Wikipedia:What "Ignore all rules" means

“ By all means break the rules, and break them beautifully, deliberately and well. That is one of the ends for which they exist. ” — Robert Bringhurst,

You do not need to read any rules before contributing to Wikipedia. If you do what seems sensible, it will usually be right, and if it's not right, don't worry — we all make mistakes. Even the worst mistakes are easy to correct: older versions of a page remain in the revision history and can be restored. If we disagree with your changes, we'll talk about it thoughtfully and politely, and we'll figure out what to do. So don't worry. Be bold, and enjoy helping to build this free encyclopedia.

Despite its name, "Ignore all rules" does not sabotage the other rules. Its purpose is to keep them from sabotaging what we're doing here: building an encyclopedia. Rules have zero importance compared with that goal. Zero. If they aid that goal, good. If they interfere with it, they are instantly negated.

Here are several other things that "Ignore all rules" does and does not mean:

What "Ignore all rules" means

1. You are not required to learn the rules before contributing. Yes, we already said that, but it is worth repeating.
2. Don't follow written instructions mindlessly, but rather, consider how the encyclopedia is improved or damaged by each edit. (See also Wikipedia:Use common sense.)
3. Rules derive their power to compel not from being written down on a page labelled "guideline" or "policy", but from the extent at which such rules contribute to the improvement of Wikipedia as a "free encyclopedia that anyone can edit."
4. Most rules are ultimately prescriptive, not descriptive; they are norms on how Wikipedia ought to work, not necessarily how it actually does, since people are free to ignore such rules and interpretations may vary widely. Policies sometimes lag behind the practices they describe. (See also Wikipedia:Product, process, policy.)
5. WikiLawyering is evil. Loopholes and technicalities should not exist on the Wiki. Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy; not moot court, nor nomic, nor Mao.
6. The spirit of the rule trumps the letter of the rule. The common purpose of building an encyclopedia trumps both. If this common purpose is better served by ignoring the letter of a particular rule, then that rule should perhaps be ignored.
7. Following the rules is less important than using good judgment and being thoughtful and considerate, always bearing in mind that good judgment is not displayed only by those who agree with you. (See also Wikipedia:Civility.)

What "Ignore all rules" does not mean

1. "Ignore all rules" does not mean that every action is justifiable. It is neither a trump card nor a carte blanche. A rule-ignorer must justify how their actions improve the encyclopedia if challenged. Actually, everyone should be able to do that at all times.
2. "Ignore all rules" does not stop you from pointing out a rule to someone who has broken it, but do consider that their judgment may have been correct. (See also Wikipedia:Assume good faith.)
3. "Ignore all rules" is not an answer if someone asks you why you broke a rule. Most of the rules are derived from a lot of thoughtful experience and exist for pretty good reasons; they should therefore only be broken for good reasons.
4. "Ignore all rules" is not an exemption from accountability. You're still responsible for reasonably foreseeable effects of your actions on the encyclopedia and on other editors.
5. "Ignore all rules" is not an invitation to use Wikipedia for purposes contrary to that of building a free encyclopedia. (See also Wikipedia:About and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not.)

See also

• Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point