which footnote is formatted correctly?\n2garrow 403 - 04 tells readers how king knew at the start of the…

which footnote is formatted correctly?\n2garrow 403 - 04 tells readers how king knew at the start of the second attempt that he would cut the march short,\nbut did not inform most of the marchers or even all of the leaders of his plan, which led many in the movement to\nbriefly criticize king.\n2. see garrow 403 - 04 for criticisms of king for cutting the march short\n2. for a detailed account of the criticisms king faced for ending the march, see garrow 403 - 04.\n2for an account of the criticisms king faced for cutting the march short and not sharing his plan with others in the\nmovement, see garrow, 403 - 04.
Answer
Answer:
2For an account of the criticisms King faced for cutting the march short and not sharing his plan with others in the movement, see Garrow, 403 - 04.
Explanation:
Step1: Check superscript placement
In footnotes, the superscript number should be at the start. The first option has the superscript in the middle, which is incorrect.
Step2: Check punctuation and capitalization
The second option has “2. see...” which is not in proper footnote style (missing superscript formatting). The third option “2. For...” also has incorrect formatting (should be superscript number without the period right after). The fourth option “2For...” (assuming it's a superscript 2) has proper superscript placement, correct capitalization after the superscript, and proper citation format (author and page number separated by a comma).