tpo6
The article states that online encyclopedias are less valuable than traditional encyclopedias. The professor refutes this point by stating that with the small price, they offer various advantages.
First, the reading states that since online encyclopedias are written by people who lack academic knowledge and credentials, they are not accurate. The professor claims that traditional encyclopedias collections are not close to being accurate. On the other hand, online encyclopedias are easy to correct however, it takes a century to correct traditional one.
Second, the article claims that online encyclopedias are exposed to hacker and scandals. Therefore people can delete and hack the information. However, the professor contends that online encyclopedias are protecting the articles from hacking, first of all, no one can change some facts in any articles. Moreover, special editors monitor changes in each article daily.
Third, the reading avers that communal encyclopedias focus deeply on trivial and popular topics. The professor opposes this point by saying that online encyclopedias have a great academic diversity of users which can provide different articles. diversity is one of the strongest advantages of Online Encyclopedias
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 90, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...ias are exposed to hacker and scandals. Therefore people can delete and hack the informat...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 246, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Diversity
...s which can provide different articles. diversity is one of the strongest advantages of O...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, moreover, second, so, therefore, third, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 18.0 30.3222958057 59% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1069.0 1373.03311258 78% => OK
No of words: 183.0 270.72406181 68% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.84153005464 5.08290768461 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.67800887145 4.04702891845 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02612866326 2.5805825403 117% => OK
Unique words: 106.0 145.348785872 73% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.579234972678 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 342.9 419.366225166 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.55342163355 122% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.6607137433 49.2860985944 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.0833333333 110.228320801 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.25 21.698381199 70% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.58333333333 7.06452816374 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => 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: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => 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: 13.7 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.87 53.8541721854 57% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.0 12.2367328918 131% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.95 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.