The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was Keep. This fun's over. The Helpful One 20:46, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Ignore all rules[edit]

Wikipedia:Ignore all rules (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Well why have rules when this is around? None of them mean anything the way things currently are. Calabe1992 04:43, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:44, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I agree. This thing is meaningless and simply invites silly arguments that rules and guidelines don't matter so long as I think I'm right. Msnicki (talk) 06:08, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:IAR. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 06:09, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. According to that page, you can do pretty much anything you like as long as you think you're right. But that's the page we're debating. Moreover, this is exactly how the page is typically invoked, in effect arguing that I don't have to follow the guidelines, not even when arguing at AfD or on a talk page. I can't remember a time when it has been helpful to the discussion to have someone argue for an ignore all rules special case that, e.g., notability doesn't matter because this is an important person who's written a lot of books you can find on Amazon. We have guidelines both because they represent good choices of how we'll maintain high quality and because they allow us to resolve a lot of otherwise tedious arguments. My experience is that the guidelines work and that in cases where it's a judgment call about what the guidelines are asking or if the guidelines themselves should be changed, we have ways to deal with that. If the guideline is wrong, anyone can change it. But the place to defend that is there, not in an AfD or on talk page, removing yourself from the reach of rational argument by claiming we should ignore all rules. Msnicki (talk) 17:48, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep If your head causes headache, cut off the bastard head. But don't suffer silently. --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 11:17, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, here we go. Per WP:IAR, I guess this is as good a reason as any. Unfortunately, I have no idea what it means. It certainly doesn't appear to be an appeal to anything else in the guidelines. Msnicki (talk) 17:48, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

HeadOn, apply directly to the forehead. HeadOn, apply directly to the forehead. HeadOn, apply directly to the forehead. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:41, 1 April 2012 (UTC) Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:41, 1 April 2012 (UTC) Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:41, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, in willful ignorance to the rules! =^_^=. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 20:08, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - oh crap.... --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 20:09, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.