Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Candidate statements/Dmcdevit: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Question |
→Question: a response |
||
Line 46:
What is, in your opinion, the proper use of [[WP:IAR]]? When, if ever, should the rule be invoked to justify administrative action? [[User:Xoloz|Xoloz]] 17:23, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
:Hm. It is honestly a very tough question to address. I guess my original statement "I believe firmly that policies do not govern the encyclopedia, but that our encyclopedia governs the policies" is how I would characterize it. I think the ''idea'' of IAR is essentially good. Especially applied editorially, it makes article editing easier. The principle is that we shouldn't let the rules get in the way of encyclopedia-writing, and if they ever do, they don't need to be followed. Policies are useful tools for us, and represent simply generalities that have wide enough consensus that they can be written down and agreed upon (of course it's important that most policies are always changing, even slightly). They just can't reasonably apply to every situation and give the best outcome if ''blindly'' applied. I think "IAR" is a good ''principle'', but there are problems with [[WP:IAR]].
:If anyone ever "invokes the rule" of ignoring all rules (which I've seen) then they've really missed the point. Often, IAR is used (speaking about administrative action primarily here) to justify actions that can't be reasonably defended otherwise. If I'm in an edit confict with another editor, and I block them citing IAR, that just doesn't cut it for a number of reasons. Basically, any correct "application" of IAR is indeed an application of policy, insofar as policy, written or not, is simply good practice for the encyclopedia with community support. If the application is good practice for the encyclopedia with community support, and can be defended in those terms (without even needing to cite IAR) then it passes. It is absolutely not (intentionally or not) an excuse for administrative abuse, and a pattern of such demands action. I hope this gives a good idea of how I think, but it is a complex issue, and one that is much harder to address in general terms than in responding to specific instances. Feel free to ask for further clarification. [[User:Dmcdevit|Dmcdevit]]·[[User talk:Dmcdevit|t]] 21:10, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
| |||