502:
52:
122:
296:
Do not revert an otherwise good edit solely because an editor used a poor edit summary or has a bad username. You cannot remove or change prior edit summaries by reverting, even if you made the edit in question. If an edit summary violates the privacy policy or otherwise qualifies for oversighting or
824:
meaning the editor who is reading this page right now. This is not a case in which you get to revert to your preferred version while you tell the other editor(s) to stop reverting to their preferred versions. We're trying to prevent an edit war here; we're not trying to get the version that you've
172:
A reversion is an edit, or part of an edit, that completely reverses a prior edit, restoring at least part of an article to what it was before the prior edit. The typical way to effect a reversion is to use the "undo" button on the article's history page, but it isn't any less of a reversion if one
626:
revert, rather than the other way around; this gives the other editor a chance to agree with you and revise their edit appropriately. Conversely, if another editor reverts your change without any apparent explanation, you may wish to wait a few minutes to see if they explain their actions on the
524:
are caught up and lost in a revert. It is often difficult for an editor to restore an uncontroversial portion of their edit without seeming like they are edit warring. If you do feel that all parts of a multi-part edit warrant reversion, it is good practice to note so in your edit summary for
670:
Edit wars are often myopic, occurring while neither participant is familiar with the big picture. The editors involved tend to focus on only one part of an article without considering other sections of the article or other articles linked dependently to the area in question, resulting in
513:
Ideally, each edit should contain one distinct change. But in practice, editors often bundle multiple changes into a single edit, such as adding a new section while also fixing a copy error elsewhere on the page. If you object to only part of an edit, consider
269:
If you see a good-faith edit that you believe lowers the quality of the article, make a good-faith effort to reword instead of just reverting it. Similarly, if you make an edit that is good-faith reverted, do not simply reinstate your edit – leave the
602:
by alerting the reverted editor to the problem with the original edit. The reverted editor may then be able to revise the edit to correct the perceived problem. The result will be an improved article, a more knowledgeable editor, and greater harmony.
606:
In addition to helping the reverted editor, providing information regarding the reversion will help other editors by letting them know whether – or not – they need to even view the reverted version, such as in the case of
541:(if they have requested notification of reversions). If you revert by manually changing the text to the old version, they will not receive a notification, which some editors appreciate. If the edits you revert are clearly
586:
and informative explanation including, if possible, a link to the
Knowledge principle you believe justifies the reversion. Try to remain available for dialogue, especially in the half-day or so after reverting.
660:
Edit wars tend to cause ill-will, delay editor development, and reduce editor retention. An editor can feel a revert is "a slap in the face" – "I worked hard and someone reverted it!"
733:
rather than reverting. Violation of the three-revert rule may lead to protection of the page on the version preferred by the non-violating party, blocking or investigation by the
726:
are generally considered to be exceptions to the three-revert rule. These include reverts of obvious vandalism, reverts of banned users, and removal of potentially libelous text.
160:
means reversing a prior edit or undoing the effects of one or more edits, which typically results in the article being restored to a version that existed sometime previously. A
583:
183:
of a previous edit. However, this is not the way the community defines reversion, because it is not consistent with either the principle of collaborative editing or with the
680:
Editors should not revert simply because of disagreement. Instead, explore alternative methods, such as raising objections on a talk page or following the processes in
386:– Always remove unsourced and poorly sourced contentious material. If you are having a dispute about whether to include it, the material is automatically contentious.
657:
Edit wars destabilize the article in question and may be off-putting to the observant and wary editors who would otherwise contribute stabilizing improvements to it.
590:
A reversion is a complete rejection of the work of another editor and if the reversion is not adequately supported then the reverted editor may find it difficult to
501:
706:
state that one may not revert any article more than three times in the same 24-hour period. This is a hard limit, not a given right. Attempts to circumvent the
496:
191:
reversal of one or more previous edits) are singled out for special treatment because a reversion cannot help an article converge on a consensus version.
611:. Explaining reverts also helps users who check edit histories to determine the extent to which the information in the article is reliable or current.
441:
Nobody can be compelled to follow the advice in this essay. However, favoring the status quo while discussion is taking place is one way to prevent
383:
430:, be the adult in the room and don't revert. Tag instead. There is no rule on Knowledge that requires anyone to revert, but if the page has
797:
650:
253:
787:
67:
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more
Knowledge contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
730:
703:
454:
365:
68:
710:, such as making a fourth revert just after 24 hours, are strongly discouraged and may trigger the need for remedies, such as an
371:
734:
347:
395:
537:
link in the page history, or revert manually. If you use the undo link, the editors whose edits you revert will receive a
846:
792:
681:
671:
inconsistencies with the big picture concerning the content in question. The noticeboard is part of the big picture too.
542:
399:
290:
259:
707:
693:
591:
143:
841:
711:
608:
756:
389:
184:
802:
538:
392:– Always remove disputed links from the "External links" section until there is a consensus to include them.
765:(policy) – if the edits don't appear in the page's edit history, or the history and edit tabs are obscured
751:
664:
646:
636:
615:
442:
413:
356:
263:
176:
A single edit may reverse multiple prior edits, in which case the edit constitutes multiple reversions.
549:, it may be better not to notify the disruptor or vandal of your correction, by reverting manually.
398:– Always remove copyright violations. Err on the side of removing suspected copyright violations.
762:
599:
546:
450:
282:
275:
72:
364:. Instead, add an appropriate tag indicating the text is disputed. For an article, many of the
723:
699:
618:, leave a note on the article's Talk page. It is sometimes best to leave a note on the Talk page
595:
561:
521:
516:
471:
316:
82:
408:– Always remove libelous or defamatory material. Err on the side of removing suspected libel.
302:
298:
216:
You reverse all of Alice's changes in wording, restoring the article to the previous version.
446:
424:, and you can be blocked for doing this. If a dispute arises regarding which version is the
60:
552:
When intermediate edits have been made, it is sometimes not possible to use the undo link.
405:
132:
revert an edit made in good faith only with an explanation and after careful consideration
775:
579:
534:
506:
38:
835:
135:
31:
75:. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
17:
376:
is good. Leave the status quo and the tag in place until the discussion concludes.
164:
involves reversing only part of a prior edit, while retaining other parts of it.
271:
208:
Alice re-phrases the wording in the first paragraph of an existing article.
533:
When you have decided to revert, please consider whether you will use the
289:, propose your reverted change on the article's talk page or pursue other
232:
You remove most of Alice's new paragraph, but leave one or two sentences.
462:(editors favoring an older version should provide substantive reasons).
825:
decided is the One True™ Correct
Version showing as soon as possible.
500:
353:
To eliminate the risk of an edit war, do not revert away from the
453:(presumed consensus exists only in the absence of a dispute) and
449:, it should not be used for any other purpose. See, for example,
614:
If your reasons for reverting are too complex to explain in an
116:
46:
340:"WP:STATUSQUO" redirects here. For the essay on abuse of the
301:. Otherwise, ignore it. In the case of a bad username, see
667:
less useful, and flood recent-change lists and watchlists.
520:. The encyclopedia is damaged when positive contributions
434:
been reverted to an older, pre-dispute version, then it's
438:
helpful if you avoid reverting to a different version.
379:
Exceptions to this recommendation include the following:
582:, are particularly important when reverting. Provide a
569:
486:
479:
331:
324:
258:
Reverting is appropriate mostly for vandalism or other
104:
97:
90:
30:"WP:RV" redirects here. For the Reviewing process, see
224:
Alice adds a new paragraph at the end of the article.
663:Edit wars do waste space in the database, make the
517:
reverting only that part and leaving the rest alone
281:If there is a dispute, editors should work towards
179:Any edit to existing text could be said to reverse
241:Number of times Alice has made a reversion: Zero.
244:Number of times you reverted Alice's edits: Two.
37:For technical information on making reverts, see
763:Knowledge:Vandalism § Template and CSS vandalism
278:that includes feedback from the other editor.
757:Knowledge:Editing policy § Try to fix problems
752:Knowledge:Edit warring § The three-revert rule
594:. This is one of the most common causes of an
8:
285:. Instead of engaging in an edit war, which
497:Knowledge:Restoring part of a reverted edit
455:
425:
417:
354:
341:
598:. A substantive explanation also promotes
286:
193:
814:
466:Do a partial reversion when appropriate
451:Knowledge:Consensus § Through editing
276:an alternative way to make the change
7:
798:Knowledge:Revert only when necessary
627:article's or your user's talk page.
254:Knowledge:Revert only when necessary
148:
788:Knowledge:Alternatives to reversion
704:Knowledge's policies and guidelines
368:are appropriate. For other pages,
173:simply types in the previous text.
131:
227:A normal change, not a reversion.
211:A normal change, not a reversion.
73:thoroughly vetted by the community
69:Knowledge's policies or guidelines
25:
309:Avoid reverting during discussion
722:Edits that do not contribute to
120:
50:
291:dispute resolution alternatives
130:Revert vandalism on sight, but
422:version" is still edit warring
266:forbids repetitive reverting.
1:
653:, for the following reasons:
264:Knowledge edit warring policy
793:Knowledge:Baby and bathwater
694:Knowledge:Three-revert rule
400:Ask for help if you need it
362:during a dispute discussion
863:
691:
634:
559:
494:
469:
339:
314:
299:Help:Edit summary § Fixing
251:
80:
44:Essay on editing Knowledge
36:
29:
529:Different ways to revert
522:that should be preserved
348:WP:STATUSQUOSTONEWALLING
187:. Wholesale reversions (
147:. Editors should always
128:This page in a nutshell:
372:under discussion inline
803:Knowledge:Monroe's law
637:Knowledge:Edit warring
580:always a good practice
510:
456:
445:. Because it protects
427:status quo ante bellum
426:
418:
357:status quo ante bellum
355:
342:
219:A complete reversion.
735:Arbitration Committee
692:Further information:
635:Further information:
631:Edit wars are harmful
504:
495:Further information:
235:A partial reversion.
149:explain their reverts
71:, as it has not been
698:As a means to limit
396:Copyright violations
168:What is a reversion?
18:Knowledge:STATUS QUO
847:Knowledge reverting
509:with the bathwater!
447:the "wrong version"
366:inline dispute tags
297:deletion, then see
196:
27:Undoing prior edits
731:request protection
714:on one's account.
682:dispute resolution
651:considered harmful
511:
507:throw out the baby
423:
363:
194:
708:three-revert rule
688:Three-revert rule
592:assume good faith
412:
361:
239:
238:
162:partial reversion
155:
154:
144:three-revert rule
115:
114:
16:(Redirected from
854:
842:Knowledge essays
826:
819:
578:Edit summaries,
572:
489:
482:
459:
429:
421:
375:
360:
345:
334:
327:
260:disruptive edits
197:
124:
123:
117:
107:
100:
93:
54:
53:
47:
21:
862:
861:
857:
856:
855:
853:
852:
851:
832:
831:
830:
829:
820:
816:
811:
784:
772:
748:
743:
720:
696:
690:
678:
644:
639:
633:
609:blanking a page
576:
575:
568:
564:
558:
556:Explain reverts
531:
499:
493:
492:
485:
478:
474:
468:
416:to maintain a "
369:
351:
338:
337:
330:
323:
319:
311:
256:
250:
203:Classification
170:
146:
138:is prohibited.
121:
111:
110:
103:
96:
89:
85:
77:
76:
51:
45:
42:
35:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
860:
858:
850:
849:
844:
834:
833:
828:
827:
813:
812:
810:
807:
806:
805:
800:
795:
790:
783:
780:
779:
778:
776:Help:Reversion
771:
768:
767:
766:
760:
754:
747:
744:
742:
739:
719:
716:
689:
686:
677:
674:
673:
672:
668:
661:
658:
643:
640:
632:
629:
574:
573:
565:
560:
557:
554:
530:
527:
519:
491:
490:
483:
475:
470:
467:
464:
437:
410:
409:
403:
393:
390:External links
387:
384:Living persons
336:
335:
328:
320:
315:
310:
307:
249:
248:When to revert
246:
237:
236:
233:
229:
228:
225:
221:
220:
217:
213:
212:
209:
205:
204:
201:
185:editing policy
169:
166:
153:
152:
142:
125:
113:
112:
109:
108:
101:
94:
86:
81:
78:
66:
65:
57:
55:
43:
39:Help:Reverting
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
859:
848:
845:
843:
840:
839:
837:
823:
818:
815:
808:
804:
801:
799:
796:
794:
791:
789:
786:
785:
781:
777:
774:
773:
769:
764:
761:
758:
755:
753:
750:
749:
745:
740:
738:
736:
732:
727:
725:
717:
715:
713:
712:editing block
709:
705:
701:
695:
687:
685:
683:
675:
669:
666:
662:
659:
656:
655:
654:
652:
648:
641:
638:
630:
628:
625:
621:
617:
612:
610:
604:
601:
597:
593:
588:
585:
581:
571:
567:
566:
563:
555:
553:
550:
548:
544:
540:
536:
528:
526:
523:
518:
515:
508:
503:
498:
488:
484:
481:
477:
476:
473:
465:
463:
461:
458:
452:
448:
444:
439:
435:
433:
428:
420:
415:
407:
404:
401:
397:
394:
391:
388:
385:
382:
381:
380:
377:
373:
367:
359:
358:
349:
344:
333:
329:
326:
322:
321:
318:
313:
308:
306:
304:
300:
294:
292:
288:
284:
279:
277:
273:
267:
265:
261:
255:
247:
245:
242:
234:
231:
230:
226:
223:
222:
218:
215:
214:
210:
207:
206:
202:
200:Editor action
199:
198:
192:
190:
186:
182:
177:
174:
167:
165:
163:
159:
150:
145:
141:
137:
133:
129:
126:
119:
118:
106:
102:
99:
95:
92:
88:
87:
84:
79:
74:
70:
64:
62:
56:
49:
48:
40:
33:
19:
821:
817:
728:
724:edit warring
721:
697:
679:
665:page history
649:are usually
645:
623:
619:
616:edit summary
613:
605:
589:
577:
551:
539:notification
532:
512:
460:stonewalling
443:edit warring
440:
431:
414:Edit warring
411:
378:
352:
325:WP:STATUSQUO
312:
295:
280:
268:
257:
243:
240:
188:
180:
178:
175:
171:
161:
157:
156:
139:
136:Edit warring
127:
58:
676:Resolutions
480:WP:CAUGHTUP
274:up, or try
59:This is an
836:Categories
718:Exceptions
543:disruptive
487:WP:REVONLY
457:status quo
436:especially
419:status quo
343:status quo
303:WP:BADNAME
287:is harmful
272:status quo
252:See also:
700:edit wars
647:Edit wars
600:consensus
570:WP:REVEXP
547:vandalism
525:clarity.
472:Shortcuts
317:Shortcuts
283:consensus
195:Examples
158:Reverting
83:Shortcuts
759:(policy)
746:Policies
741:See also
596:edit war
562:Shortcut
189:complete
729:Please
642:Reasons
432:already
782:Essays
770:How-to
505:Don't
346:, see
332:WP:QUO
262:. The
105:WP:RVV
98:WP:REV
32:WP:RVW
809:Notes
620:first
584:valid
406:Libel
91:WP:RV
61:essay
624:then
622:and
535:undo
181:some
822:You
545:or
293:.
140:See
838::
737:.
702:,
684:.
374:}}
370:{{
305:.
134:.
402:.
350:.
151:.
63:.
41:.
34:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.