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 idea might sound attractive, but the communal online encyclopedias have several important problems that make them much less valuable than traditional, printed encyclopedias.
First, contributors to a communal online encyclopedia often lack academic credentials, thereby making their contributions partially informed at best and downright inaccurate in many cases. Traditional encyclopedias are written by trained expertswho adhere to standards of academic rigor that nonspecialists cannot really achieve.
Second, even if the original entry in the online encyclopedia is correct, the communal nature of these online encyclopedias gives unscrupulous users and vandals or hackers the opportunity to fabricate, delete, and corrupt information in the encyclopedia. Once changes have been made to the original text, an unsuspecting user cannot tell the entry has been tampered with. None of this is possible with a traditional encyclopedia.
Third, the communal encyclopedias focus too frequently, and in too great a depth, on trivial and popular topics, which creates a false impression of what is important and what is not. A child doing research for a school project may discover that a major historical event receives as much attention in an online encyclopedia as, say, a single long-running television program. The traditional encyclopedia provides a considered view of what topics to include or exclude and contains a sense of proportion that online "democratic" communal encyclopedias do not.
The reading states that although communal online ecncyclopedias have several advantages, they have some problems decline their value. The lecturer, however, finds the idea dubious and casts doubt on the reasons proposed by the reading passage.
The author argues that due to the fact that traditional encyclopedias are the reults of experts' work, they are less likely to contain errors rather than online encyclopedias. Conversely, the lecturer brings up the idea that although the traditional ones have a high certain degree of accuracy, in a case of an error, they still stay unchaned for decades. However, in online versions the error can be revised as soon as possible.
Furthermore, the reading passage holds the view that communal online encyclopedias are in the danger of hackers and some part of the information may be changed or eliminated by them. On the contrary, the professor underlines the fact that there are several appoarches which can be applied to save online information. One of them is recruiting some editors to mintor all changes and prevent dire consequences.
Finally, the reading asserts that online encyclopedias provide people with a large majority of different aspects of a certain topic which can be confusingh to find what is more important than others, but the traditional ones are cosideered in a cetain aspect. In contrast, the speaker dismisses this issue due to the fact that due to the limited space of traditional encyclopedias writers cannot support a variety of topics, and they choose the one which can be discussed in that limitation.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-11-16 | TiOluwani97 | 87 | view |
| 2023-07-11 | keisham | 83 | view |
| 2023-04-05 | Dat_Nguyen | 70 | view |
| 2022-12-28 | MotherAstronaut | 85 | view |
| 2022-12-28 | MotherAstronaut | 85 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement It is more important for students to understand ideas and concepts than it is for them to learn facts Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 70
- In the United States employees typically work five days a week for eight hours each day However many employees want to work a four day week and are willing to accept less pay in order to do so A mandatory policy requiring companies to offer their employee 81
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Technology has made children less creative than they were in the past Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement It is more important to keep your old friends than it is to make new friends Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 76
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement People who develop many different skills are more successful than people who focus on one skill only Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, 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.
...asons proposed by the reading passage. The author argues that due to the fact that...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, furthermore, however, if, may, so, still, in contrast, on the contrary, what is more
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1325.0 1373.03311258 97% => OK
No of words: 255.0 270.72406181 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19607843137 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99608801488 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.893134431 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 145.348785872 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.564705882353 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 423.9 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => 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: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.6942677878 49.2860985944 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.5 110.228320801 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5 21.698381199 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.0 7.06452816374 156% => 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 : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.268126041821 0.272083759551 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.100999741047 0.0996497079465 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.061366820562 0.0662205650399 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.154131546717 0.162205337803 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0537530104724 0.0443174109184 121% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.8 13.3589403974 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 53.8541721854 70% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.0289183223 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.27 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.