User:Wwwwolf/Politics/Wikilawyering

This is a random mini-rant on WikiLawyering.

I don't like the bad kind of WikiLawyering. No one does. However, one must remember a random thing about lawyers in general: Not all lawyers are jargon-spouting, backstabbing slimeballs we all know and dislike. Some actually want to see that the justice is done properly.

So, I'd like to promote the good kind of WikiLawyering: Know the policies and guidelines, argue your case properly, tell what you think should be done based on established practices and the case at hand. Be constructive, and try to make articles fit the policy. Don't go "by the book" in borderline cases, but do the right thing; demand severe actions only in blatant and clear cases of violations.

However, remember that Wikipedia is not actually a courtroom. Throwing the policy around like a book of laws is bad WikiLawyering, and it's not helping at all. We have this interesting policy called Ignore all rules - we're not to bound to follow the policy in case it doesn't make the slightest bit of sense in some particular corner case, even when someone argues it that way. Nobody likes lawyers who try to get the case go their way by diddling with the obscure little details of law, just because. Everyone, however, agrees with lawyers who do the right thing.