I understand what you mean. Here I express my opinion. I hope you will read my article carefully. Let’s take Triffin’s Dilemma as an example:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5351847.msg57574343#msg57574343

First of all, the title of my article is "Bitcoin and Triffin Dilemma". I combined the historical event of Triffin Dilemma to illustrate my understanding of Bitcoin. The ultimate goal is to explain the status of Bitcoin's future development.

Triffin’s dilemma is a known historical event. It belongs to common sense problems in economics and history. The conclusion of Triffin’s dilemma is also a well-known conclusion in history. I use this point of view to illustrate my understanding of Bitcoin. Anyone with a background in history and economics can explain in detail what the Triffin dilemma is. This is common-sense and universal information. The Triffin dilemma is explained in detail in the wiki. I put the wiki here to let more people understand what Triffin’s dilemma is.

From this point of view, I have come to the conclusion that Bitcoin will be the best choice for super-sovereign currencies. We will eventually get a new global currency and financial system with Bitcoin as the core.

In this article, the Triffin dilemma is a known historical event. The subject of my article is about Bitcoin, which is an independent point of view. The other articles are similar, you can read them carefully. If you still have any questions, I can explain to you the origin of the point of view in each article.

I explained my understanding of Bitcoin from different perspectives through specific events in history. Every article is the result of my deep thinking. I recorded the thought process and finally came to my conclusion. Should we describe a known historical event as evidence of plagiarism?