When Stanley Park first opened it was the largest most heavily used public park in town It is still the largest park but it is no longer heavily used Video cameras mounted in the park s parking lots last month revealed the park s drop in popularity the re

While it may be true that Stanley Park is not as heavily used as it was in the past, the author's arguments regarding the reasons and solutions for its current state are debatable. In the given argument, the author compares the usage of two parks in the same town. However, he/she has not used the correct basis for comparison, and hence, the argument sounds weak.

The author claims that there are only 50 cars visiting Stanley Park per day, whereas, 150 cars visit Carlton Park. Assuming these statistics to be true, the number of cars in a park does not neccesarily determine the number of people going inside the park. Since Carlton Park is near business district area, people may be using the park only as a parking spot. On the contrary, if Stanley Park is situated near residence area, people living nearby may not be needing cars to go to this park. The residents may be walking or cycling to the park. Considering this, the author's asummption that number of cars equal to the number of people using a park is questionable.

The author believes that Stanley Park will gain popularity by providing more benches for people to socialize. Nevertheless, a study regarding the useage of benches at Carlton Park is important to the argument. It is unclear whether the people use benches at all. The benches at the Carlton Park may be deserted. People may like to roam around the walkway of the parks, rather than sitting at one place. Hence, to suggest conversion of open areas into places for socializing sounds unsteady.

Moreover, the author claims that ample seating is the only reason that people enjoy Carlton Park over Stanley Park. However, the reasons that the later has been getting fewer visitors can be a combination of various aspects. Stanley Park may be situated on the outskirts of the town, making it inconvenient for people to travel such a distance. Stanley Park may also be deprived of other amenities such as availability of drinking water, washrooms, etc. Besides, Carlton Park may be recently built and, out of curiosity, people may be visiting it more. Thus, the author must study all such reasons and give suggestions accordingly.

A well-maintained park surely adds value to the town's beauty and social image. It is important for Stanley Park to be brought up to its original honour. However, the argument needs more study to justify its claims.

Votes
Average: 7.9 (2 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 457, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...ence area, people living nearby may not be needing cars to go to this park. The residents ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 49, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'towns'' or 'town's'?
Suggestion: towns'; town's
...aintained park surely adds value to the towns beauty and social image. It is importan...
^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, besides, hence, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, regarding, so, thus, well, whereas, while, such as, on the contrary

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1982.0 2260.96107784 88% => OK
No of words: 406.0 441.139720559 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.88177339901 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48881294772 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54351819755 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.490147783251 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 603.9 705.55239521 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 29.7106415653 57.8364921388 51% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 82.5833333333 119.503703932 69% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.9166666667 23.324526521 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.70786347227 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.36584127476 0.218282227539 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.136792520541 0.0743258471296 184% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.091826930494 0.0701772020484 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.228349913334 0.128457276422 178% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0674681977346 0.0628817314937 107% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.0 14.3799401198 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 48.3550499002 132% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 12.197005988 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.73 12.5979740519 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.81 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 98.500998004 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 2 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 9 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 407 350
No. of Characters: 1916 1500
No. of Different Words: 197 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.492 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.708 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.464 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 140 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 101 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 57 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 32 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.696 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.49 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.696 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.344 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.539 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.104 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5