Wikipedia:DRNC

Sometimes editors will undo a change, justifying their revert merely by saying that there is "no consensus" for the change. Ask yourself: will two wrongs making a right be best for the editors and the readers? If you believe so, slow down, reread talk, verify sources and pause before acting. Genuine consent is freely given, while no consensus can be a take.

Reverting on a "no consensus base" without any further info tries to avoid any discussion, not to start it. It's one of the strategies of . After all, if one reverted the edit already shows that there is no consensus. But when authors neglect to explain why they personally disagree with the edit or where the consensus in question was concluded, they haven't given people a handle on how to build any new consensus that is desired to enhance WPs articles and their individual quality.

It is best to first consider whether there is a substantive problem with the edit in question. Mention that. Tag it. If it added unsourced or poorly-sourced information, try to find said information yourself, or failing that, note that in the revert summary. If it made the presentation of material awkward, tag it. Edit to make the presentation less awkward. Question awkwardness on the talk page. If the bold edit added a biased statement among others less controversial, try to find a way to recast the bias into a neutral mode or just revert that aspect only. Avoid Overzealous deletions. If it added instructions on how to do something, explain that . If it removed content with no explanation or an unconvincing one, note that you are restoring valid content, and why the explanation is unconvincing (if the edit summary box is too small for this, continue on the talk page).

If you feel that an edit should not stand, but you can't point to any specific reason, stop and think before you act. Just never make any edit without a reason.

Never revert a change that you personally believe is a net improvement to the page. If you believe that the change is an improvement, then you should not revert it, even if you are convinced that someone else will object to it. Let those the editors who object to it do their own reverting. Then the original contributor will know who disagrees with it and who needs to be involved in the discussion.

...
Wikipedia