If every single edit you made was reverted, maybe they weren't really constructive edits? Just food for thought. > If you run into an asshole in the morning, y

If every single edit you made was reverted, maybe they weren't really constructive edits? Just food for thought. > If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. If you run into assholes all day, you're the asshole. - Raylan Givens, Justified On a more serious note, I always hear people complaining about getting reverted. What they don't realize is that, often, their edits really are just bad. Here's some of the stuff I have to revert daily: * Test edits/gibberish * Vandalism * Original research [0] * Changing stuff to match their variety of English [1] * Making the grammar worse, or going against the Manual of Style [2] * Improper tone [3] * No edit summary giving a rationale for the edit A lot of the time, the changes people make are just arbitrary or don't improve the article. If you ever feel you were improperly reverted though, you can always bring it up on the talk page. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#National_varieties_of_English https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Nati... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Writing_better_articles#Tone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Writing_better_artic...