Kuroma Kuroma

en.wikipedia.org scores 57/100 for AI Readiness

en.wikipedia.org scores 57/100 (grade B) on AI Readiness, audited 30 Sep 2026. Its strongest area is On-Page Content (64) and its weakest is Authority Signals (42); the biggest single gap is Trust & Brand Signals at 17/100 (No privacy policy link found). That places it in the top quartile of the 30,995 sites Kuroma has audited.

Audited URL: https://en.wikipedia.org

57/100
Grade
B

The most points to recover are in Trust & Brand Signals: it scored 17/100 on a check worth 9% of the total, which takes 7.5 points off the overall score.

This audit is 7 days old. AI answers change between audits, so what AI search sees today may differ from this card.

Updated 7 days ago

Top 25% of all audited sites Median 39 · Top quartile 45 · across 30,995 audited sites

Is en.wikipedia.org ready for AI search?

Mostly, with gaps: en.wikipedia.org scores 57/100 (grade B). The gaps to close are Add FAQ Schema Markup and Add Trust Signals.

Category scores

On-Page Content 25% of the score 64
Technical Optimization 20% of the score 61
Authority Signals 25% of the score 42
AI Readiness 30% of the score 62

Top fixes, ranked by points recovered

Ranked by each check's share of the overall score times how far it fell short, so the biggest number is the biggest win, not the lowest score.

  1. Add Trust Signals up to +7.5 pts

    On https://en.wikipedia.org · Authority Signals → Trust & Brand Signals, scored 17/100

    • No privacy policy link found
    • No about or company page linked from this page
    • No contact information easily accessible
    • Add a privacy policy page and link to it in the footer
    • Link to an about page that says who publishes this site
    • Your Organization schema declares 2 of the identity properties engines read; add the rest (name, url, logo, sameAs, contactPoint, address)
  2. Improve Crawlability & AI Crawler Access up to +5.6 pts

    On https://en.wikipedia.org · Technical Optimization → Crawlability & Accessibility, scored 57/100

    • Canonical URL does not match page URL
    • The response at en.wikipedia.org is not a robots.txt file, so AI crawler access could not be verified.
    • Verify canonical tag points to the correct URL
    • Serve a plain-text robots.txt at en.wikipedia.org — the response we received could not be parsed as one
  3. Add FAQ Schema Markup up to +5.1 pts

    On https://en.wikipedia.org · On-Page Content → Question Coverage & FAQ Presence, scored 21/100

    • No FAQ schema markup detected
    • Few question-based headings
    • Identify the top 5-10 questions your audience asks
    • Create a dedicated FAQ section on this page
    • Add FAQPage schema markup (see code below)
  4. Increase Citation-Worthy Content up to +4.4 pts

    On https://en.wikipedia.org · AI Readiness → Citation-Worthiness, scored 42/100

    • Conduct original research or surveys
    • Include specific statistics with sources
    • Add expert quotes and interviews
  5. Strengthen E-E-A-T Signals up to +4.3 pts

    On https://en.wikipedia.org · Authority Signals → E-E-A-T Signals, scored 38/100

    • No author attribution found
    • No publication or update dates found
    • Add author byline with name and credentials
    • Create detailed author bio pages
    • Include "About Us" with company history

All 19 scored checks

Every check the published rubric scores, with what this audit found on the page.

On-Page Content 25% of the score

  • Content Depth & Comprehensiveness Pass 97/100

    6.5% of the overall score

    Found: 1,481 words, 7 paragraphs, 44 lists, 1 tables, 23 images (19 with alt text)

    • 4 images missing alt text (e.g. /static/images/icons/enwiki-25.svg, //thumb.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/Wikimedia_Community_Logo.svg/40px-Wikimedia_Community_Logo.svg.png?utm_source=en.wikipedia.org&utm_campaign=parser&utm_c…
  • Question Coverage & FAQ Presence Fail 21/100

    6.5% of the overall score

    No FAQ structure. 0 question headings. 0 questions detected in content

    • No FAQ schema markup detected
    • Few question-based headings
  • Structured Data Quality Needs work 45/100

    4.5% of the overall score

    1 JSON-LD scripts. Schema types: Article

  • AI Readability Score Pass 94/100

    3% of the overall score

    Average 9 words/sentence. 4 long sentences. Has text formatting.

  • Heading Hierarchy Pass 100/100

    2.8% of the overall score

    H1: 1, H2: 9, H3: 0. Proper hierarchy.

  • Media Accessibility Needs work 47/100

    1.8% of the overall score

    Measures whether images, video, and charts have text equivalents AI can read.

    • 3 of 22 content images have no alt text, so their content is invisible to AI search.
    • 13 images have alt text too short to describe what they show ("Wikipedia", "Bangkok floods", "Fyffe House").
    • 6 images have no caption, so AI can't read the takeaway of a chart or diagram without one.

Technical Optimization 20% of the score

  • Schema Markup Completeness Partial 50/100

    1% of the overall score

    1 valid schemas

  • Page Performance Indicators Pass 91/100

    2% of the overall score

    2 render-blocking resources. 2,345 elements for 1,481 words

  • Mobile Optimization Partial 60/100

    4% of the overall score

    Has viewport. 20 responsive images

    • Viewport not configured for device width
  • Crawlability & Accessibility Partial 57/100

    13% of the overall score

    HTTPS enabled. Has canonical. Indexable. AI crawler access unverified (robots.txt unreadable). 9 placeholder links

    • Canonical URL does not match page URL
    • The response at en.wikipedia.org is not a robots.txt file, so AI crawler access could not be verified.

Authority Signals 25% of the score

  • E-E-A-T Signals Needs work 38/100

    7% of the overall score

    Experience: 0/10. Expertise: 10/25. Authority: 15/25. Trust: 7/25

    • No author attribution found
    • No publication or update dates found
  • External Citations & References Partial 70/100

    9% of the overall score

    49 external links, 0 citation phrases, 6 statistics. Has references section.

  • Trust & Brand Signals Fail 17/100

    9% of the overall score

    Present: Publisher schema (2 identity properties)

    • No privacy policy link found
    • No about or company page linked from this page
    • No contact information easily accessible

AI Readiness 30% of the score

  • Answer Box Potential Partial 72/100

    7.2% of the overall score

    9 of 10 headings open a quotable passage, 2 definitions, 1 comparison structures

    • No FAQ structure detected
  • Citation-Worthiness Needs work 42/100

    7.5% of the overall score

    0 original data indicators, 0 percentages, 0 quotes.

  • Content Freshness Pass 89/100

    5.7% of the overall score

    References current year. Last modified: 6/12/2026

  • Unique Value Proposition Needs work 32/100

    5.1% of the overall score

    3 of 67 passages carry a figure, 1 set two figures against each other, 0 named versions or models.

  • AI Discoverability Not measured 66/100

    3% of the overall score

    Score: 66/100

  • Raw HTML Availability Pass 100/100

    1.5% of the overall score

    1,481 words readable without JavaScript

This audit measures citation readiness: how easily AI engines can crawl, extract, and quote these pages. It cannot see the off-site brand footprint (mentions, reviews, third-party coverage) that gates whether AI engines retrieve a brand at all; Kuroma's visibility scans and off-site signals track that side. How the score works

Score your own site → Claim this card