Encyclopedia
In the passage points are made in support of traditional encyclopedias where as speaker contradicts the points in reagrds to three point by giving perticular reasons ad examples. The points are No encyclopedia is perfect, defence mechanisms from frauders and last but not least interest and space.
Firstly speaker points out that in passage it was stated that in communal encyclopedia many Internet users add information and their sourse is not crediable. However regarding to speaker no encyclopedia is perfect. Generating information sourses without mistake are nearly imposible. Furthermore he says that printed error lasts longer that online error. They may remain for decades.
Secondly in the passage it was stated that hackers manipulate the original data and unsuspecting user can not distinguish between true and false error. According to speaker it is misconception and precautionary methods are in use that avoid such incidence. Read only format and editors specially appointed to find such malecious format helps reader to find original and true knowledge.
Thirdly he denies the validity of point made in passage that one cannot distinguish the difference between important and not important data, by saying that traditional encyclopedia is having limitation of space so the author of books had to select only important data. The data found important by this author might be of not in interest book of others. this drawback was removed by internet. Variety of idea are available that will be helping user to find data of his/her interest.
Hence in conclusion , speaker lucidly substantiates his points of view with cogency.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 72, Rule ID: WHERE_AS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'whereas'?
Suggestion: whereas
...in support of traditional encyclopedias where as speaker contradicts the points in reagr...
^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 269, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[3]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'not the least'.
Suggestion: not the least
...e mechanisms from frauders and last but not least interest and space. Firstly speake...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 159, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...tion and their sourse is not crediable. However regarding to speaker no encyclopedia is...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 285, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Furthermore,
...s without mistake are nearly imposible. Furthermore he says that printed error lasts longer...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 354, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: This
...t be of not in interest book of others. this drawback was removed by internet. Varie...
^^^^
Line 17, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
... to find data of his/her interest. Hence in conclusion , speaker lucidly substan...
^^^^^
Line 17, column 20, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...s/her interest. Hence in conclusion , speaker lucidly substantiates his point...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, hence, however, if, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1401.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 257.0 270.72406181 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.4513618677 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00390054096 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89323106759 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 151.0 145.348785872 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.587548638132 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 435.6 419.366225166 104% => 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: 2.0 8.23620309051 24% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 59.9310715183 49.2860985944 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.4 110.228320801 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.1333333333 21.698381199 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.06666666667 7.06452816374 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.183794932229 0.272083759551 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0635075068989 0.0996497079465 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0971298110661 0.0662205650399 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0984013180343 0.162205337803 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.094180753918 0.0443174109184 213% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 13.3589403974 96% => OK
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: 14.03 12.2367328918 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.96 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.