Communal online encyclopedias represent one of the latest resources to be found on the Internet. They are in many respects like traditional printed encyclopedias collections of articles on various subjects. What is specific to these online encyclopedias, however, is that any Internet user can contribute a new article or make an editorial change in an existing one. As a result, the encyclopedia is authored by the whole community of Internet users. The idea might sound attractive, but the communal online encyclopedias have several important problems that make them much less valuable than traditional, printed encyclopedias.
First, contributors to a communal online encyclopedia often lack academic credentials, thereby making their contributions partially informed at best and downright inaccurate in many cases. Traditional encyclopedias are written by trained expertswho adhere to standards of academic rigor that nonspecialists cannot really achieve.
Second, even if the original entry in the online encyclopedia is correct, the communal nature of these online encyclopedias gives unscrupulous users and vandals or hackers the opportunity to fabricate, delete, and corrupt information in the encyclopedia. Once changes have been made to the original text, an unsuspecting user cannot tell the entry has been tampered with. None of this is possible with a traditional encyclopedia.
Third, the communal encyclopedias focus too frequently, and in too great a depth, on trivial and popular topics, which creates a false impression of what is important and what is not. A child doing research for a school project may discover that a major historical event receives as much attention in an online encyclopedia as, say, a single long-running television program. The traditional encyclopedia provides a considered view of what topics to include or exclude and contains a sense of proportion that online "democratic" communal encyclopedias do not.
<span style="color: rgb(58, 58, 58); font-family: "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, STHeiTi, Arial, "Microsoft YaHei", sans-serif; font-size: 16px; white-space: normal;">The reading and the lecture are both about latest resources which are found in internet.The author of the reading believes that these informations authored by whole community.The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article. He thinks that resources from internet never have been perfect.</span>
First of all,the author of the passage points out that resources are best informed.it is mentioned that it is written by trained experts but inaccurately.this point is challenged by the lecturer.She says that there are many criticisms such as areas are filled not inaccurately.Furthermore,she argues there many unknown authors.
Secondly, the author contends that users are unscrupulous.The article notes some hackers and vandals have opportunity to fabricate,delete and corrupt information.The lecturer rebuts this argument.She suggests offline decades that protect one strategy.She elaborates on this by mentioning that people can make changes reliably.
Finally,the author states that resources from internet are too frequently.The article establishes that young readers can have false impression.The lecturer,on the other hand ,posits that there are limited space what is important what is not.She puts forth idea that it is not an issue that represented accurately.
In conclusion,the lecture and the reading are both about traditional encyclopedias.The professor effectively challenges the claims made in the article.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 231, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'about the latest'.
Suggestion: about the latest
...s;>The reading and the lecture are both about latest resources which are found in internet.T...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 282, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...t resources which are found in internet.The author of the reading believes that the...
^^^
Line 1, column 369, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...nformations authored by whole community.The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made...
^^^
Line 3, column 13, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , the
...have been perfect. First of all,the author of the passage points out that r...
^^^^
Line 3, column 196, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: She
...his point is challenged by the lecturer.She says that there are many criticisms suc...
^^^
Line 3, column 278, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Furthermore
...ch as areas are filled not inaccurately.Furthermore,she argues there many unknown authors. ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 289, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , she
... are filled not inaccurately.Furthermore,she argues there many unknown authors. Se...
^^^^
Line 5, column 59, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...or contends that users are unscrupulous.The article notes some hackers and vandals ...
^^^
Line 5, column 131, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , delete
...nd vandals have opportunity to fabricate,delete and corrupt information.The lecturer re...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 163, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...abricate,delete and corrupt information.The lecturer rebuts this argument.She sugge...
^^^
Line 5, column 197, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: She
...ation.The lecturer rebuts this argument.She suggests offline decades that protect o...
^^^
Line 5, column 252, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: She
...fline decades that protect one strategy.She elaborates on this by mentioning that p...
^^^
Line 7, column 8, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , the
...ple can make changes reliably. Finally,the author states that resources from inter...
^^^^
Line 7, column 75, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...ources from internet are too frequently.The article establishes that young readers ...
^^^
Line 7, column 144, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...young readers can have false impression.The lecturer,on the other hand ,posits that...
^^^
Line 7, column 156, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , on
...s can have false impression.The lecturer,on the other hand ,posits that there are l...
^^^
Line 7, column 174, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...mpression.The lecturer,on the other hand ,posits that there are limited space what...
^^
Line 7, column 242, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: She
...ted space what is important what is not.She puts forth idea that it is not an issue...
^^^
Line 9, column 14, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , the
... represented accurately. In conclusion,the lecture and the reading are both about ...
^^^^
Line 9, column 84, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...re both about traditional encyclopedias.The professor effectively challenges the cl...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, if, second, secondly, so, in conclusion, such as, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 20.0 30.3222958057 66% => 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: 1409.0 1373.03311258 103% => OK
No of words: 223.0 270.72406181 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.31838565022 5.08290768461 124% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.86434787811 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.93181237921 2.5805825403 152% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 145.348785872 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.663677130045 0.540411800872 123% => OK
syllable_count: 425.7 419.366225166 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.55342163355 122% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 5.0 13.0662251656 38% => 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: 44.0 21.2450331126 207% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 96.3713650417 49.2860985944 196% => OK
Chars per sentence: 281.8 110.228320801 256% => Less chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 44.6 21.698381199 206% => Less words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 23.0 7.06452816374 326% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 20.0 4.19205298013 477% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.103790555372 0.272083759551 38% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0572667590733 0.0996497079465 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.020297155588 0.0662205650399 31% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0559900738198 0.162205337803 35% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0212688591149 0.0443174109184 48% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 30.6 13.3589403974 229% => Automated_readability_index is high.
flesch_reading_ease: 1.44 53.8541721854 3% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 14.6 5.55761589404 263% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 24.0 11.0289183223 218% => Flesch kincaid grade is high.
coleman_liau_index: 20.26 12.2367328918 166% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.34 8.42419426049 135% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 63.6247240618 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 30.5 10.7273730684 284% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 19.6 10.498013245 187% => OK
text_standard: 31.0 11.2008830022 277% => The average readability is very high. Good job!
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.