Source text:

(Several different sources.)

Writer’s text:

Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) has dominated Japanese politics for most of the post world war period. Many scholars have been debating over what are the key sources of LDP power to marginalize other political parties. Since the case in Japan is very rare compared to other democratic countries – in fact it is the only political party in the history to manage to stay in power without being forced to join in any coalition for such a long period of time- the search for its ability to stay in power becomes essential.

Writer’s comment:

I remember reading it in so many different places; so I thought that I should highlight it in the introduction.

Student’s comment:

1. Well, in introduction I mean I’m assuming that all this is talked about later on, that how the liberal Democratic Party has dominated Japanese politics, and where that information comes from. So I think I’m comfortable with this not being cited. (A Master’s student in Library & Information Studies)
2. As a marker or as a teacher, I would not give any credibility to that. At the minimum, as a reader, I just won’t believe it. You need the reference. So, the minimum level is that I wouldn’t believe it, and the maximum level, I would say, well, you have to put a reference there… a mark for it , or I certainly wouldn’t give it any credibility. (A graduate in Business

Faculty member’s comment:

1. At least cite some… it doesn’t have to be exhaustive, but you have to show you know. (A professor in Education)
2. I would require a citation for. Either this party has stayed in power without being forced to join the coalition or it hasn’t. It is so simple to verify that anybody who can read a newspaper could do so, or consult a simple encyclopedia. So there’s no scholarly claim or knowledge here that is beyond what would be common knowledge for any Japanese citizen. Like the sentence, ‘many scholars have been debating over,’ because there’s no debate quoted here. It’s simply stating student’s topic, so there’s no substantive claim being made here. And any claim that is made is simply a common knowledge fact. This would work very well as statement of a problem in a paper.( A professor in Education)