The reading and the lecture discuss the importance and the quality of the communal online encyclopedias. The author of the reading thinks that they are not valuable or accurate. However, the lecturer refutes all the claims in the reading passage.
First, the article argues that online encyclopedias lack accuracy. The professor, on the other hand, rejects this opinion by stating that even traditional ones have errors and it is nearly impossible to find any encyclopedia without mistakes. Moreover, online data can be easily corrected or revised, which is opposite to the traditional ones.
Second, the text contends that the online encyclopedias are liable for hacking and misleading with the information. The speaker rebuts this assumptions by explaining that even it may be partially true, but now the facts on any encyclopedias are read-only which protect it from any possible threat. What is more, the encyclopedias hires editors whose job is to edit and revise the information, which eliminates the chances of untruthful data.
Third, the passage posits that the online encyclopedias focus more on trivial topics. Conversely, the lecturer casts doubt on this notion. She elaborates that it a positive thing to have many topics that really reflect the different interests of people. Besides, the academic topics also exist for those want them. Hence, the online resources are more varied and covers different fields of subjects and topics.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, conversely, first, hence, however, if, may, moreover, really, second, so, third, what is more, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 20.0 30.3222958057 66% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1228.0 1373.03311258 89% => OK
No of words: 228.0 270.72406181 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.38596491228 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.88582923847 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81339735522 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 140.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.614035087719 0.540411800872 114% => OK
syllable_count: 392.4 419.366225166 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.116997792494 855% => Less interrogative sentences wanted.
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
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: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.2116184365 49.2860985944 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.7142857143 110.228320801 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.2857142857 21.698381199 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.42857142857 7.06452816374 133% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.19972027883 0.272083759551 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0627631932555 0.0996497079465 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0450498303499 0.0662205650399 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.109099608703 0.162205337803 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0482764709474 0.0443174109184 109% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.42 8.42419426049 112% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.