Talk:Laurent Dailliez

message: The Wikipedia article is currently making the case that Dailliez is reputable, because he is used as a source in Alain Demurger's book The Last Templar.  However, I actually looked up the Dailliez mentions in Demurger's book today, and it's actually quite the opposite... Demurger seems to be referring to Dailliez as one of the "pseudo-history" authors who may be correct here and there, but in general needs to be challenged.  For example, on page 51 of Demurger's book, he says, "As nothing positive is known, some people have naturally credited Jacques de Molay with various offices.  Laurent Dailliez plausibly maintains that Molay was a marshal of the Order at the time of his election; however, he could not have been one until after the death of Pierre de Sivrey, who was decapitated by the Mamluks towards the end of the siege of Acre in May 1291.  Prior to that, it is impossible because almost all the Order's dignitaries in Beaujeu's time are known, and he is not among them." 
Demurger then further criticizes Dailliez in his footnotes.  For example, in Demurger's book, page 231, footnote #46 to Chapter 3, he says: "L. Dailliez, Jacques de Molay..., p. 21, cites a chronicle and a large map of Cyprus ad annum 1292, with no reference, as is usually the case with this author.". In short, just because Demurger cites Dailliez, does not mean that Dailliez is a reliable source. --Elonka 22:10, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Demurger's comments

message: Laurent Dailliez easily fullfills several of the sufficient condition to be recognized as notable on Wikipedia (as per Wikipedia:Notability (academics)):
As a matter of fact, Dailliez essentially satisfies reasons 1 to 5:
#He was selected to write the article on the Templars, by the Encyclopedia Universalis (the leading French paper encyclopedia, owned by the same company as Encyclopedia Britanica). He is also referenced by several reputable authors.
#For the same reasons.
#Dailliez has published numerous well-known books, available in most libraries, especially in France.
#He work in indeed well known, and quoted by other authors.
#Maybe not, he did contribute to the understanding of ancient Templar documents.
And of course ""the academic is more notable than the average college instructor/professor"" fully applies.
Therefore, I don't see any reason why Notability couldn't be accepted for this profilic, even if sometimes disputed, historian. PHG 10:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability

message: Corruption of Dailliez's quote	Corruption of Dailliez's quote                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       	Corruption of Dailliez's quote
                              	Original text                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        	Elonka's modifications and interpretation
French                        	Original text: "Les Tatares, après avoir enlevé Damas et plusieurs places importantes aux Turcs, après avoir été mis en déroute à Tibériade par le sultan d'Egypte en 1260, s'allièrent aux Templiers. Jacques de Molay, dans sa lettre au roi d'Angleterre, dit qu'il a été obligé de signer un traité semblable pour lutter contre les musulmans, "notre énemi commun"" Dailliez "Les Templiers, p 306-307                                                                                                                                                                                         	Emendation of the French by Elonka: "Les Tartares...en 1260, s'allierent aux Templiers. Jacques de Molay, dans sa lettre au roi d'Angleterre, dit qu'il a ete oblige de signer un traite sembable pour lutter contre les musulmans, "notre ennemi commun."
English                       	Direct translation by PHG: "The Mongols, after having taken Damas and other places important to the Turcs, after having been routed at Tiberiad by the sultan of Egypt in 1260, allied with the Templars. Jacques de Molay, in his letter to the king of England, said that he had to sign a similar treaty to fight against the muslims, "our common enemy"."                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       	Elonka's translation of her emendation: "The Mongols, in 1260, allied with the Templars. Jacques de Molay, in his letter to the King of England, said that he had been obliged to sign a treaty to fight against the Muslims, 'our common enemy"
Interpretation                	PHG's response: "What Dailliez actually says is that the Templars allied with the Mongols after 1260 (not in 1260 as Elonka claims), which is essentially right (see Franco-Mongol alliance for details). He also doesn't give 1260 at all for De Molay's signature of a treaty, but only refers to the letter to Edward I in a separate phrase and obviously means circa 1300 (clear from the context, as he dates de Molay's rule as Grand Master from 1292 to 1314). Elonka simply emended/corrupted Dailliez's quote to try to make a point that he was wrong." PHG 06:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  We can talk about this at mediation. --Elonka 07:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? This is not a subject of the mediation. Please explain here why you are corrupting a quote by Dailliez to try to discredit him. PHG 07:46, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  We are already discussing Dailliez at the mediation.  Let's keep the thread there. --Elonka 08:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Corruption of Dailliez's quote

message: It is untrue to state that Dailliez does not use sources or references in his work. I just purchased his "Jacques de Molay, dernier maitre du Temple", and it has 14 pages of notes, and 5 pages of bibliography (sample attached). As explained by User:Relata refero in Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Laurent Dailliez, many of the books published by Tempus do not use notes ("Les Templiers" was published by Tempus), but this is clearly not the general case for Dailliez's work. PHG 20:27, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you find a source in the book for his claim that Jacques de Molay signed a treaty with the Mongols, I would be very interested in seeing it. --Elonka 20:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Dailliez and sources

message: Now that I have made the case for notability PHG, it is up to you and others to clean up this article by adding more references and properly using the ref tags to refer to your sources. It is imperative that in order to make Dailliez stronger down the road that more must be done. Good luck- I wish I could help, but alas the articles of ancient history call! Monsieurdl 14:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup of article