" 
 **Try to have a clue instead of needlessly reinventing the wheel. The circumstances here are no different than in the vast majority of the hundreds of thousands of articles which this standard layout was designed for. Very few of them are ""footnotes"" either, and the section title does not in fact say ""footnotes""  so your argument is utterly irrelevant. Encyclopaedias generally have standardised formatting. Wikipedia has established such standards, so lacking a good reason (and you have provided none), I see no reason not follow it. This is not being ""robotically .... robotically"" (my you do have a tediously limited vocabulary). ''''(P) "