Belief revision aims at incorporating a new piece of information into the beliefs of an agent. This process can be modelled by the standard AGM/KM rationality postulates. However, these postulates suppose a classical setting and do not govern the case where (some parts of) the beliefs of the agent are not consistent. In this work we discuss how to adapt these postulates when the underlying logic is Priest’s Logic of Paradox, in order to model a rational change, while being a conservative extension of AGM/KM belief revision. This paper is a summary of [5].