wishlink.com
readable
C Acceptable. Readable, but working against you
Loading speed is diagnostic only; it does not affect this grade or search ranking.
| Subject | Weight | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Interruption | 35.71% | 100 |
| Readability | 28.57% | 59 |
| Accessibility and keyboard | 21.43% | 74 |
| Stability and weight | 14.29% | 70 |
This letter rests on 100% of the grade. Every subject was measured, including article readability and accessibility. How this is worked out.
- Largest paint
- 6.5s
- Paywall
- none
- Ad requests
- 0
- Tracker requests
- 0
- Page weight
- 24 KB
- Readability
- 16px type · 1.2 line height · 102 characters per line · 21.0:1 contrast
- Accessibility
- 1 automated check failed (1 serious)
- Green hosting
- not measured
- Measured
- 2026-09-25
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 2026-09-25. Every number is a mechanical fact about the page, not a judgment of its design.
| What | Measured | The bar |
|---|---|---|
| Body type size | 16px, 14px at phone width | 16px, the browser default |
| Characters per line | 102 | 45–90 |
| Line height | 1.19 | 1.5 (WCAG 1.4.8) |
| Text contrast | 21.0:1 | 4.5:1 (WCAG AA), 7:1 (AAA) |
| Text column | 75% of the window | at least 45% |
| Reflows at phone width | yes | WCAG 1.4.10 |
| Dark mode | no | noted, not scored |
| Automated accessibility checks | 1 automated check failed (1 serious): link-name | WCAG 2.1 A and AA, via axe-core |
| Keyboard | no trap; focus visible on 100% of stops | never trapped, always visible |
| Structure | no main landmark, 1 h1, 1 skipped heading level | a main landmark, one h1, no skips |
| Alt text | 0% of 3 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 25 days old. Dates refer to the evidence, never the card rebuild.
- Access and interruptions:
- Readability and accessibility:
Measurement history
Newest 2 saved observations. Each describes a sampled page at that time; older, failed or held observations do not override the current reviewed card. Raw automated findings may have been superseded by later review or detector replay. No previous grade is inferred.
Read dated observations
- — Readability and accessibility observation; prose source p; desktop type 16px; phone overflow not observed
https://www.wishlink.com/w/blog/content-planning-for-creators-a-2026-guide-to-consistency-virality-monetization
Evidence source: readability-top-sites-wishlink.com.jsonl · observation ce75afbd69a6 - — Access observation: pass
https://www.wishlink.com/w/blog/content-planning-for-creators-a-2026-guide-to-consistency-virality-monetization
Evidence source: refresh-aa3d1876-8e05-475a-8811-0ac3b42150e2.jsonl · observation 23bacf9b4161
How we know
| Pages rendered | 1 |
|---|---|
| Site verdict | errors dropped; majority of remaining; ties to the stricter verdict; active reviewed exclusions override admission |
| Figures shown | numeric measurements generally use medians; interruption costs, overflow, keyboard traps and accessibility failures retain the strongest observed finding |
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.