Well I was taking this from Wikipedia s definition which notes that Secondary sources in history and humanities are usually books or scholarly journals By contrast encyclopedias and dictionaries are defined by Wikipedia as tertiary sources One defines a sources on a source by source basis not a sentence by sentence basis In fact one would be hard pressed to find any history books or scholarly journals which do not cite some secondary sources and yet Wikipedia notes that a peer reviewed article is always a secondary source It s true that Hane does cite secondary sources among other types of sources In this case however Hane is directly citing a work of specialist scholarship dealing entirely with Korean influence on Japanese culture I m not going to be banned so we are just going to have to work this out I think it s up to you to find a source which says that some Japanese myths do not have Korean origin When we know that there are reliable source affirming something as a clear fact among scholars then we assume it is a fact unless we have other sources presenting other points of view I m fine with including other points of view but right now we have no evidence that they exist