User talk:Kesharich1

May 2016
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Ebonics has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 00:19, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Ebonics was changed by Kesharich1 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.960087 on 2016-05-04T00:19:37+00:00.

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. — Qpalzmmzlapq T C 00:27, 4 May 2016 (UTC)


 * There is no question that the term "Ebonics" is controversial and offensive. You may simply Google the words "is Ebonics derogatory or offensive" and a number of articles will come up on the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kesharich1 (talk • contribs) 00:36, 4 May 2016‎
 * I'm sorry for the snags with your first contribution to Wikipedia! There are a couple of issues with your edits:
 * You tried to add content to a disambiguation page, a kind of short index, which is there to help readers find articles with similar names, and should be only long enough to make the distinctions clear. Your content would probably be more appropriate to one of the pages linked from there, especially Ebonics (word) or African American Vernacular English. In fact, you may find that what you're trying to say is already present there!
 * You removed an important template, disambig, which marks the page as a disambiguation page and helps editors and automated processes keep track of how the page is linked to and where it fits into the category tree. Generally, templates and other markup should be left alone.
 * Ideally, every sentence on Wikipedia is backed by a cited source. While the CNN article did contain useful information, you restated it in a way that seemed to draw a few additional conclusions.
 * I encourage you to make some contributions to the actual articles (leaving the disambiguation page alone for the time being), and I will be glad to review your changes to ensure they conform to Wikipedia's guidelines and manual of style, to the best of my knowledge and ability. Ibadibam (talk) 22:51, 4 May 2016 (UTC)