The issue both the reading and listening focus on is the drawbacks of communal online encyclopedias but the listening disagrees at three main points.
At the first point, the reading states that the information in online encyclopedias often contains mistakes because of the lacking academic credentials of the contributors. According to the listening, having errors is a common thing. The errors in communal online encyclopedias are likely to be fixed easily, but the mistakes in traditional ones would take a lot of time to be corrected.
At the second point, the reading believes that hacking is a big issue of online encyclopedias. On the contrary, the listening argues that people can use some manners to protect the right information such as putting crucial facts or having some special characters to manage the changes.
At the last point, the reading mentions that communal encyclopedias might cause a false impression of what is important or not important. However, the listening confirms that those encyclopedias have unlimited space, hence they are able to represent a variety of articles and diversity of users' interests, which makes them become very useful and important.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, however, second, so, such as, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 12.0772626932 50% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 8.0 22.412803532 36% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 30.3222958057 76% => 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: 999.0 1373.03311258 73% => OK
No of words: 188.0 270.72406181 69% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.31382978723 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.70287850203 4.04702891845 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98939482832 2.5805825403 116% => OK
Unique words: 109.0 145.348785872 75% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.579787234043 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 317.7 419.366225166 76% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 13.0662251656 61% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.4761453258 49.2860985944 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.875 110.228320801 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5 21.698381199 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06452816374 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.244973491844 0.272083759551 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.1023337772 0.0996497079465 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0810226337411 0.0662205650399 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138246297771 0.162205337803 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.062811390303 0.0443174109184 142% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 13.3589403974 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 53.8541721854 74% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.0289183223 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.2367328918 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.81 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 48.0 63.6247240618 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.