User talk:100.2.198.39

December 2020
Hello, I'm Thanoscar21. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to Trumpism have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse.   Thanoscar21talkcontributions 18:33, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Offer of assistance
Perhaps I can be of assistance regarding improvements to the article on Trumpism. Maybe it is true that many editors are suffering from Trump derangement syndrome, so if there is an authoritative source or sources making a positive (or in your view more accurate) statement about Trumpism, I support any efforts to including the point of view in the article. I can sympathize that it can be time consuming to find and develop these sources into a form suitable for an encyclopedia article, but I am willing to assist. If you become aware of peer reviewed articles stating viewpoints which you believe ought to be incorporated into the article, please list them on the article’s talk page, or on  my talk page. I will develop a summary of them and provide all the stuff that makes the citation footnote work in the article. You then can go ahead and rephrase anything you feel I summarized incorrectly. How does that sound? I understand how it can seem that the mass media and other trusted sources of information are out to deliberately mischaracterise Trump supporters and/or the President. This article for example has assertions made by particular experts that Trumpism is a cult. But other sources also quoted say it is not a cult. Both cannot be correct, but we don’t take sides. What we do is summarize all sides of a subject from authoritative sources. An example of recognized authorities are those who are able to have their perspective published as a peer reviewed article. There are plenty of extremely conservative individuals who are scholars and write for peer reviewed articles. Cato Institute, Heritage Foundation and other right wing think tanks have a number of such scholars. One way to find articles expressing viewpoints more in line with yours would be to methodically go through those lists of academics and using scholar.google.com to search for their name and “Trump” or “Trumpism”. I for one am interested in reading and summarizing viewpoints for WP articles regardless whether I agree with them. Wikipedia articles benefit from more diverse perspectives. Regards, J JMesserly (talk) 23:21, 18 December 2020 (UTC)