It's extremely easy to get 20 edits approved. Correct typos and grammar in 20 posts. Or add link sources to them. Or fix formatting... There are a lot of ways.

This is a general question about a general problem. A specific example is provided for reference. As you said, it might not be the largest example, but still it's an example. After what has emerged in the comments I am wondering if I should make it even more general given that we are talking about a user doing constant abuse of formatting.

@Zanna I actually like your title better. Would you mind editing it in? :)

@Videonauth that sounds like an interesting option. Would you mind writing an answer?

Well, maybe I should change the title in "What to do when users intentionally degrade formatting of their posts?".

I believe the question is pretty clear: a user reverted edits improving a post and I am asking how to handle this behavior without an edit war. I am not asking for other people to take action. I see you are in a mood for arguing, maybe you felt personally attacked or something. I actually like most parts of your answer, what I cannot agree on is that formatting properly is just aestethics or that a manually typed list does not constitute a problem. It doesn't look right if reading with your eyes and it doesn't read right if using a screen reader.

Yes. The main problem is that a edit that was improving the formatting has been basically undone. The secondary problem is that this act of reverting some modifications made the post slightly less readable. Meta is not the right place to explain the fact that semantic HTML is useful and sometimes necessary, there are plenty of resources on the subject, i.e. (1) (2) (3).

Screen readers are just an example (but yeah, they say something if a list is present in the text). But providing semantically correct and formatted content should be a goal that is pursued regardless of screen reader issues.

Thanks for your answer but I find the first part really troublesome. The absence of a semantically correct HTML code is a real issue for people reading the website via screen readers or other tools, for instance visually impaired people. Formatting is not just "pretty", it serves a purpose.

It is as vague as tagging questions with "Ubuntu". I mean, if something doesn't work and you have an error message of course you should include it. There is no need for this tag.

No worries, we all appreciate a lot what you guys are doing to clean up the tags on this site. Keep up the great work!

I apologize. I though the reference was obvious and I hoped the tongue-in-cheek tone was underlined by the smiley. I guess the joke didn't come up very well.

To avoid discrimination, after removing error and warning you should also remove fatal, info, and debug. :)

Those would make for some amazing canned comments, though.

Superb answer. And yes, this is your site too. Just a little quirk (yup, I know I am being pedantic...): this is not a forum, it's a Q&A site. ;)

The point of Ask Ubuntu is to be the reference source for up-to-date, well curated information. Not to merely redirect people to other sources of information. As a side note, your attitude in those comments is unkind (or dare I say pretty impolite).

This is Ask Ubuntu, not Ask Canonical. :)

If OP is using a theme different than the default, that's what you should seek. If they are not using Ubuntu, then VTC.