Thread:ParadoxV5/@comment-5645428-20171028044803

Yes, the Portals article is great one, but if it were not for you, it might've remained merely 'good'. I got it looking pretty good before, but you really delved into the table structure and fleshed out a much more intuitive take on it that has extensively topped what I had envisioned and previously thought was sufficient. And recently implementing those footnotes, that's something even I hadn't yet learned how to do to such an advanced level and I've been wikiing for years now. I have made some adjustments, namely with the column and row spans so that updates won't have to see the table be restructured to facilitate new fields, but before you came along, there was barely any of that to speak of. Technical contributions can make a huge difference, and so you have. Thank you for taking the time over what I see has been several months to ensure that the article maintains a high level of quality and sophisticated level of design proficiency. Cheers! 