 | This is an
essay on the
precedent essay and
consensus policy. 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 page in a nutshell: Although there is an established precedent, consensus can change, and you should ignore precedent if it prevents you from making constructive edits. |
If the old or established way of doing things prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it.
If you want to make a constructive edit but the traditional way of doing things holds you back, ignore it. Be bold and edit it. This can help settle into a bold, revert, discuss cycle. Discuss your changes on the talk page, and editors might give you feedback on if your way is better than the previous method.
What Ignore all precedent is for
- When you want to make a change but you are turned down by the reasoning that "We always do it this way" or "This is how it was done in x article"
- When pages are outdated but the main editors refuse to let anyone update it (which is also a violation of WP:OWN)
What Ignore all precedent is not
- It is not an excuse for edit warring.
- It is not an excuse for unconstructive edits.
- It is not an excuse for ignoring all consensus in a content dispute or deletion discussion.
| This is an
essay on the
precedent essay and
consensus policy. 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 page in a nutshell: Although there is an established precedent, consensus can change, and you should ignore precedent if it prevents you from making constructive edits. |
If the old or established way of doing things prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it.
If you want to make a constructive edit but the traditional way of doing things holds you back, ignore it. Be bold and edit it. This can help settle into a bold, revert, discuss cycle. Discuss your changes on the talk page, and editors might give you feedback on if your way is better than the previous method.
What Ignore all precedent is for
- When you want to make a change but you are turned down by the reasoning that "We always do it this way" or "This is how it was done in x article"
- When pages are outdated but the main editors refuse to let anyone update it (which is also a violation of WP:OWN)
What Ignore all precedent is not
- It is not an excuse for edit warring.
- It is not an excuse for unconstructive edits.
- It is not an excuse for ignoring all consensus in a content dispute or deletion discussion.