Programmable

Website review, no card needed

wikipedia.org logo

wikipedia.org website review

Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 11 October 202612 issues · 59 checks

This review found 12 issues worth fixing on wikipedia.org, 2 of them high impact, across 59 checks. The most urgent: form elements must have labels (1 element). 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

91A

Closest competitors among reviewed websites

Compare side by side
Real-visitor load time (LCP)75th percentile, phones
1.3 s1.2 sApr 18Oct 31.3 s
Show as table
DateReal-visitor load time (LCP)
Apr 18, 20261.2 s
Apr 25, 20261.2 s
May 2, 20261.2 s
May 9, 20261.2 s
May 16, 20261.2 s
May 23, 20261.2 s
May 30, 20261.2 s
Jun 6, 20261.2 s
Jun 13, 20261.2 s
Jun 20, 20261.2 s
Jun 27, 20261.2 s
Jul 4, 20261.2 s
Jul 11, 20261.2 s
Jul 18, 20261.2 s
Jul 25, 20261.2 s
Aug 1, 20261.2 s
Aug 8, 20261.2 s
Aug 15, 20261.2 s
Aug 22, 20261.2 s
Aug 29, 20261.2 s
Sep 5, 20261.3 s
Sep 12, 20261.3 s
Sep 19, 20261.3 s
Sep 26, 20261.3 s
Oct 3, 20261.3 s
Real-visitor tap response (INP)75th percentile, phones
99 ms96 msApr 18Oct 399 ms
Show as table
DateReal-visitor tap response (INP)
Apr 18, 202697 ms
Apr 25, 202697 ms
May 2, 202696 ms
May 9, 202696 ms
May 16, 202696 ms
May 23, 202696 ms
May 30, 202696 ms
Jun 6, 202696 ms
Jun 13, 202696 ms
Jun 20, 202696 ms
Jun 27, 202696 ms
Jul 4, 202696 ms
Jul 11, 202696 ms
Jul 18, 202696 ms
Jul 25, 202696 ms
Aug 1, 202696 ms
Aug 8, 202696 ms
Aug 15, 202696 ms
Aug 22, 202696 ms
Aug 29, 202696 ms
Sep 5, 202696 ms
Sep 12, 202697 ms
Sep 19, 202698 ms
Sep 26, 202699 ms
Oct 3, 202699 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.wikipedia.org (opens in a new tab)
Full-page screenshot of wikipedia.org (desktop) rendered by Google PageSpeed Insights

How it loaded on a phone

  1. wikipedia.org at 0.4 s0.4 s
  2. wikipedia.org at 0.9 s0.9 s
  3. wikipedia.org at 1.3 s1.3 s
  4. wikipedia.org at 1.7 s1.7 s
  5. wikipedia.org at 2.2 s2.2 s
  6. wikipedia.org at 2.6 s2.6 s
  7. wikipedia.org at 3.0 s3.0 s
  8. wikipedia.org at 3.5 s3.5 s

Speed

100

  • Use efficient cache lifetimes

    200 ms · 27 KiB

    4 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (27 KiB).

  • 2 long tasks on the main thread

    2 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 167 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.

  • Improve image delivery

    50 ms · 35 KiB

    1 image could be 35 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 50 ms faster on a phone.

  • 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.

  • Forced reflow

    Scripts make the browser recalculate the layout repeatedly while the page loads, which wastes processor time on phones.

3 checks passed

  • Mobile performance score: 100

    100/100

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

  • Main-thread work: 0.7 s

    A phone's processor spends 0.7 s on main-thread work while loading, 20 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.

  • Server response: 27 ms

    27 ms

    Your server sent the HTML in 27 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.

Core Web Vitals

100

  • Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors

    +2%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-03, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 97 ms to 99 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

  • Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors

    +6%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-03, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.2 s to 1.3 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

12 checks passed

  • Passes Core Web Vitals for real visitors

    Real Chrome users on phones pass Google's Core Web Vitals on this page (28-day field data from the Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab)).

  • Real-user LCP: 1.3 s

    1.3 s

    Real visitors wait 1.3 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.

  • Real-user INP: 98 ms

    98 ms

    Real visitors wait 98 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: 1.1 s

    1.1 s

    Real visitors see the first content after 1.1 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Real-user TTFB: 532 ms

    532 ms

    Real visitors wait 532 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.

  • Speed Index: 2.5 s

    2.5 s

    Visually, the page fills in at 2.5 s (Speed Index), inside the 3.4 s “good” threshold.

  • First Contentful Paint: 1.1 s

    1.1 s

    The first text or image appears after 1.1 s, inside the 1.8 s “good” threshold.

  • Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.001

    0.001

    The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0.001, good is under 0.1).

  • Largest Contentful Paint: 1.4 s

    1.4 s

    Your largest element renders in 1.4 s on a phone, inside Google's 2.5 s “good” threshold. The largest element is the text “You deserve an explanation, so please don't skip this 1-min…”.

  • Total Blocking Time: 40 ms

    40 ms

    Scripts block the page for only 40 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.

  • Time to Interactive: 1.4 s

    1.4 s

    The page is fully interactive after 1.4 s.

Images and page weight

100

  • About 0.03 g of CO₂ per visit

    0.03 g

    By the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.03 g of CO₂e: 3.3 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.

4 checks passed

  • Page weight: 99 KiB in 5 requests

    99 KiB

    Your homepage downloads 99 KiB in 5 requests on a phone: images 57 KiB (2), HTML 30 KiB (1) and scripts 12 KiB (2). That is a lean page.

  • Images use modern formats

    Every sizeable image is WebP, AVIF or SVG.

  • Images load when needed

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

  • Images are sized for phones

    No image is downloaded at more than three times the size it is drawn on a phone.

Accessibility

2 to fixGoogle 9497

  • Form elements must have labels (1 element)

    Form elements must have labels: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated critical by axe-core.

  • Heading levels should only increase by one (1 element)

    Heading levels should only increase by one: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate by axe-core.

2 checks passed

  • Every image has alt text

    All 7 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.

  • 48 automated accessibility rules passed

    axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 50 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 48 passed and 2 failed. 1 more need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.

SEO

5 to fixGoogle 10079

  • Title is short (9 characters)

    Your title is only 9 characters: “Wikipedia”. 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 XML sitemap

    No XML sitemap at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/rest.php/site/v1/sitemap/0, so Google discovers your pages only by following links.

  • 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 set, so this is minor.

4 checks passed

  • Meta description: 130 characters

    Your meta description is 130 characters: “Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia, created and edited by volunteers around the world and hosted by the Wikimedia …”.

  • One H1 headline

    Your main headline reads: “Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia”.

  • Open Graph tags complete

    Open Graph tags are complete, so shared links show a title, description and image.

  • robots.txt in place

    robots.txt is in place and points crawlers to your sitemap.

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.wikipedia.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

    Your robots.txt lets the crawlers behind ChatGPT search, Claude and Perplexity read the site and cite it in answers.

  • Text is in the HTML

    Your server sends the page's text in the HTML (1,058 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.

Best practices

1 to fixGoogle 10093

  • 8 small tap targets

    8 of 39 tappable elements near the top of the page are smaller than 24 px, hard to hit with a thumb.

2 checks passed

  • No console errors

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

  • Mobile viewport set

    The page declares a mobile viewport.

Content and conversion

3 to fix67

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • About 541 words of copy

    The homepage carries about 541 words of visible text.

3 checks passed

  • 2 calls to action

    The homepage has 2 calls to action, for example “Download Wikipedia for Android or iOS” and “Wikiquote Free quote compendium”.

  • 1 short form

    A short form (2 fields at most) is right on the homepage.

  • Social proof on the page

    Social proof on the homepage: 1 testimonial or review block and 6 trust badges.

Privacy and tracking

  • 5 cookies set on arrival

    5

    Opening the homepage sets 5 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 wikipedia.org, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.

Go beyond the website

What your $25 Growth Playbook adds

This review found 12 issues on wikipedia.org, including 5 SEO issues and 3 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