-- I'd rather add "ignore all rules" as a corollary to a policy called "Be cautious". --JWSchmidt 14:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)