In May 2007, Claire Harkins edited the footnote references from some type of name referent to the footnote reference to a number. Unfortunately, this was only done on the bottom section of the footnotes WITHOUT changing the top part. It seems that there was already a correspondence problem (missing or misplaced footnotes), and then the numbering confused matters even further. Someone has to investigate if the footnotes do indeed correspond to the reference sought. I suspect there is a minor mismatch, but at least one of the ffs seems to be off.
There should BE NO change in ff referencing from names --> numbers unless it is done in both sections of the article.
Thanks for pointing that out Paul,
I have treated the External resources as distinct from the references. My contribution was to number the footnotes, I left the external resources alone, in the belief that these were different from the references. Appologies for any confusion this has caused. If that is what you are refering to.