Can AI-written content actually get cited by AI assistants?
Only if it carries what assistants quote, which is not what most generated content carries. The measured levers are quotations, concrete statistics and named sources — so every draft here is written to that shape, and every figure in it is searched for and traced to an independent source before you see it.
…clicked a result in 8% of searches that showed an AI summary (Pew Research Center, 2025).
- Source named in the line
- Answers in the opening
- One claim handed back
Three things you get
- Every figure searched for
- Sources named in the sentence
- Untraceable claims handed back
What comes back
The shape of it, drawn at a size the figures can be read. Placeholders, not a customer's numbers.
What makes a page quotable rather than just well-written?
According to Princeton and Georgia Tech researchers, who tested nine content changes across ten thousand queries against unmodified baselines, the levers are measurable. Adding quotations moved visibility in AI answers by 41 per cent, adding concrete statistics by 40 per cent, and citing sources by 28 per cent. A page sitting fifth in the results gained over a hundred per cent relative visibility from citations alone.
The detail+–
That is the standard every draft is held to, and it is measured on the draft while you edit it. It is deliberately not the thing the category sells: scoring a draft against the average of whoever already ranks is convergence to the mean by construction, and the experiment says citation comes from carrying what the other pages do not.
How does the fact-checking work?
Every sentence carrying a figure, a date, a superlative or a named comparison is pulled out and searched for. Where an independent source says the same thing, the source is named in the prose — as words, not a link, because a hyperlink does not survive being lifted into an assistant's answer and "according to the Princeton study" does.
The detail+–
Where nothing independent supports it, the sentence is left exactly as written and listed for you under "check these before publishing". We establish that a claim can be traced, not that it is true, and we will not blur those two.
Whose sources are allowed?
Never a competitor's. Not for reasons to do with link equity — that fear is folklore — but because "according to [your rival]" tells every reader, and every assistant reading the page to learn who knows about this subject, that your rival is the authority on it.
The detail+–
A company is a fine source about its own product and an interested party about its market. The distinction lives in the claim rather than the domain, so the same page can support "X supports Y" and be refused for "X is the fastest".
Also asked
- Will the writing sound like a machine? +
- It is checked before you see it, on two axes: whether a person wrote it, and whether a machine will quote it. A draft that fails is rewritten once, and if it still fails you are told it needs an editor rather than handed it as finished.
- What if a figure cannot be verified? +
- It stays in the draft exactly as written and is listed separately for you to decide about. Quietly softening your sentence would hide the problem instead of showing it.
- Do I get images too? +
- Only where one genuinely helps — a process with steps, a comparison, a run of figures. Most sections of most articles get none, and that is the honest answer rather than a limitation.
Last updated 3 September 2026
Become the brand AI recommends.
Start with the free check. Your web address and nothing else.