You list eight negative reviews by professors of history Now unless the number of leading historians in the world is less than 16 the statement in the current revision of this page is incorrect Presumably you do not mean what you say literally as suggested by your argument that the main evidence for the claim is the absence of positive reviews in scholarly journals So I suggest that at the very least you use a more literal turn of phrase For example reviews in scholarly journals have mostly been negative or a number of prominent less POV than leading historians have written largely negative reviews I d accept this wording for the moment but not necessarily indefinitely we have to be very careful about these most many largely etc statements since they re almost impossible to verify objectively I expect you think the first sentence of this comment is pedantic but we have to be pedantic here we can t just say most this and many that without some pretty strong justification Why not just list these negative reviews in a more compact form rather than making such generalisations It would probably get your point across far more effectively than the borderline weasel wording in the current revision