The Communal online encyclopedia
The author and the lecturer talk about the communal online encyclopedia. In the reading passage, the author mentions the advantage of a traditional encyclopedia over an online platform. The lecturer, however, opposes the claim made by the writer and provides the details in favor of the topic.
First, the author mentions that the content published on the online platform is so not accurate because we are not sure about the academic qualification of contributors. The professor, nevertheless, denies the fact. She states that any article or research paper cannot be 100 percent precise with the details. Though traditional encyclopedias are written by trained experts, it can be possible that it is not as accurate as expected. Further, if we want to modify any content, then it can be possible on an online encyclopedia rather than on a traditional one.
Second, the reading passage states that online content has a risk of getting hacked, and can be modified based on the need which is impossible with a traditional encyclopedia. The speaker, however, refutes the claim. She says that nowadays, the content of an online encyclopedia is monitored by a special editor who eliminates malicious topics. Additionally, the encyclopedia is updated with software that gives access to the crucial subject in only read mode. No one can edit such topics without taking permission.
Lastly, the writer says that an online encyclopedia is filled with unimportant topics which creates difficulty to distinguish from the important ones. Moreover, people can publish any topic of their own interest which is not possible in a traditional encyclopedia because papers get published only after having a considerable analysis done by the experts. The lecturer denies the argument. She mentions that the traditional way has limited space that why experts only have a few options to print. Further, experts do not always show their interest in every topic. In addition, an online encyclopedia is diverse with different topics, especially in which people are more interested.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, lastly, moreover, nevertheless, second, so, then, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1738.0 1373.03311258 127% => OK
No of words: 327.0 270.72406181 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31498470948 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25242769721 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96239212425 2.5805825403 115% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 145.348785872 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.529051987768 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 563.4 419.366225166 134% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 46.2561218528 49.2860985944 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.4736842105 110.228320801 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.2105263158 21.698381199 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.52631578947 7.06452816374 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.338221150016 0.272083759551 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.106118852186 0.0996497079465 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.128715386613 0.0662205650399 194% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.230391200112 0.162205337803 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0879505774975 0.0443174109184 198% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 53.8541721854 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.22 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.63 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 63.6247240618 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.