Communal online encyclopedias represent one of the latest resources to be found on the Internet. They are in many respects like traditional printed encyclopedias collections of articles on various subjects. What is specific to these online encyclopedias, however, is that any Internet user can contribute a new article or make an editorial change in an existing one. As a result, the encyclopedia is authored by the whole community of Internet users.
The reading and the lecture are both about whether online encyclopedias are just as important as traditional printed encyclopedias.
The author of the reading believes there are three explanations why online ones hold many flaws.
The lecturer challenges the statements made by the author.
she is of the opinion that online encyclopedias promises variety of advantages if not perfect.
First of all, the author suggest that online encyclopedias have less academic credentials. so they tend to be inaccurate and have errors. it is mentioned that, on the other hand, traditional encyclopedias are written by experts.
The argument is refuted by the lecturer. she says both types of encyclopedias have error and flaws, but online one can be corrected easily. Furthermore, she argues that traditional one, however, could remain containing flawed information for decades.
Secondly, the article posits that vandals and hackers change the information of online encyclopedias. The article notes that users can not tell the changed information. The lecturer, however, rebuts this by asserting that most online encyclopedias have solutions for such actions. she elaborates on this by mentioning that online encyclopedias have read only format as well as special editors who monitor the encyclopedia. Thus the information is safe and reliable.
Finally, it is stated in the article that online encyclopedias are too broad and contain many unnecessary information. As a result, this kind of attributions give rise to ambiguity of which information is valueable and which is not. The article establishes that even a very important historical event recieve as equal attention as a mere long tv series. The lecturer, on the other hand, opposes that by saying that traditional encyclopedias have limited space, so authors decided which information to put, but the authors judgement can not reflect users' opinions and need. she puts forth the idea that online ones having many topics is the one of the strongest disadvantages.
- Your professor is teaching a class on political science Write a post responding to the professor s question In your response you should express and support your personal opinion make a contribution to the discussion in your own words An effective response 80
- Governments should spend more money in support of the arts than in support of athletics such as state-sponsored Olympic teams. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 70
- TPO 27 integrated writing Little Ice Age 70
- do you agree of disagree with the following statement? It is important to know what ishappening around the world, even if it does not affect your personal lives. 70
- Professor Today we re discussing the ethics of targeted advertising Some people argue that online advertising which uses personal information to target specific people is an invasion of privacy Others argue that it s simply an acceptable way to reach cons 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 1, 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.
...ons why online ones hold many flaws. The lecturer challenges the statements made...
^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
...s the statements made by the author. she is of the opinion that online encyclope...
^^^
Line 9, column 92, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: So
...opedias have less academic credentials. so they tend to be inaccurate and have err...
^^
Line 9, column 139, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
... tend to be inaccurate and have errors. it is mentioned that, on the other hand, t...
^^
Line 11, column 42, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
...he argument is refuted by the lecturer. she says both types of encyclopedias have e...
^^^
Line 13, column 282, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
...pedias have solutions for such actions. she elaborates on this by mentioning that o...
^^^
Line 13, column 424, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...l editors who monitor the encyclopedia. Thus the information is safe and reliable. ...
^^^^
Line 15, column 90, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun information seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much unnecessary information', 'a good deal of unnecessary information'.
Suggestion: much unnecessary information; a good deal of unnecessary information
...encyclopedias are too broad and contain many unnecessary information. As a result, this kind of attributions...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 15, column 515, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...cided which information to put, but the authors judgement can not reflect users opinion...
^^^^^^^
Line 15, column 574, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
...an not reflect users opinions and need. she puts forth the idea that online ones ha...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, second, secondly, so, thus, well, kind of, as a result, as well as, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 30.3222958057 76% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1720.0 1373.03311258 125% => OK
No of words: 313.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.49520766773 5.08290768461 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20616286096 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09666916211 2.5805825403 120% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536741214058 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 551.7 419.366225166 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.55342163355 116% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 13.0662251656 153% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.1980547987 49.2860985944 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.0 110.228320801 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.65 21.698381199 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.3 7.06452816374 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 8.0 4.09492273731 195% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 10.0 4.19205298013 239% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 4.33554083885 254% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.306111141044 0.272083759551 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0965955142491 0.0996497079465 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0700156017901 0.0662205650399 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.15049822533 0.162205337803 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0645199236193 0.0443174109184 146% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 39.33 53.8541721854 73% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.32 12.2367328918 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.67 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 63.6247240618 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.