Communal online encyclopedias
The reading and the lecture both talk about the communal online encyclopedias, which is an encyclopedia is managed by the whole online community. The writer suspects the effectiveness of the online encyclopedias compared with the traditional one. However, the lecturer points out that the online version has many features that outweigh the drawbacks.
Firstly, the writer states that online encyclopedia lacks academic reliability because it is usually written by nonspecialists. On the other hand, the lecturer disputes that there is no encyclopedia is flawless. if there is an error with the content in the online encyclopedia, it will be easier to correct, yet, it will last for a long time before the next edition with the printed one.
Secondly, the passage says that access to the encyclopedia enables hackers to tamper with the information in the articles. The speaker argues that there are many strategies done to protect the original text. For example, the read-only format will restrict users from changing any crucial facts. What's more, a person will be hired to check before any changes are confirmed on the encyclopedia.
Finally, the reading believes that online encyclopedia gives too much emphasis on minor topics, which may lead to a misunderstanding of what is truly important. Nevertheless, the speaker put forth the idea that great diversity in topics is a distinct character of the online encyclopedia.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 213, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: If
...t there is no encyclopedia is flawless. if there is an error with the content in t...
^^
Line 5, column 296, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: What's
... users from changing any crucial facts. Whats more, a person will be hired to check b...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, firstly, however, if, may, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, for example, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 1.0 7.30242825607 14% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 11.0 22.412803532 49% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1207.0 1373.03311258 88% => OK
No of words: 226.0 270.72406181 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.3407079646 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.87727950738 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03832839298 2.5805825403 118% => OK
Unique words: 133.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.588495575221 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 385.2 419.366225166 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 29.3128479605 49.2860985944 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 100.583333333 110.228320801 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8333333333 21.698381199 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.08333333333 7.06452816374 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.454298502725 0.272083759551 167% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.154883309148 0.0996497079465 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.114002762973 0.0662205650399 172% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.267255412294 0.162205337803 165% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.12967909916 0.0443174109184 293% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 13.3589403974 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 53.8541721854 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.35 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.