Rob, I approved those edits you had issues with concerning footnotes. I don't consider them bad per se so long as we cover all relevant information even before their use (which was done), and while we are more informal than Wikipedia, including them after appropriately long descriptions for additional clarification and/or providing more specific information to elaborate on a well-made point seems fair enough to me.
In fact, I recommend we modify that rule since MediaWiki does allow for their use while PmWiki never really supported that feature. They should not be an absolute requirement, but should be permissible so long as all the relevant information is already cited and the reference link is just pointing to the place the editor got more specific information.
In fact, I recommend we modify that rule since MediaWiki does allow for their use while PmWiki never really supported that feature. They should not be an absolute requirement, but should be permissible so long as all the relevant information is already cited and the reference link is just pointing to the place the editor got more specific information.