This page is part of WikiProject Current events, an attempt to expand and better organize information in articles related to current events. If you would like to participate in the project, visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.Current eventsWikipedia:WikiProject Current eventsTemplate:WikiProject Current eventsCurrent events articles
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Time, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Time on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TimeWikipedia:WikiProject TimeTemplate:WikiProject TimeTime articles
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YearsWikipedia:WikiProject YearsTemplate:WikiProject YearsYears articles
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This page is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
please provide referenced support that everyone agrees the statements were racist otherwise you are violating the neutral point of view policy. 173.52.62.50 (talk) 17:30, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@173.52.62.50: See how that links to an article entitled "Racial views of Donald Trump"? That explains the context. Also, note that HR 489 was recently passed, so there's no doubt that a recent racial context exists here. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks♥) 17:48, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Nice4What who are you using as your official decider that what was said is racist because the majority of Americans Love President Trump and do not think anything he says is racist. Also you cant us the word "deemed" because again there is no authority that we have all agreed on to make that decision...just because some people think its racist doesn't mean it has been "deemed" racist. please change the wording — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.52.62.50 (talk) 18:02, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@173.52.62.50: Your claim that the majority of Americans Love President Trump and do not think anything he says is racistdoes not mean that what he said couldn't be racist, I hope you know this.
I'd feel wrong changing the text from "deemed as racist", considered that the House passed a resolution condemning the tweet as such and many publications have boldly deemed his tweet "racist", avoiding euphemisms such as "racially charged" and "racially infused". As the NPR put it, "it's language that should not be thrown around lightly, but under due consideration, if it fits, you use the word."[1] I suggest reading "Racial views of Donald Trump#Democratic Congresswomen should "go back" to their countries" for further explanation and let me know if you have any more concerns. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks♥) 18:19, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Nice4What I cant find the details of HR 489 but I will later. the part about what most Americans think about President Trump NOT saying racist things is to show that you can not use a phrase like "deemed as racist' because that makes it seem like everyone agrees that its racist. can you change it to "some people feel its racist" or something like that. Your way is kind of trying to paint a narrative that the whole world thinks President Trump is a racist. 173.52.62.50 (talk) 18:38, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@200.28.88.10: Bring your concerns about the Trump story here instead of edit warring. The talk page can be used to explain your concerns on that particular story's inclusion, though insults like "Twitter lowlife", "Irrelevant", and "Nobody cares" aren't very constructive. Also note you have already been given your final warning about edit warring, so please take the opportunity to talk instead. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks♥) 17:48, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
