Wren Beta — what that means

theregister.co.uk

readable

B Good. A minor flaw or two

Loading speed is diagnostic only; it does not affect this grade or search ranking.

SubjectWeightScore
Interruption 35.71% 100
Readability 28.57% not scored
Accessibility and keyboard 21.43% 58
Stability and weight 14.29% 91

This letter rests on 71% of the grade. Readability was measured but is not scored here. We have not measured an article for this site. Homepages, listings and other non-article pages can make our typography measurements reflect navigation rather than prose. The numbers are below; the letter leaves them out until we have measured an article. How this is worked out.

theregister.co.uk
Largest paint
0.5s
Paywall
none
Ad requests
11
Tracker requests
7
Page weight
842 KB
Readability
16px type · 1.4 line height · 38 characters per line · 12.6:1 contrast
Accessibility
3 automated checks failed (3 serious)
Green hosting
not measured
Measured
2026-08-31

Observed interruptions

Ad and tracker counts above are network requests, not counts of visible ads or separate companies. They do not affect the interruption score.

Assessed 1 sampled page. The largest detected ad area was 0% of a sampled viewport. No qualifying obstructive prompts were detected.

This is a sample, not a promise that the whole site has no interruptions. Ad detection can miss formats and content outside the sampled view. Older scans did not check visibility or overlapping ad rectangles as thoroughly. The score uses the strongest observed deduction, so one panel is not penalized under multiple names. How interruptions are scored.

The type, and who can use it

Measured on 1 rendered page; latest measurement 2026-09-05 — no article measured yet. Every number is a mechanical fact about the page, not a judgment of its design.

WhatMeasuredThe bar
Body type size 16px, 15px at phone width 16px, the browser default
Characters per line 38 45–90
Line height 1.43 1.5 (WCAG 1.4.8)
Text contrast 12.6:1 4.5:1 (WCAG AA), 7:1 (AAA)
Text column 22% of the window at least 45%
Reflows at phone width no — scrolls sideways at 360px WCAG 1.4.10
Dark mode no noted, not scored
Automated accessibility checks 3 automated checks failed (3 serious): color-contrast, image-alt, link-name WCAG 2.1 A and AA, via axe-core
Keyboard no trap; focus visible on 97% of stops never trapped, always visible
Structure no main landmark, 1 h1, 13 skipped heading levels a main landmark, one h1, no skips
Alt text 7% of 229 content images described every content image
Reader mode parses parses (Firefox’s Readability)

Automated accessibility checks catch an estimated 30–40% of real problems, so “no automated violations detected” is a floor, not a certificate. We never say “accessible”. How these are scored.

Measurement dates

Oldest evidence 50 days old. At least one subject is due for rechecking (30 days or older). Dates refer to the evidence, never the card rebuild.

Measurement history

Earlier dated observations are not available on this report card. Current subject dates are listed above; previous grades cannot be reconstructed from them.

How we know

Pages rendered1
Site verdicterrors dropped; majority of remaining; ties to the stricter verdict; active reviewed exclusions override admission
Figures shownnumeric measurements generally use medians; interruption costs, overflow, keyboard traps and accessibility failures retain the strongest observed finding
Cited by3,883 encyclopedia articles

Think this is wrong? It may well be — the measurements cover only a handful of pages. Any reviewed admission decision and its dated evidence are shown above. Re-measurement on request is not built yet, so there is no button here that would do anything. When it exists it will be free and it will be on this page.