In today's world, Wikipedia:Chesterton's fence is still a topic of great relevance and debate. For many years, Wikipedia:Chesterton's fence has been the object of study, analysis and reflection by experts and scholars from various areas. Its importance has transcended borders, generations and disciplines, becoming a topic of universal interest. Throughout history, Wikipedia:Chesterton's fence has aroused the curiosity and interest of humanity, and its impact has been a cause for discussion and reflection in different contexts. In this article, we will explore the importance and impact of Wikipedia:Chesterton's fence in today's society, as well as its relevance in the past and its potential influence in the future.
![]() | 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. |
![]() | This page in a nutshell: Don't change something until you understand why it is the way it is. There may be a valid reason for it to be that way. |
Chesterton's fence is the principle that reforms should not be made until the reasoning behind the existing state of affairs is understood. The quotation is from G. K. Chesterton's 1929 book The Thing, in the chapter entitled "The Drift from Domesticity":
In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, "I don't see the use of this; let us clear it away." To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: "If you don't see the use of it, I certainly won't let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it."
Chesterton's admonition should first be understood within his own historical context, as a response to certain socialists and reformers of his time (e.g. George Bernard Shaw).
If you're considering nominating something for deletion, or changing a policy, because it doesn't appear to have any use or purpose, research its history first. You may find out why it was created, and perhaps understand that it still serves a purpose. If you believe the issue it addressed is no longer valid, frame your argument for deletion in a way that acknowledges that.