On Tue, 30 Jun 2009, Apoc 2400 wrote:
Some would say that we need no rule for this as we have IAR. However, Wikipedia:Ignore all rules is about ignoring rules when they prevent you from improving the encyclopedia.
I've complained about this for some time (to no avail). IAR may be short, but it's not free of loopholes, and when a loophole in it is used, it's almost always this particular one. Usually it comes up in privacy situations rather than life endangering ones, but it's the same loophole: IAR only lets you ignore rules in order to improve the encyclopedia, helping someone's privacy doesn't improve the encyclopedia, therefore, you're not allowed to use IAR for that.
Perhaps a change to IAR. Of course, most people who propose changes to IAR quickly get shot down because the rule is supposed to be simple. But here I'm proposing a change which *widens* the rule, while most proposed changes not only complicate it, but narrow its scope. "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, or otherwise doing what's right, ignore it." I understand the desire not to turn IAR into paragraphs, since that defeats its purpose, but it seems to be needed here. "Otherwise doing what's right" is still a vague term, but no more vague than the rest of IAR, and it would plug the loophole, not just here, but for privacy and BLP issues in general.
I also think that this situation is a blatant case of *not* applying IAR (unless you think the rule being ignored is "don't lie about the reliable sources rule"). Actually applying IAR instead of abusing other rules would have been much better.