Thanks for your thoughtfulness on this info and I'll answer this as best as I can.
1. Have at it.
2. We need to get those added back on the live site, and they are indeed part of the catalog. djp needs to either find the old writeups or just put in some new ones if the original ones are lost to time.
3. That's more of a question for the MusicBrainz community. We use straight quotation marks, but the style on MB doesn't matter to us. Keeping this consistant across many entries is a huge pain, but hopefully something can be scripted.
4. What DarkeSword said is correct. That said, I don't mind the "ReMoved" designation. It's not a naming convention that was official from OCR, sure, but it's a logical fan-made styling for pieces that were previously part of the catalog, and I understand the desire to track that (I have every "ReMoved" track myself).
5. The implication there is that the track in question was somehow stolen, which it wasn't. It was posted, but then we discovered that the source tune originated from a Pokemon anime score rather than the game it was referenced from, so the source tune was deemed ineligible for an OC ReMix. It could be called "ReMoved", sure. If it were a case of literally stealing material w/o attribution (which we've had before in the very early days), then it wouldn't merit an entry.
6. Have at it, and we're just honored that @CyberSkulland others give their time to ensure everything is cataloged!