Wikipedia talk:Ignore all rules/Alternate wordings

Created page

Created a page summarising some of the previous versions. I've been somewhat random so far, so there is plenty of room for improvement.

Please expand and improve! :-) --Kim Bruning 19:10, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure this is a better approach than just using IAR's talk page. But anyhow: it should be "alternative wordings" and as currently written, it doesn't allow for new proposals, which just means it's a re-hash of past versions. What's the value of a list of versions where none of them is a clear winner?--Father Goose 21:31, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The talk page is continuously archived and gets snowed under. This is basically a quick summary so that errr, "scholars of wikipedia policy" O:-) can do their own background research, and try to figure out where the actual consensus lies on their own. (likely somewhere in the middle). This way people can carry on on the talk page or on the project namespace page, while people who just want to figure out what this IAR thing is about can also proceed to do so. Seems like win-win-win on all sides to me :-) --Kim Bruning 21:35, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't that what WIARM has been for? Seems to me this page just muddies those waters. I agree with the "good enough" sentiment, but I don't see this page really helping that.--Father Goose 21:45, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WPIARM tries to explain stuff. This page just shows some cool wordings for this particular page over time :-) --Kim Bruning 23:58, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most important is that it takes some pressure off of people where they are forced to continuously try to make the page "absolutely perfect", which is driving people nuts at the moment. A "good enough" is rather more relaxing to work with. :-) --Kim Bruning 21:41, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]