"
I wrote this article out of altruism and ""trying to do the right thing"". In comparison to what it was it is a vast improvement. I don't have an eating disorder and have no personal connection to the topic matter. Getting into childish tit for tat nonsense is not something I am interested in. This comment  ""Colored tables because they're pretty"" is rude. There are no ""pretty colors"" on the page, I added two. Light blue in the box heading and grey in the sections that are in list format, a not uncommon thing to do. As far as the ""superfluous images""; every image corresponded to the adjoining text, they explain and expound upon the subject matter, e.g., a lack of neuroplasticity in the somatosensory homunculus has been hypothesized to be a contributing factor in body image distortion. The image I included was of Penfield's homunculus. How that can be considered ""superfluous"", I don't understand.

Nobody had a problem with the page or the content as it was written, It is somwhat ironic that after an unpleasant exchange on another page, which I did not initiate, this one becomes the object of attention. I'm not part of the Wiki medicine project, or what ever it's called. I wouldn't want to be. But I would think that people who are actually concerned about improving content would be looking for things like the ""endocinal jubachina system"", Which was on the the thyroid page for over two years, in the infobox not buried in the text. Petty grievances against myself do not give you the right to dissect other articles I wrote or contributed to. Your alleged concerns over ""accesibility"" are not valid. Collectively the ""collapsible boxes"" I have put on articles have been viewed well over a million times, without alteration or complaint.
  "