User talk:Noahbug2005

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding misuse of vanishing and clean start requests. The thread is Misuse of VANISH request. Nathannah • 📮 23:01, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you believe that 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 ~~~~}}.  voorts (talk/contributions) 23:07, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

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).

Noahbug2005 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

I'm sorry for vandalism. I know that vandalism is bad and wrong. I promise I will slow down next time Noahbug2005 (talk) 02:44, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Given the below, I'm afraid you're going to have to do a bit more than "oops sorry" to get unblocked. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:54, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

---

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.

To any admin reviewing this: please note that Noah loutsocked several times after being blocked and only requested an unblock here after I directly hard blocked their IP. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:50, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

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).

Noahbug2005 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

I will slow down from moved on Noahbug2005 (talk) 06:30, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Decline reason:

THis is incoherent. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 06:24, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

---

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.

(Non-administrator comment) Hi, please put new posts at the bottom so everyone can see things in the order they happened.

Your last appeal was declined because you didn't properly show an understanding of why you were blocked, why your actions were disruptive and what you should have done instead.

It's good to slow down and think about what you're doing, but you were not blocked for editing too quickly.

Can you please review the ANI report and any warnings you've been given, then explain why you were blocked and what you should have done instead? You can either amend your existing appeal or add an explanation in a normal comment in reply to my post. Blue Sonnet (talk) 06:45, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

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).

Noahbug2005 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

Damn I shouldn't have done that. For this, I got blocked now. For this, I have no choice to quit Wikipedia community right now Noahbug2005 (talk) 22:03, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You can only have one unblock request open at a time. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:12, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

---

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.

Noahbug2005 (talk) 22:03, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Noah, you need to do what's called a WP:CLEANSTART. In 6 months time, which would be August, come back. Give us an unblock with a clear, concise reason why you should be allowed to return. Tell us what you will differently so this behavior doesn't repeat itself. DO NOT SOCKPUPPET! That means don't use temporary accounts, which is doing you no favors. If that continues, even a CLEANSTART won't help. Don't promise anything, don't say you won't do it again. There's no immediate fix for this.

Walk away, don't sockpuppet, then come back and tell us what you will do to prevent this behavior from happening again. Only then will you be allowed to edit. This isn't a punishment, but a path forward. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:02, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

OK. I know that making sockpuppet accounts is bad and wrong. I will get in big trouble, blocked and banned for making sockpuppet accounts Noahbug2005 (talk) 23:01, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

@Neutralhomer: WP:CLEANSTART is not an option here and will just lead to further blocks if the clean start account is discovered. Maybe you're thinking of WP:STANDARD OFFER?-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:19, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

@Ponyo: I was thinking of the Standard Offer, my apologizes. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:21, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm taking a break right now Noahbug2005 (talk) 03:35, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Take at least six months. When you come back, you should be prepared to address the reasons for your block and the conduct that preceded it prior to your vanishing. voorts (talk/contributions) 04:44, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

@Noahbug2005 User talk pages can't be deleted under U1, it explains on the U1 page. Accounts can't be deleted once they've been created either. Blue Sonnet (talk) 08:25, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

This latest attempt to delete your account highlights why you are now blocked. You need to take accountability for your edits. You can't run away like a scolded child and hope for mercy when you return. voorts (talk/contributions) 14:15, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

To be even more blunt, you need to have the maturity to admit when you're wrong and communicate with other editors when they explain why you're incorrect. You then need to stop doing those things. If you don't have the maturity to do that, I think you should probably find other things to do beyond Wikipedia. voorts (talk/contributions) 14:48, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Not having seen this, but seeing the unblock request at User talk:Tabornoah767, I proceeded to CU-block that account and User:Tabornoah... --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 04:21, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

Odd. voorts (talk/contributions) 04:42, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

@Noahbug2005 You can delete everything except declined unblock appeals (there a warning at the bottom that tells you this), so I've restored your Talk page.

If you want to delete everything else then that's ok, just be aware that the declined appeals will be the only thing left visible and they'll be a lot more obvious as a result. Blue Sonnet (talk) 06:56, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

OK. I won't delete declined appeals ever again. I apologize for that Noahbug2005 (talk) 14:54, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

No problem, it happens more often than you think!

I don't know if you're able to edit other Wikipedia projects, but you might find Simple English Wikipedia a bit easier to work on. You can use this account to log in there and maybe start with some basic edits there whilst you're away from this Wikipedia.

It also means that you'll be able to get some practice in and learn how to become a better editor, plus you'll also build up very valuable evidence that could help immensely with a future appeal if you choose to come back in six months or so.

You'd be surprised how much this can help to bolster appeals - if you can show an admin that you've done a lot to help make Simple better and haven't run into any problems, that can completely change the outcome of an appeal. Actions speak louder than words, after all.

It's totally up to you and you don't need to make a decision until you're ready - this is just a suggestion for you to consider.

If you go ahead with this plan, you should be aware that Simple has a one-strike rule for problem editing if you've been blocked on another project.

They do this because you've already been warned here, and lots of editors will go to Simple as a type of "rehab" or "parole" to work on improving as an editor; they need to be strict so they don't get inundated with problems from other Wikipedias.

That said, I imagine that they would probably be happy to overlook small, honest mistakes - you just need to be careful and triple-check every edit before you publish it. Read through all their policies and guides before you start doing anything beyond obvious typos, for example. Be as careful as you can be, soon it'll become a habit & get easier over time.

There are hundreds of experienced, well-respected editors who've taken that exact path and are now a great asset to Wikipedia.

I think you can be one of them, if you work hard and choose to come back in the future. Blue Sonnet (talk) 07:28, 23 February 2026 (UTC)