Talk:Marine sandglass

Here is the problem with primary sources

The following sentence:

The "orloge de mer" was sent to him as a gift by his aunt, Yolande of Aragon, when he still was a prince (therefore prior to 1356 when he ascended to the throne).

…appeared with the following primary source (reference markup language removed for appearance)

cite book|title=Johan I D'Arago|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=kb3SJxHaTpUC&pg=PA128%7Cpublisher=Institut d'Estudis Catalans|pages=128ff|id=GGKEY:8CXSF5T5A0D}}</ref>{{primary source-inline|date=November 2014

While my Spanish is not perfect, the information in this sentence (regarding a quote in French) is not clearly and directly attributable to this source (which is a primary source in Spanish).

And while I can find mention of the aunt, Yolanda of Aragon (as Infantissa Yolanda) on the cited page of the work, there is no sourcing either of the French quotation, or of the "or loge de mer" (either in French, or in Spanish). Hence, this is an inappropriate use of a primary source, likely appearing in a secondary source, and transferred without adequate understanding of the material and sources.

Only return this citation to the article if, here in talk, the actual attribution of the text material can be made to the cited page (or corrected page range), and, in text, where the scholarly connection can be made between the Spanish source text and the French events and quotation.

Better still, give a (the) secondary source responsible for this interpretation, and move away from apparent scholarship and apparent OR, to encyclopedic writing.

71.239.87.100 (talk) 16:55, 1 November 2014 (UTC)