(Fix previous edit, which changed the meaning of the sentence, probably unintentionally)
m (Added anchors to help DOREVERT and DONTREVERT targeted redirects)
Reverting tends to be hostile, making editing Wikipedia unpleasant. Sometimes this provokes a reciprocal hostility of re-reversion. Sometimes it also leads to editors departing Wikipedia, temporarily or otherwise, especially the less bellicose. This outcome is clearly detrimental to the development of Wikipedia. Thus, fair and considered thought should be applied to all reversions given all the above.
==Good reasons to revert==
The main purpose of reversion is to undo vandalism or other [[WP:Disruptive editing|disruptive edits]]. If you see an edit that you're sure was intended by its author to damage Wikipedia, and it does, there is no need for further consideration. Just revert it.
Another kind of acceptable reversion is an incidental one. A Wikipedia editor is not expected to investigate the history of an article to find out if an edit being considered is a reversion of some prior edit. The rule against reversions applies only to cases where the reverter is aware that the edit is a reversion of another edit.
==Bad reasons to revert==
There are a number of things that sometimes motivate an editor to revert, but should not.