Nice to meet you, I was blocked and then just released again.

It's bittersweet,administratior considered me as sock and blocked, until before I requested it.

I mention it carefully, but first of all, from your piecemeal editorial history (soldiers of the CN-JPN War), you appear to be Chinese. You seem to have judged me to be the same person as those horrible socks who defamed the Chinese. I want to make it clear that I'm not the racist or anti-CN person you reported. I'm not the same person as the Socks. I respect China and its people, and I haven't made any racist contributions since I joined. I don't intend to do that in the future. And I'm not willing to edit any contributes related to the Chinese or the country of China.

When I faithfully looked at the contributions of Korean Socks, there were some similarities, maybe because they are the same Korean as me. Of course he is an extreme nationalist, unlike me. I looked it up and found that "marry"'s account is still alive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Marryhence

If I were sock, I would have used that account. You can also look at the unblocking request I wrote on my page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sbowman3452

We may need to verify marry's account in the future. However, I am never the same person. I don't have the will to leave desecrating content about China or the Chinese. You could continue to look at my edits in the future. If you have any doubts, please keep an eye on my account.

I hope to maintain a good relationship with you in the future. Sbowman3452 (talk) 04:00, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just don't understand why you're being so mean. I didn't know the rules because I signed up for a new one, and I explained my position very faithfully on my page. I hope that's a good answer. Sbowman3452 (talk) 07:33, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Dear 88thD. We are having discussions in too many places. Would please come to my page and talk? Sbowman3452 (talk) 07:49, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please come to my page Sbowman3452 (talk) 07:52, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you're dissatisfied with me, I think it's better to come to my page and talk instead of doing that on other people's pages Sbowman3452 (talk) 08:00, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will explain my argument faithfully again, so please visit my page. We are now talking on 3 pages. It will be hard for all of us to argue on 3 pages at once. Please come. Sbowman3452 (talk) 08:13, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote an explanation for your claim. I ask you to stop arguing that I'm a sock in other people's pages, and come to my page and have a discussion. Please. Sbowman3452 (talk) 10:34, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

user:Olafgurfson was just yesterday because it was confirmed that it was a sockpuppet of Milktaco.

All refutations to claims that suspect me of being a sock are in my user talk. My purpose was to erase the contribution of the sock. So I created an account. If only the contribution of the sock is deleted, I will no longer be active on wikipedia.

Respectful 88thD. Finally, I reveal that it's not a sock. I was so dumbfounded that you made the claim that I was a sock. But I believe you are a good person. Please continue to work for Wikipedia, which is in order. Anything that socks leave in the documents will be deleted. Sbowman3452 (talk) 00:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sbowman3452 claims he would have used Marryhence if he was his sock, but that account is already being watched and under suspicion its logical that the sockpuppet master would abandon that account and not use it again Marryhence was reported under suspicion of being a sock of Bablos939 already and since that account was under suspicion and being watched of course he would not use it again

the admins that sockpuppet investigations never declared Marrryhence as innocent, they just said Everything available is too stale for CU

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Chinese-proti/Archive

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Chinese-proti/Archive#30_May_2020

I see now that you were the one who contributed that part, so why did you delete the whole thing? Again, I have nothing to do with Bigboss9873 or Helvtica332, and I'm certainly not a sockpuppet. Gekkontore (talk) 20:08, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Prostitution in Japan, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 09:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 2020–2021 China–India skirmishes, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 14:41, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Milktaco per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Milktaco. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Izno (talk) 01:43, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

88thD (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Appeal:

I was editing on Prostitution in Malaysia when I saw a Korean account removing prostitution of Korean edits, I also found the milktaco sockpupept case from there and saw that nationalist sockpuppets were selectively reverting edits from the sock case.

Qiushufang reverted me on Slavery in China for deleting sockpuppet edits, saying the info is useful despite sock, I restored milktaco edits after that since I just did what Qiushufang did

I deleted a sockpuppet and Qiushufang restored the sockpuppet edits immediately and he didn't get blocked for it I restored legitimate edits, that had no other issues, the only thing AirshipJungleman29 deleted edits from Semu is because they were made by Milktaco, not because they had any problems. AirshipJungleman29 refused to delete unsourced info on Semu for years

I saw Korean sockpuppets (Bablos939, Korean-Proti) was edit warring with another sockpuppet (milktaco) and that I'm just trying to restore neutrality to the articles, in cases where they are legitimate edits that are being removed by one of the socks I am not milktaco I only restored legitimate Milktaco edits on Semu after Qiushufang restored sock edits, and AirshipJungleman29 appears to have an axe to grind over your Semu edits I reverted Airshipjungleman29's deletions, which enraged him. 88thD (talk) 08:19, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that you're not a sockpuppet. What that leaves me is that you are someone apparently named after a National Revolutionary Army division that fought the Japanese in WWII and you've been engaged in disruptive editing about comfort women and slavery in China. The block stands. -- asilvering (talk) 21:17, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

88thD (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

My edits were about ordinary prostitution, not wartime comfort women. I am editing only ordinary prostitution unrelated to comfort women. the slavery articles I edited don't have anything to do with Japan

none of my edits were proven actually disruptive. I was reverted on the sole basis of accusation of being a sockpuppet, I didn't use any unreliable sources or add false information into my edits. my prostitution edits and slavery edits have nothing to do with World War II I deleted stuff from Slavery in China because a sockpuppet made those edits, and Qiushufang then restored it saying it was useful info despite sock, so I restored non-controversial edits made by another sock. I wasn't doing disruptive editing on the slavery articles I was solely accused of beind disruptive because I've been accused of being a sock, not becasue my edits were disruptive the edits Qiushufang restored were by a Korean nationalist sock. Qiushufang is different from Bablos and chinese-proti

88thD (talk) 01:11, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=My edits were about ordinary prostitution, not wartime comfort women. I am editing only ordinary prostitution unrelated to comfort women. the slavery articles I edited don't have anything to do with Japan none of my edits were proven actually disruptive. I was reverted on the sole basis of accusation of being a sockpuppet, I didn't use any unreliable sources or add false information into my edits. my prostitution edits and slavery edits have nothing to do with World War II I deleted stuff from Slavery in China because a sockpuppet made those edits, and Qiushufang then restored it saying it was useful info despite sock, so I restored non-controversial edits made by another sock. I wasn't doing disruptive editing on the slavery articles I was solely accused of beind disruptive because I've been accused of being a sock, not becasue my edits were disruptive the edits Qiushufang restored were by a Korean nationalist sock. Qiushufang is different from Bablos and chinese-proti [[User:88thD|88thD]] ([[User talk:88thD#top|talk]]) 01:11, 11 November 2024 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=My edits were about ordinary prostitution, not wartime comfort women. I am editing only ordinary prostitution unrelated to comfort women. the slavery articles I edited don't have anything to do with Japan none of my edits were proven actually disruptive. I was reverted on the sole basis of accusation of being a sockpuppet, I didn't use any unreliable sources or add false information into my edits. my prostitution edits and slavery edits have nothing to do with World War II I deleted stuff from Slavery in China because a sockpuppet made those edits, and Qiushufang then restored it saying it was useful info despite sock, so I restored non-controversial edits made by another sock. I wasn't doing disruptive editing on the slavery articles I was solely accused of beind disruptive because I've been accused of being a sock, not becasue my edits were disruptive the edits Qiushufang restored were by a Korean nationalist sock. Qiushufang is different from Bablos and chinese-proti [[User:88thD|88thD]] ([[User talk:88thD#top|talk]]) 01:11, 11 November 2024 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=My edits were about ordinary prostitution, not wartime comfort women. I am editing only ordinary prostitution unrelated to comfort women. the slavery articles I edited don't have anything to do with Japan none of my edits were proven actually disruptive. I was reverted on the sole basis of accusation of being a sockpuppet, I didn't use any unreliable sources or add false information into my edits. my prostitution edits and slavery edits have nothing to do with World War II I deleted stuff from Slavery in China because a sockpuppet made those edits, and Qiushufang then restored it saying it was useful info despite sock, so I restored non-controversial edits made by another sock. I wasn't doing disruptive editing on the slavery articles I was solely accused of beind disruptive because I've been accused of being a sock, not becasue my edits were disruptive the edits Qiushufang restored were by a Korean nationalist sock. Qiushufang is different from Bablos and chinese-proti [[User:88thD|88thD]] ([[User talk:88thD#top|talk]]) 01:11, 11 November 2024 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}