` :::What point am I supposed to be trying to prove? This is about facts. Are relations ``largely harmonious`` or not? I have presented a source that says they are not, supported, as I will demonstrate blow, by the source for the ``harmonious`` sentence. Of course I want the article to make sense, as I said above. Presently, it doesn't make sense, since it uses one source to supposedly prove that ``relations between different ethnic and religious groups are largely harmonious.`` By your own rules, this should be a quote saying that ``according to some writers, relations between different...``. I, personally, find that using quotes all the time makes for confusing reading, and ``some writers`` is probably weasel words.  Additionally, a quick-read through of your source is has demonstrated that it seems to be about  inter-ethnic and religious strife, not harmony. It goes into considerable detail on Suharto's discriminatory policies, and religious conflicts. I haven't  actually been able to find a part of the article which support the sentence in question. Indeed, however, I find it a useful source, as it demonstrates quite the opposite of what it sources in the article. Some quotes: ``since 1999, the nation has witnessed an explosion of ethnic and religious violence..`` ``the violence has had a corrosive impact on Indonesia's own fragile efforts at democratic reform...`` ``the violence has been directed by anti-reform elements in the now deeply divided military...``.    `