Communal online encyclopedias represent one of the latest resources to be
found on the Internet. They are in many respects like traditional printed encyclo-
pedias: 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 attrac-
tive, but the communal online encyclopedias have several important problems that
make them much less valuable than traditional, printed encyclopedias.
The reading and the lecture are both about the advantages and disadvantages of communal online encyclopedias and traditional printed encyclopedias. While the author of the article puts forth three reasons why traditional printed encyclopedias are better than online encyclopedias, the lecturer disputes his arguments. Her stand is that online encyclopedias are better than traditional ones.
The article states that contributors to the online encyclopedia lack academic credentials and the accuracy of the content is called into question. The author claims that traditional encyclopedias are authored by people who follow strict academic rigor. The lecturer, however, challenges this specific argument by saying that traditional encyclopedias have never been completely accurate. She goes on to say that the errors in the online script can at least be corrected whereas such editing is not possible for printed encyclopedias.
Secondly, the author asserts that information in online format can be tampered with by vandals, and hackers who might fabricate, delete or corrupt the data. He also states that such corruption of data is not possible with traditional printed encyclopedias. In contrast, the lecturer asserts that there are many ways to protect the information in online encyclopedias. The data is presented in a read-only format that prevents people from editing it. Additionally, there are special editors who are tasked with eliminating malicious errors from the data.
Finally, the author’s contention is that online encyclopedia focuses on trivial topics which gives a false impression to the reader about the importance of the topic. However, the lecturer contends that the traditional encyclopedias have limited space and the decision of specifically what information to print is taken by a board. She goes on to say that printed material does not cover many variations of content that appeal to all readers. Consequently, online encyclopedias have much more space than the traditional ones and can cover a greater variety of information that can appeal to any and all number of readers and hence preserving the diversity of topics.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 253, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...eople who follow strict academic rigor. The lecturer, however, challenges this spec...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, finally, hence, however, if, second, secondly, so, whereas, while, at least, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 12.0772626932 149% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 30.3222958057 132% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1828.0 1373.03311258 133% => OK
No of words: 328.0 270.72406181 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.57317073171 5.08290768461 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25567506705 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.1347868758 2.5805825403 121% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 145.348785872 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.496951219512 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 587.7 419.366225166 140% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.55342163355 116% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.8673672177 49.2860985944 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.25 110.228320801 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0625 7.06452816374 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.286472058109 0.272083759551 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.103115707216 0.0996497079465 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0607748154841 0.0662205650399 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.185694077612 0.162205337803 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0662572982647 0.0443174109184 150% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 13.3589403974 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 53.8541721854 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 11.0289183223 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.03 12.2367328918 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.91 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 63.6247240618 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.