User:2NumForIce/Essays/IAR is not a loophole
 | This is an essay on Wikipedia:Ignore all rules and Wikipedia:What "Ignore all rules" means. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
 | This is a work-in-progress |
The twelve words "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it." makes a difference for new editors—not everyone knows every single rule on Wikipedia, and Ignore all rules makes sure that people have a chance to learn from mistakes and not be excluded.
However, some editors and companies use IAR as a "loophole" to edit. An example is that some paid editing services use IAR as a "loophole" to bypass paid editing.
IAR is about common sense and good faith[edit]
We are not perfect, and neither are rules. IAR ensures that the spirit of the law takes precedence over the letter of the law. The letter of the law is only roughly the underlying spirit, which is one of the reasons IAR exists.
The thing is that, even though an edit doesn't comply with the wording of a rule, as long as the edit is made in good faith, common sense is used, and the point of the rule still gets across, IAR applies.
"Loopholes" encourage wikilawyering[edit]
"Wikilawyering" is a term