User talk:D.H.Lee

September 2016
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive tendentious editing. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:36, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

--D.H.Lee (talk) 23:18, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Could you kindly explain to me what you mean by "the nature of the problem"? Thank you. --D.H.Lee (talk) 23:54, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You are a historian specializing in 20th century Korean history. You should be well aware of the scholarly consensus regarding comfort women, or if you aren't, you should be easily able to educate yourself before writing about that topic on Wikipedia. Yet you managed to write claims such as that "Japanese operators followed the order and only recruited willing women", which is at best a fringe view. This is a deliberate deviation from what the primary sources report, namely that the operators of the brothel were Japanese. More bluntly, you added untrue content that better fitted the story you wanted to tell than the truth. In other places you claim to uphold what the primary sources report; as an academic you should know that picking and choosing the sources that support your side of the story and ignoring of misrepresenting the sources that disagree with it is not appropriate. Yet still you did so. If you were willing to violate academic standards to such a degree, I'm reluctant to accept a mere "I will not do it again". Huon (talk) 00:42, 20 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Oh my goodness. I don't blame you for thinking that I deliberately misrepresented the issue if you think the Japanese operated brothels. There are a number of primary & secondary sources that prove that comfort stations where Japanese women worked were operated by the Japanese operators and comfort stations where Korean women worked were operated by the Korean operators. This is because of the language issue of course. The Korean women, mostly from rural villages, couldn't speak Japanese and thus the Japanese couldn't have possibly managed them. A diary written by a Korean comfort station worker was discovered in 2013 and it is a compelling primary source that definitely proves that comfort stations where Korean women worked were operated by the Korean operators.　http://book.daum.net/detail/book.do?bookid=KOR9788994228761　Of course the diary was written in Korean, so unless you are Korean you can't read it. (By the way this is the main reason the comfort women issue is completely misunderstood by most because the mainstream narrative was established by scholars who couldn't read primary sources in Korean) So instead here is the analysis of the diary in English by Professor Choe Kil-sung.　http://www.sdh-fact.com/CL/Chapter-51.pdf　Please make sure you read the whole thing. It will tell you what the life of operating comfort stations was like. Here is the list of comfort stations and their owners that appear in the diary. At the time most Koreans used Japanese names so the names were Japanese but the owners were all Korean if you check where their origins were.　http://www.fastpic.jp/images.php?file=0189045814.jpg　Here is the list of comfort stations in Shanghai where Korean women worked. Again the owners were all Korean.　http://www.fastpic.jp/images.php?file=4398766540.jpg　Here is an order the Japanese military sent to comfort station operators.　http://www.fastpic.jp/images.php?file=8155355946.jpg　It says "Only recruit willing prostitutes. Do not recruit unwilling women."　The reason some of the Korean women are still unhappy is because the Korean operators didn't follow the orders. The reason no Japanese women complain is because the Japanese operators followed the orders and recruited only willing prostitutes. I have so much more to provide, but I don't want to wear you out, so I pause here for now. Please let me know after you read the analysis of the diary. Oh, here is a news release of the discovery of the diary.　http://archive.is/1jcC4　 I want to be unblocked so that I can remove one sentence from the following page.　https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_Kidnapping_of_Korean_Women_in_1930s　Under "Comfort women for the Japanese military" section, I want to remove the last sentence "So I provided this section to present a different view from comfort women Wikipedia." I put that in there by mistake. That sentence shouldn't be there because obviously it is subjective. --D.H.Lee (talk) 02:55, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

The U.S. State Department is very much aware that the comfort women issue is a North Korea issue. They are monitoring the scholars and websites that I mentioned. You can erase the messages I send you, but your edits are on records and I'll continue to monitor them. Should a tragic event takes place in East Asia, I will report your activities on Wikipedia to the State Department. I will let them know that I made you aware of North Korean involvement yet you continued to cooperate. You'd better hope Kim Jong-un will not behave badly. That is my hope as well. --D.H.Lee (talk) 02:01, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 02:44, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

 Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. ([ block log] • [ active blocks] • [ global blocks] • [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/autoblock/?user=&project=en.wikipedia.org autoblocks] • contribs • deleted contribs • [ abuse filter log] • [ • change block settings • [ unblock] • [ checkuser] ([ log]))

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice. -- GB fan 02:54, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of South Korean rape of Vietnamese women for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article South Korean rape of Vietnamese women is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/South Korean rape of Vietnamese women until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Dschslava  Δx parlez moi 23:59, 28 December 2017 (UTC)