communal online encyclopedia
The reading and the lecture discusses the pros and cons of online encyclopedias and the traditional one. The author of the passage feels that there are three reasons for the traditional encyclopedia being more valuable. The lecturer challenges the claims made by the author. he is of the opinion that the explanations are faulty.
Firstly, the communal type lacks academic credentials and are partly informed as well as inaccurate. The article mentions that the printed version is written by trained expects and they adhere to standards required. this statement is challenged by the lecturer .he claims that no work is free from errors .The printed errors cannot be corrected whereas the online mistakes can be rectified.
Secondly, the writer mentions that unscrupulous users or hackers can delete or fabricate information which would be eventually difficult to notice if its tampered with. While, the book has no such trouble. The lecturer however, rebuts this by referring that there are strategies like inclusion of crucial information in the read only format and special editors who can eliminate wrong information entered.
Thirdly, it is suggested by the author that online version may focus on trivial and popular topics creating a false impression. Likewise, the written version decides what to be included and excluded. In contrast, the lecturer says that a variety of topics directed to the users interest can be found in online version which is the strongest advantage of online over traditional.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 123, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d the traditional one. The author of the passage feels that there are three reaso...
^^
Line 1, column 222, 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.
...ional encyclopedia being more valuable. The lecturer challenges the claims made by ...
^^^
Line 1, column 277, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: He
...allenges the claims made by the author. he is of the opinion that the explanations...
^^
Line 4, column 217, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: This
... and they adhere to standards required. this statement is challenged by the lecturer...
^^^^
Line 4, column 261, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... statement is challenged by the lecturer .he claims that no work is free from erro...
^^
Line 4, column 305, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... claims that no work is free from errors .The printed errors cannot be corrected w...
^^
Line 4, column 307, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...laims that no work is free from errors .The printed errors cannot be corrected wher...
^^^
Line 7, column 170, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “While” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...fficult to notice if its tampered with. While, the book has no such trouble. The lect...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 407, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...an eliminate wrong information entered. Thirdly, it is suggested by the author t...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, likewise, may, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, well, whereas, while, in contrast, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 30.3222958057 76% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1284.0 1373.03311258 94% => OK
No of words: 240.0 270.72406181 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.35 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.93597934253 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78227275203 2.5805825403 108% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 145.348785872 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.6 0.540411800872 111% => OK
syllable_count: 399.6 419.366225166 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => 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: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 50.7064880365 49.2860985944 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.7692307692 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.4615384615 21.698381199 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.1538461538 7.06452816374 144% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 4.19205298013 215% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.194600604931 0.272083759551 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0579749369687 0.0996497079465 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.075398315273 0.0662205650399 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.104434033998 0.162205337803 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.066724548817 0.0443174109184 151% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 53.8541721854 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.75 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.79 8.42419426049 116% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 63.6247240618 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.