Programmable

Website review, no card needed

wikimedia.org logo

wikimedia.org website review

Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 7 November 202622 issues · 58 checks

This review found 22 issues worth fixing on wikimedia.org, 4 of them high impact, across 58 checks. The most urgent: fails Core Web Vitals for real visitors. Your full playbook turns these into prioritised fixes alongside reviews, competitors and channels.

  1. Homepage
  2. Phone render
  3. Links and pages
  4. Google PageSpeed

Google PageSpeed Insights (opens in a new tab), mobile

Site score

86B

Closest competitors among reviewed websites

Compare side by side
Real-visitor load time (LCP)75th percentile, phones
849 ms747 msMay 16Oct 31760 ms
Show as table
DateReal-visitor load time (LCP)
May 16, 2026821 ms
May 23, 2026822 ms
May 30, 2026825 ms
Jun 6, 2026828 ms
Jun 13, 2026832 ms
Jun 20, 2026835 ms
Jun 27, 2026837 ms
Jul 4, 2026826 ms
Jul 11, 2026813 ms
Jul 18, 2026797 ms
Jul 25, 2026781 ms
Aug 1, 2026775 ms
Aug 8, 2026771 ms
Aug 15, 2026767 ms
Aug 22, 2026765 ms
Aug 29, 2026768 ms
Sep 5, 2026767 ms
Sep 12, 2026768 ms
Sep 19, 2026769 ms
Sep 26, 2026764 ms
Oct 3, 2026767 ms
Oct 10, 2026764 ms
Oct 17, 2026763 ms
Oct 24, 2026759 ms
Oct 31, 2026760 ms
Real-visitor tap response (INP)75th percentile, phones
111 ms104 msMay 16Oct 31105 ms
Show as table
DateReal-visitor tap response (INP)
May 16, 2026108 ms
May 23, 2026108 ms
May 30, 2026109 ms
Jun 6, 2026110 ms
Jun 13, 2026110 ms
Jun 20, 2026109 ms
Jun 27, 2026110 ms
Jul 4, 2026110 ms
Jul 11, 2026109 ms
Jul 18, 2026109 ms
Jul 25, 2026109 ms
Aug 1, 2026109 ms
Aug 8, 2026109 ms
Aug 15, 2026109 ms
Aug 22, 2026109 ms
Aug 29, 2026109 ms
Sep 5, 2026109 ms
Sep 12, 2026108 ms
Sep 19, 2026108 ms
Sep 26, 2026107 ms
Oct 3, 2026105 ms
Oct 10, 2026105 ms
Oct 17, 2026105 ms
Oct 24, 2026105 ms
Oct 31, 2026105 ms

Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab): real Chrome visitors over rolling 28-day periods.

One score from every part of this review. How it works

www.wikimedia.org (opens in a new tab)
Full-page screenshot of wikimedia.org (phone) rendered by Google PageSpeed Insights

How it loaded on a phone

  1. wikimedia.org at 0.4 s0.4 s
  2. wikimedia.org at 0.8 s0.8 s
  3. wikimedia.org at 1.1 s1.1 s
  4. wikimedia.org at 1.5 s1.5 s
  5. wikimedia.org at 1.9 s1.9 s
  6. wikimedia.org at 2.3 s2.3 s
  7. wikimedia.org at 2.6 s2.6 s
  8. wikimedia.org at 3.0 s3.0 s

Speed

100

  • Improve image delivery

    59 KiB

    1 image could be 59 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen.

  • Chained critical requests

    Critical files load one after another instead of in parallel (3 chains). Preconnecting to key origins and preloading the hero image shortens the chain.

3 checks passed

  • Mobile performance score: 100

    100/100

    Your mobile performance score is 100. That is in Google's “good” band (90 and up).

  • Main-thread work: 0.1 s

    A phone's processor spends 0.1 s on main-thread work while loading, 6 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.

  • Server response: 1 ms

    1 ms

    Your server sent the HTML in 1 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.

Core Web Vitals

3 to fix100

  • Fails Core Web Vitals for real visitors

    Real Chrome users on phones do not pass Google's Core Web Vitals on this page (28-day field data from the Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab)). Google uses this in ranking.

  • Real-user TTFB: 1.1 s

    1.1 s

    Real visitors wait 1.1 s for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.

  • 1 image without width and height

    1 image have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.

  • Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors

    -3%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-31, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 108 ms to 105 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

  • Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors

    -8%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-31, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 0.8 s to 0.8 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

10 checks passed

  • Real-user LCP: 1.5 s

    1.5 s

    Real visitors wait 1.5 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.

  • Real-user INP: 99 ms

    99 ms

    Real visitors wait 99 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.

  • Real-user CLS: 0.00

    0.00

    For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.00 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.

  • Real-user FCP: 1.5 s

    1.5 s

    Real visitors see the first content after 1.5 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Cumulative Layout Shift: 0

    0

    The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0, good is under 0.1).

  • First Contentful Paint: 0.8 s

    0.8 s

    The first text or image appears after 0.8 s, inside the 1.8 s “good” threshold.

  • Largest Contentful Paint: 0.8 s

    0.8 s

    Your largest element renders in 0.8 s on a phone, inside Google's 2.5 s “good” threshold. The largest element is the text “Welcome! The Wikimedia movement is a global community of pe…”.

  • Speed Index: 0.8 s

    0.8 s

    Visually, the page fills in at 0.8 s (Speed Index), inside the 3.4 s “good” threshold.

  • Total Blocking Time: 0 ms

    0 ms

    Scripts block the page for only 0 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.

  • Time to Interactive: 0.8 s

    0.8 s

    The page is fully interactive after 0.8 s.

Images and page weight

1 to fix90

  • 1 image far larger than shown

    60 KiB

    1 image is downloaded at several times the size a phone draws it, for example wikimedia_logo.png at 1,280 px wide, shown at 40 px. Resized copies would save about 60 KiB.

  • 1 image in older formats

    1 image (60 KiB) is JPEG, PNG or GIF. The same pictures as WebP or AVIF are usually much smaller at the same quality, and every current browser shows them.

  • About 0.04 g of CO₂ per visit

    0.04 g

    By the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.04 g of CO₂e: 4.7 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.

2 checks passed

  • Page weight: 142 KiB in 19 requests

    142 KiB

    Your homepage downloads 142 KiB in 19 requests on a phone: images 126 KiB (17), HTML 12 KiB (1) and scripts 4 KiB (1). That is a lean page.

  • Images load when needed

    Images below the first screen wait until the visitor scrolls to them.

Accessibility

4 to fixGoogle 8487

  • 1 image without alt text

    1 image has no alt text, which hurts accessibility and image search.

  • All page content should be contained by landmarks (7 elements)

    All page content should be contained by landmarks: 7 elements on the page fail this check, rated moderate by axe-core.

  • No main landmark

    The page has no <main> landmark, so screen-reader users cannot jump straight to the content.

  • Page should contain a level-one heading (1 element)

    Page should contain a level-one heading: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate by axe-core.

1 checks passed

  • 15 automated accessibility rules passed

    axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 19 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 15 passed and 4 failed. 1 more need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.

SEO

8 to fixGoogle 9162

  • No H1 headline

    There is no <h1>, so neither visitors nor Google get a clear main headline.

  • Title is short (9 characters)

    Your title is only 9 characters: “Wikimedia”. Between 30 and 65 characters leaves room to say what you do and for whom.

  • No structured data

    No structured data (JSON-LD), so Google can't show rich results such as your logo, ratings or FAQs.

  • No canonical URL

    No canonical URL, so duplicate versions of the homepage (with or without www, with tracking parameters) can split ranking signals.

  • No social preview image

    No Open Graph image (also missing: og:title, og:description), so links shared on LinkedIn, Slack or Facebook show no preview picture.

  • No XML sitemap

    No XML sitemap at https://www.wikimedia.org/sitemap.xml, so Google discovers your pages only by following links.

  • No robots.txt

    There is no robots.txt at wikimedia.org/robots.txt, the first file search crawlers ask for.

  • Only 0 internal links

    The homepage links to only 0 pages on your own site, so visitors and crawlers find few routes into the rest of it.

  • No X (Twitter) card tag

    No twitter:card tag. X falls back to Open Graph, which is incomplete here.

1 checks passed

  • Meta description: 135 characters

    Your meta description is 135 characters: “The Wikimedia movement is a global community of people, projects, and activities working together to create and share k…”.

AI search readiness

1 to fix88

  • No Organization structured data

    There is no Organization (or LocalBusiness) JSON-LD, so search engines and AI assistants have no machine-readable facts about who runs the site: its name, logo, profiles and contact details.

  • No llms.txt

    There is no https://www.wikimedia.org/llms.txt, a short Markdown guide to your key pages for AI tools (llmstxt.org). It is optional and few AI tools read it yet, so treat it as a cheap extra.

2 checks passed

  • AI answer engines may read the site

    There is no robots.txt, so nothing stops the crawlers behind ChatGPT search, Claude and Perplexity from reading the site and cite it in answers.

  • Text is in the HTML

    Your server sends the page's text in the HTML (191 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.

Best practices

Google 100100
3 checks passed

  • No console errors

    No JavaScript errors were logged while the page loaded on a phone.

  • Tap targets are thumb-sized

    14 of 17 tappable elements near the top are at least 24 px.

  • Mobile viewport set

    The page declares a mobile viewport.

Content and conversion

5 to fix50

  • No call to action on the first screen

    On a phone, there is no call to action on the first screen: visitors have to scroll to find out what to do next.

  • Thin social proof

    Social proof on the homepage: “over 260,000 users”. Pairing it with named testimonials or customer logos makes it far more convincing.

  • No analytics detected

    No analytics or tag manager detected in the HTML, so you can't measure whether any of these fixes work.

  • No direct contact details

    No phone number or email link on the homepage, so ready-to-buy visitors have one fewer way to reach you.

  • Only about 191 words

    The homepage has only about 191 words of visible text; thin pages give Google and first-time buyers little to go on.

  • No form on the homepage

    There is no form on the homepage, so every lead has to click through to another page first.

  • No risk reducer

    No guarantee or risk reducer (money-back, free trial, no credit card) is mentioned, which is often what tips a hesitant visitor.

1 checks passed

  • 2 calls to action

    The homepage has 2 calls to action, for example “WikiquoteFree quote compendium” and “Contact”.

Privacy and tracking

  • 7 cookies set on arrival

    7

    Opening the homepage sets 7 cookies (measured from a US location before any click).

  • No consent tool detected

    No known cookie consent tool loads with the page. Some sites build their own banner, and some only show one to visitors from the EU.

1 checks passed

  • No known trackers before consent

    No known advertising or analytics trackers load before a visitor clicks anything (measured from a US location before any click).

Security, domain, email and software versions

The security, domain and email checks, software and plugin versions, and any app with a known security problem are visible only to people at wikimedia.org, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.

Upkeep, stack and company

Stack

Hosting
Wikimedia Foundation Inc.

Company

Headquarters
San Francisco

Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info

Go beyond the website

What your $25 Growth Playbook adds

This review found 22 issues on wikimedia.org, including 3 speed issues, 8 SEO issues and 5 conversion gaps. That is the website alone. The full Growth Playbook pairs these findings with what your customers say in public reviews and communities and what your closest competitors do better, then turns everything into at least 20 prioritised ideas, each with the evidence behind it, a step-by-step playbook, a metric and an owner.

  • 28 research agents read your site, reviews, competitors, communities and public filings
  • Customer review mining (G2, Capterra, Trustpilot and more) and voice-of-pain analysis in your buyers’ own words
  • Competitor intelligence with battlecards for your closest rivals
  • Ideal customer profile, buyer segments and buying-stage funnel
  • Ranked channels, outreach sequences and content angles
  • Live Reddit threads where buyers ask for what you sell, with draft replies
  • Earned media and PR openings
  • At least 20 ideas with evidence, a step-by-step playbook, metric, owner, effort and impact, grouped into this week, this quarter, big bets and wildcards, plus a 30/60/90-day roadmap
  • PDF, Markdown, CSV, Notion and Linear exports, and a shareable page your team can track progress on
  • Refresh the playbook later to see what changed

By continuing you agree to the Terms and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.

Free requests are written in the order they come in, so it can take a while. Pay $25 and yours is ready within a few hours. Either way you get a shareable link and a PDF.

  • No subscription
  • Free, or $25 to skip the line
  • Money-back guarantee

14-day money-back guarantee: not happy for any reason, email us within 14 days and we refund in full.

Get the full playbook · $25