On 12/17/06, Daniel P. B. Smith
<wikipedia2006(a)dpbsmith.com> wrote:
In the footnote, after citing the sources actually
quoted, if you
think it is important you could add "other sources with similar
opinions are" and cite and quote a couple more of the best.
Yes, this is a better approach. If one has 20 good sources backing a
view, and in particular if one has no good sources opposing the view,
then it is actually *better* to state these things as simple fact,
with the sources in the footnote, avoiding the original research of
claiming there is a "legal consensus".
It follows from this that this is really a question of proper wording,
and not of original research. Two people see the same evidence and draw
their conclusions differently. I might still dispute what is meant by a
"good" source, but that's a different argument.
It's interesting that this question should arise about law in the light
of Brad's comments in the "Office actions" thread. Lawyers' opinions
are still just opinions no matter how many of them are given. A single
unappealed decision by a low-level judge would be a precedent that could
throw all 20 scholarly opinions out the window.
Ec