TPO6- integrated
The article states that communal online encyclopedia has some problems that make it unreliable rather than traditional ones and provides three reasons of support. However, the professor explains that it is by far a satisfactory resource and refutes each of the author's reasons.
First, the reading claims that online encyclopedias have so many errors. The professor opposes this point by saying that both the online and printed ones are not impeccable, and indeed it is inevitable to have a few errors. What matters is that online encyclopedias can be corrected much easier. However, the printed versions may remain with errors for along time.
Second, the article posits that online encyclopedias are prone to attacks from hackers. In contrast, the professor says that their crucial facts can still bereliable. According to the professor, there are some strategies that can help those who are in charge of the encyclopedia protect it from attacks. For instance, a cautious editor can check the materials and look for any harmful change and omit it if necessary.
Third, the reading states that the diversity ofmaterials is not wide enough. The professor casts doubt on this point by explaining that unlike the limitationof space which hampers printed documents from publishing a wide range of information, the online ones can benefit from not having any concern about whether the length of the paper allows them to have something or not. They can readily provide their readers with diverse knowledge offered in as many pages as needed.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 350, Rule ID: FOR_ALONG_TIME[1]
Message: Did you mean 'for a long time'?
Suggestion: for a long time
...printed versions may remain with errors for along time. Second, the article posits tha...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 354, Rule ID: ALONG_TIME[1]
Message: Did you mean 'a long time'?
Suggestion: a long time
...ted versions may remain with errors for along time. Second, the article posits tha...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, look, may, second, so, still, third, for instance, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1310.0 1373.03311258 95% => OK
No of words: 248.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.28225806452 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96837696647 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69368118274 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 145.348785872 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.596774193548 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 405.0 419.366225166 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.0922367954 49.2860985944 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.769230769 110.228320801 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0769230769 21.698381199 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.30769230769 7.06452816374 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.34 12.2367328918 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.04 8.42419426049 107% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.