Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy ; nor moot court, nor nomic, nor Mao. Most of the rules are derived from a lot of thoughtful experience and exist for pretty good reasons; they should therefore only be broken for good reasons. Being able to articulate "common sense" reasons why a change helps the encyclopedia is good, and editors should not ignore those reasons because they don't include a bunch of policy shortcuts. Retrieved Pólya, George (1945). "Let Your Sins Be Strong: A Letter From Luther to Melanchthon Letter. If you are blocked or sanctioned for a rule-breaking edit that does not improve the encyclopedia, then you may not use "Ignore all rules" as a reason to be unblocked or unsanctioned. If they aid that goal, good. Le Discours de la Méthode. There is no common sense Good sense is of all things in the world the most equally distributed, for everybody thinks he is so well supplied with it that even those most difficult to please in all other matters never desire more of it than. The principle of the rulesto make Wikipedia and its sister projects thriveis more important than the letter. George Pólya 8 A society which is based on the letter of the law and never reaches any higher is taking very scarce advantage of the high level of human possibilities. Most rules are ultimately descriptive, not prescriptive ; they describe existing current practice. Be careful about citing this principle too aggressively. "Ignore all rules" is not an invitation to use Wikipedia for purposes contrary to that of building a free encyclopedia (see also Wikipedia:About and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not ). No : DON'T DO IT Yes : Does it break the rules? Meditate on that carefully before you actually apply this rule. Other editors are likely to ascribe very different meanings and values to words and concepts than you, so try to state your arguments as fully as possible. "Ignore all rules" is not a Get Out of Jail Free card. For other uses, see WP:common (disambiguation). Why isn't "use common sense" an official policy?