traditional encyclopedias comparison with the online encyclopedia
The reading and the lecturer both are about online encyclopedias and traditional encyclopedias. The author of reading thinks that online encyclopedias are less valuable since they have several problems. The lecturer casts doubt on the points made in the reading passage. She says that traditional encyclopedias were never perfect than an online encyclopedia.
First of all, the author says that online encyclopedias are often inaccurate due to the lake of academic credentials where traditional encyclopedias were written by the experts. The lecturer refutes this point and asserts that traditional encyclopedias were never accurate; no one can find at least one without any mistakes. Additionally, an online encyclopedia can be corrected but traditional encyclopedias having errors for decades.
Secondly, the author states that material from encyclopedia can be hacked by the unscrupulous users, where this is not possible with traditional encyclopedias. This point is challenged by the lecturer. She thinks that in online encyclopedias has a special structure so no one can dispute the data or change information. This special edition can eliminate changes.
Finally, the author mentions that in the online encyclopedia, there are many topics that are included so no one can make a distinction between popular topics and regular topics. The lecturer opposes this argument. She says that in the traditional encyclopedia there was not much space to include all the information, but in online encyclopedias, much information can be included.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 204, 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.
...uable since they have several problems. The lecturer casts doubt on the points made...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, second, secondly, so, at least, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 21.0 30.3222958057 69% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1322.0 1373.03311258 96% => OK
No of words: 233.0 270.72406181 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.67381974249 5.08290768461 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.90696013833 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.26752378304 2.5805825403 127% => OK
Unique words: 123.0 145.348785872 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.527896995708 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 430.2 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.55342163355 116% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => 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: 48.7170610856 49.2860985944 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.4285714286 110.228320801 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.6428571429 21.698381199 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.64285714286 7.06452816374 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.468002681665 0.272083759551 172% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.1858492119 0.0996497079465 187% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.144653540361 0.0662205650399 218% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.319935341804 0.162205337803 197% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.091904730904 0.0443174109184 207% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.3589403974 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.31 53.8541721854 71% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.31 12.2367328918 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 54.0 63.6247240618 85% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
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.