Proposed wording on the generalities of autoformatting Since the key members of the pro autoformatting side UC Bill and Locke Cole have conceded that the results of the previous RfC on son of autoformatting would likely repeat itself if we conducted an ArbCom sponsored RfC here where Locke wrote I am tempted to ask that you Ryan issue a declaratory judgement due to their default I can t help but suspect that they knew all along that the previous RfC was a fair measure of the true community consensus when Locke dragged us all to this ArbCom However I instead propose that we do as Locke proposes present autformatting to the community in a more generalized manner not attached to any specific implementation such as UC Bill s son of autoformatting as described above Here is what I would propose Statement by Clerk Ryan Postlethwaite Statement for Statement against 342 words quotation We adhere to the fundamental principle that all editors should see the same article content as regular I P users The Wikipedian community does not want to have date formatting tools in articles that creates a default format for a given article for all regular I P readers to see and which then provides a custom view per the preferences setting that would benefit only A regi