User:Chrislk02/spiritorletter
 | This is an essay. 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. |
Preface
[edit]After over 2 and a half years of editing and almost 2 years of being an administrator, I made a realization. I am not sure how well this will be taken and will probably move me into more of a rogue category. All too often, the letter of policy is followed too literally. While the letter of policy is important, I think it is MUCH more important to follow the spirit of the policy. I have no doubt that this is the reason that Ignore all rules policy and Be Bold in Editing guidlines came about and are invaluable assets to this project.
The letter
[edit]The letter of policy is good, it is important, it is the foundation of policy. Also, they are policies, not guidelines (wikipedia has both). However, most policies only look at things in the small picture. Policies are generally unable to provide comprehensive coverage in what to do in EVERY situation, and hence may not be sufficient as templates for handling every situation. Even policies such as Wikipedias Civility Policy may have occasion that deviation is necessary. I hope to cover some of these theoretical examples in the following Essay.
The spirit
[edit]The spirit of the policy is a bit more complex and unlike the letter of policy, it is often difficult to be grouped into the standard terms of, "Black & White." For example, there may be multiple interpretations of the spirit of the policy, while the letter may only allow for one interpretation. I however strong believe that, at the core of every policy, is a fundamental principle. This is a principle usually so fundamental that despite what the letter says, despite what anybody says, should be upheld. Policies quickly become bogged down with pages of definitions, cookie cutter actions/reactions of what is appropriate and inapropriate in a given situation, and 95% of the time the letter of the policy is right.
Opening our minds
[edit]The problem is, 95% of the time is pretty good coverage. In fact, it may be so good so that as when there is any deviation from the policy people enter into a panic.