Wikipedia:Don't revert due solely to "no consensus"

Sometimes editors will undo a change, justifying their revert merely by saying that there is "no consensus" for the change, or by simply asking the editor to "first discuss". This is rarely helpful. In the first place it discourages bold contributions, which are essential to Wikipedia. Moreover, if you can't point out an underlying problem with an edit, there is no good reason to revert it. Finally, there may in fact be silent consensus to keep the change.

Of course, reverting, even quick-reverting, is often necessary and helpful. However, first consider whether there is a substantive problem with the edit in question. If it added unsourced or poorly-sourced information, note that in the revert summary. If it made the presentation of material awkward, say something like "This is hard to follow - please discuss". If it added a biased statement, note that a Neutral Point of View must be maintained. If it added instructions on how to do something, note that Wikipedia is not a manual. If it removed content with no explanation or an unconvincing one, note that you are restoring valid content. But if all you can say is "no consensus for this addition", it is best not to simply revert it. Consensus is built on reasoning and arguments.