AI Readiness Assessment
https://www.lookfantastic.com
Assessed2026-09-18
Reference0918/LOO/35
IndustryRetail and e-commerce
Regulated · ListedNone found · Not established
Scale207 / 2,688
Foundations assessed now · the automated tests
Your Digital Doorway
PeopleAI systems
Credibility · E-E-A-T
32.2%
AI readiness · Pages
47.7%
AI readiness · PDFs
N/A
Misinformation · Pages
Extremely likely
Misinformation · PDFs
N/A
0%25%50%75%100%
Governancestage 2 · not assessed yet...more
43 judgements need a named person in the organisation to confirm, because they turn on what you know to be true rather than anything measurement can settle: whether a claim is supported, whether a page is still current, which of two versions is the one to quote. In order, they cover: who is answerable for this content; is it still true today; can each claim be backed; does our published content agree; will the right meaning come across; can someone reach it and act on it. An answer recorded against each, with a name and a date, is what turns published content into governed content.
Visibilitystage 3 · not assessed yet...more
Once the foundations are sound and the content is governed, the visibility stage measures how AI systems and agents actually find the estate: which pages they reach, how often, and how the organisation is represented when they answer questions about it, tracked over time. Building visibility on unconfirmed foundations only amplifies whatever is wrong, which is why it comes last.
Key findings · AI readiness
How much of your content is reachable and readable, rather than blocked, buried or missing. Higher is better.
AI readiness is very low.AI systems get nothing at the door of the site, so most of the content cannot be reached at all, however well the pages themselves are built.
What is holding it back
- The links shown as turned away were refused to our visits, not found missing: lookfantastic.com began turning our visits away part way through the assessment, as it would any visitor making them.Note
- A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it.17 pages
- A visitor and an AI can be shown two different versions of the same page, so wording nobody sees can still be quoted back with your name on it, and a page that shows almost nothing until it is clicked gives a visitor an empty shell.6 pages
- Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly.37 pages
Key findings · Misinformation
Where your content could lead an AI system to state something incorrect. Only direct routes to a wrong answer count here.
Misinformation is extremely likely.The pages read as extremely likely to cause it.
What could cause it
- Lookfantastic.com began turning our visits away part way through the assessment, as it would any visitor making them. The effect on an AI is real all the same: served only part of the content and refused the rest, it may state something wrong.Note
- The page looks complete to a person, but its content is built by scripts that many AI systems never run, so they receive it near-empty. The organisation's material is missing from their answers.pages
- Facts written for machines are taken as given. They are not weighed against the page, they are read straight out and repeated. A price, an address or a rating recorded there but absent from the page is a statement the organisation has made without knowing it, and it will be repeated with the organisation's name on it.pages
- Anything taking the page apart relies on that marking to know where one item ends and the next begins. Where a set of steps is only styled to look separate, it comes back as one continuous run of words. Instructions lose their order and a set of options reads as a single sentence, so an answer built from it gives the steps in the wrong order or merges two into one.pages
▸What makes up these figures door, site, pages and documents · click to view
The front doorOpen to the services that answer people's questions.
The site as a whole9.6%Broken internal links hold the whole estate back.
Your pages47.7%What your pages say comes back usable, but unevenly: your best reaches 58.2%, your weakest 9.9%.
▸Digital doorway measured at the front door · click to view
Anyone asking for this site, a person on a phone or an AI system building an answer, is let in, turned away, or left with no answer, in milliseconds, by machinery most organisations never see. An AI system that gets nothing here reads nothing at all: to that system the organisation simply does not answer.
People
4 out of 4 served
AI systems
22 out of 22 served
The proof behind this picture
28 live agents were first set up and readied for this assessment. 26 were sent to this door: 4 people and 22 AI systems, in the order shown on the chart; the other 2 stood ready as backup, to be called in depending on how the door answered. Of those sent, 24 made one timed call each, in their own name, asking for the same page. The 2 desktop browsers made a full visit, exactly as a person at a computer would. Nothing here is simulated: these are real calls to the live site, recorded as they happened, and each line below carries the moment it happened. Alongside them, two further readings were taken at the door: the site's security certificate, and its published rules for crawlers.
Called from54.171.52.206
The door, atwww.lookfantastic.com · 199.232.25.91
Started2026-09-18 08:44:04 UTC
Finished2026-09-18 08:44:11 UTC
| Visitor | When | What happened | Answer | Took | Sent | Received | Answered from |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| People | |||||||
| iPhone user | 08:44:06.254 | ✓ served | 200 | 83 ms | 255 B | 210.1 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| Android user | 08:44:06.254 | ✓ served | 200 | 76 ms | 237 B | 208.0 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| Safari on a Mac | 08:44:07.025 | ✓ served | 200 | 1121 ms | n/a | n/a | n/a |
| Chrome on a PC | 08:44:10.113 | ✓ served | 200 | 758 ms | n/a | n/a | n/a |
| AI systems | |||||||
| GPTBot · OpenAI | 08:44:05.892 | ✓ served | 200 | 79 ms | 222 B | 205.7 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| OAI-SearchBot · OpenAI | 08:44:05.892 | ✓ served | 200 | 97 ms | 326 B | 205.7 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| ChatGPT-User · OpenAI | 08:44:05.892 | ✓ served | 200 | 95 ms | 225 B | 208.0 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| ClaudeBot · Anthropic | 08:44:05.892 | ✓ served | 200 | 92 ms | 185 B | 205.7 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| Claude-SearchBot · Anthropic | 08:44:05.892 | ✓ served | 200 | 99 ms | 264 B | 205.7 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| Claude-User · Anthropic | 08:44:05.893 | ✓ served | 200 | 93 ms | 227 B | 208.0 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| Googlebot (Gemini) | 08:44:05.972 | ✓ served | 200 | 79 ms | 288 B | 207.0 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| GoogleOther | 08:44:05.986 | ✓ served | 200 | 86 ms | 226 B | 205.7 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| Bingbot (Copilot) · Microsoft | 08:44:05.987 | ✓ served | 200 | 86 ms | 287 B | 198.4 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| PerplexityBot | 08:44:05.988 | ✓ served | 200 | 94 ms | 266 B | 207.9 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| Perplexity-User | 08:44:05.990 | ✓ served | 200 | 100 ms | 243 B | 205.7 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| CCBot · Common Crawl | 08:44:05.992 | ✓ served | 200 | 86 ms | 160 B | 209.5 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| Bytespider · ByteDance | 08:44:06.052 | ✓ served | 200 | 77 ms | 268 B | 205.7 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| Amazonbot | 08:44:06.072 | ✓ served | 200 | 90 ms | 228 B | 208.0 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| GrokBot · xAI | 08:44:06.074 | ✓ served | 200 | 87 ms | 172 B | 205.7 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| Meta-ExternalAgent | 08:44:06.079 | ✓ served | 200 | 81 ms | 209 B | 202.8 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| Meta-WebIndexer | 08:44:06.083 | ✓ served | 200 | 85 ms | 238 B | 202.8 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| Meta-ExternalFetcher | 08:44:06.091 | ✓ served | 200 | 74 ms | 211 B | 208.0 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| Applebot | 08:44:06.130 | ✓ served | 200 | 78 ms | 314 B | 205.7 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| MistralAI-Training | 08:44:06.161 | ✓ served | 200 | 89 ms | 239 B | 205.7 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| MistralAI-Index | 08:44:06.162 | ✓ served | 200 | 86 ms | 263 B | 200.7 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
| MistralAI-User | 08:44:06.163 | ✓ served | 200 | 89 ms | 235 B | 207.1 KB | 199.232.25.91 |
The desktop browsers are run in full rather than as a single call, so one figure for the information moved does not apply to them; their outcome and timing are shown.
What this shows
All 4 people were served. All 22 AI systems were served. The visitors fall into two groups, and each is judged on its own. 13 of the 13 services that answer people's questions were let in. 9 of the 9 services that gather material for future answers were let in. Where a service arrived carrying a question, it typed the general question “What do you do?” into the search address the site declares to machines in its structured data, because no registered name was found for the organisation. A door of this kind decides call by call. This record is what happened at this door, at this time, from this address; it can answer differently at another time, which is why the time and the address are part of the record.
How this stands up
These calls can be repeated on request while you watch. A separate checking tool, kept apart from the assessment engine so the two cannot share a mistake, knocks on the same door several times over and records whether the answers hold still; each of its checks is saved with the date, the time and the calling address.
▸E-E-A-T credibility in Google’s four terms · 32.2% · click to view
Four questions a reader asks before believing what a site says: can it be relied on, is the organisation recognised, is it clear who wrote it, and does it show first-hand knowledge. Each is measured from the checks that carry it, and the four combine into one score.
| Pillar | What it measures | Score | Weight | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trust | Can what this site says be relied on? | 82.2% | 35% | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
How this pillar was measured
16 checks carry this pillar. They produced 200 results across the pages and documents assessed: 122 passed, 76 were flagged, 2 failed. The score is the weighted share that passed, with a flagged result counting as half.
What is holding this pillar down
failWhether a way to make contact appears in the words of the site as text, rather than only inside an image or a file.across the siteWhat good looks like At least one way to make contact is published as text on the site. Why it matters A route held only in a picture or a document cannot be read, copied or dialled by anything working from the page, so it is closed to part of the audience. Which routes are offered is the organisation's own decision. Where it was found, and what was found there
failThe exact facts the page states in a form built for machines, a price, a telephone number, a postcode, a rating or an email address, set against what the page says in its own words.1 of 37What good looks like Each fact stated for machines is also stated on the page. Why it matters Facts written for machines are taken as given. They are not weighed against the page, they are read straight out and repeated. A price, an address or a rating recorded there but absent from the page is a statement the organisation has made without knowing it, and it will be repeated with the organisation's name on it. Where it was found, and what was found there
warningThe copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states.37 of 37What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. Where it was found, and what was found there
…and 25 more like these. The full record is in the exports. warningPercentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage.34 of 37What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. Where it was found, and what was found there
…and 22 more like these. The full record is in the exports. warningClaims of being largest, leading, best or first in the page's words, and whether a figure or a source sits in the same passage.2 of 37What good looks like A claim of standing carries the figure or the source that supports it. Why it matters A claim of standing with no figure beside it is a statement about the organisation made by the organisation. Taken out and repeated, it carries the weight of a measured fact while resting on nothing. Where it was found, and what was found there
warningWhether the site publishes and serves its terms, its privacy notice and a route to make contact or complain.across the siteWhat good looks like Terms, a privacy notice and a contact route are published, and each opens when asked for. Why it matters These are the pages looked for before anything on a site is repeated. Where one is absent or does not open, there is nothing to confirm who stands behind the content. Where it was found, and what was found there
warningClaims repeated across pages in wordings that nearly match but differ in their words.across the siteWhat good looks like A claim repeated across pages is repeated in the same words. Why it matters Several wordings of one claim each carry part of its standing, and a correction made to one leaves the rest in place. Where it was found, and what was found there
warningWhether the site publishes a statement on how accessible it is, and whether it can be reached from the front page.on one itemWhat good looks like A statement exists, is linked, and gives a route for reporting a barrier. Why it matters The statement is the organisation saying in public what standard it holds itself to, what it knows is not yet right, and how to tell it. Its absence is read as the subject not having been considered at all. Where the site trades in the United Kingdom or the European Union it also carries legal weight. Where it was found, and what was found there
What passed
8 of the 16 checks in this pillar passed on each item assessed
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Authoritativeness | Is this plainly the organisation it says it is? | 91.8% | 30% | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
How this pillar was measured
9 checks carry this pillar. They produced 260 results across the pages and documents assessed: 189 passed, 60 were flagged, 11 failed. The score is the weighted share that passed, with a flagged result counting as half.
What is holding this pillar down
failThe trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same.29 of 36What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. Where it was found, and what was found there
…and 17 more like these. The full record is in the exports. failWhether the facts the page states for machines agree with the same facts in its words: the address it gives as its own, its dates, and its subject.3 of 37What good looks like The two say the same thing. Why it matters Where the page and its machine-readable summary disagree, a reader has two answers and no way to choose between them. It usually takes the machine-readable one, because that is the one written to be taken as given. An old date recorded there against a current date on the page makes current work look stale, and a subject recorded there that differs from the heading files the page under the wrong question. Where it was found, and what was found there
failThe exact facts the page states in a form built for machines, a price, a telephone number, a postcode, a rating or an email address, set against what the page says in its own words.1 of 37What good looks like Each fact stated for machines is also stated on the page. Why it matters Facts written for machines are taken as given. They are not weighed against the page, they are read straight out and repeated. A price, an address or a rating recorded there but absent from the page is a statement the organisation has made without knowing it, and it will be repeated with the organisation's name on it. Where it was found, and what was found there
warningThe short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page.37 of 37What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. Where it was found, and what was found there
…and 25 more like these. The full record is in the exports. warningThe type each page declares in the detail it states for machines, and whether that detail carries the fields the type calls for.1 of 37What good looks like Detail stated for machines carries the fields its declared type calls for. Why it matters An incomplete declaration is set aside or half read, so the page gets no benefit from having made it and the facts it meant to state are not taken. Where it was found, and what was found there
What passed
4 of the 9 checks in this pillar passed on each item assessed
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Expertise | Is it clear who stands behind the words? | 49.9% | 20% | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
How this pillar was measured
1 checks carry this pillar. They produced 34 results across the pages and documents assessed: 0 passed, 34 were flagged. The score is the weighted share that passed, with a flagged result counting as half.
What is holding this pillar down
warningPages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it.34 of 34What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. Where it was found, and what was found there
…and 22 more like these. The full record is in the exports. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Experience | Does the content show first-hand knowledge? | 93.8% | 15% | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
How this pillar was measured
2 checks carry this pillar. They produced 40 results across the pages and documents assessed: 35 passed, 5 were flagged. The score is the weighted share that passed, with a flagged result counting as half.
What is holding this pillar down
warningPages published as a product, and whether the detail they state for machines says what it is, what it costs and whether it can be had.3 of 3What good looks like A page published as a product states its description, its price and its availability. Why it matters A product stated without price or availability is listed but cannot be offered. Anything answering a buying question skips it in favour of a competitor that stated both. Where it was found, and what was found there
warningClaims of being largest, leading, best or first in the page's words, and whether a figure or a source sits in the same passage.2 of 37What good looks like A claim of standing carries the figure or the source that supports it. Why it matters A claim of standing with no figure beside it is a statement about the organisation made by the organisation. Taken out and repeated, it carries the weight of a measured fact while resting on nothing. Where it was found, and what was found there
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Whether the estate can be reached and read at all: access rules, links, redirects, sitemap, transport.
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 5 | |||||||||||||
| DS04 | fail | 1 of 120 crawled URLs returned an error status (not found, or a server error) | |||||||||||
What we check Addresses that answered with an error, not found or gone or a server failure, during the visit. What good looks like The addresses visited answer successfully, without error, not-found or server-failure statuses. Why it matters Pages that answer with an error are simply missing from what AI systems know about the organisation. Whatever those pages were meant to say plays no part in any answer. What we found on this page 1 of 120 crawled URLs returned an error status (not found, or a server error) The evidence, taken from the page as served Each crawled URL that returned an error status
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the addresses visited answer successfully, without error, not-found or server-failure statuses. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 5 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide whether content can be reached and read at all, so it carries the heaviest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| DS23 | fail | the site publishes no list of its own pages, so an AI can only find what it reaches by following links, and anything poorly linked is never found | |||||||||||
What we check The site publishes a sitemap at the standard address and it returns successfully. What good looks like The site publishes a list of its own pages at the usual address. Its absence is a fail: discovery then rests on links alone. Why it matters Without a list of its own pages, the site can only be explored by following links, so any page that is poorly linked is never found and plays no part in what AI systems know about the organisation. What we found on this page the site publishes no list of its own pages, so an AI can only find what it reaches by following links, and anything poorly linked is never found The evidence, taken from the page as served The sitemap, as the site answered for it
The address sitemap.xml was asked for. It is the file a site uses to list its own pages.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the site publishes a list of its own pages at the usual address. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| AR10 | fail | no way to make contact is published as text on the pages assessed. A detail held only inside a picture or a file cannot be read, copied or dialled by anything working from the page | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a way to make contact appears in the words of the site as text, rather than only inside an image or a file. What good looks like At least one way to make contact is published as text on the site. Why it matters A route held only in a picture or a document cannot be read, copied or dialled by anything working from the page, so it is closed to part of the audience. Which routes are offered is the organisation's own decision. What we found on this page no way to make contact is published as text on the pages assessed. A detail held only inside a picture or a file cannot be read, copied or dialled by anything working from the page The evidence, taken from the page as served The ways to make contact found in the words of the site
The pages assessed were read for an email address, a telephone number and a postal address, in their text and in the links they carry.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: at least one way to make contact is published as text on the site. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it does not move the misinformation reading This failure makes content harder to reach or to read, but it is not a direct route to a wrong answer, so it is held out of the misinformation reading rather than counted twice. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| DS08 | fail | SEVERE: 98% of the links to the site's own pages fail for an AI reader. 39 were turned away: the site refused the request, and an ordinary browser request for the same page made at the same moment, as it does a visitor it has stopped serving. That is 39 of the 40 checked, which stand for the 1647 links to the site's own pages across the pages checked | |||||||||||
What we check The share of links to the site's own pages, from a sample, whose targets do not resolve. What good looks like The site's own links open, leading to live pages. Where one no longer does, the page either carries the point in its own words or stops presenting a route that does not open. Why it matters The site's own links lead to pages that no longer answer, so material the organisation still publishes cannot be reached by following them and drops out of what gets found. What we found on this page SEVERE: 98% of the links to the site's own pages fail for an AI reader. 39 were turned away: the site refused the request, and an ordinary browser request for the same page made at the same moment, as it does a visitor it has stopped serving. That is 39 of the 40 checked, which stand for the 1647 links to the site's own pages across the pages checked The evidence, taken from the page as served The internal links checked, with the status each returned
A link that fails here fails in one of two ways, and the report names them apart. A DEAD link answers, when the page is asked for in full, that the page is not there. An AI-BLOCKED link points at a page that is still published and opens for a person in a browser, but the destination refuses callers that are not a person browsing, so an AI never receives it. Opening such a link by hand proves only the human route; this assessment reflects the AI position, and from the AI position both classes land in the same place: the material this page offers as its support does not come back when it is asked for. The consequence is not a matter of tidiness. Where a link carries the weight of a claim, a figure, a policy or a regulatory statement, and the target does not open, the support behind that claim is missing at the moment it is needed. Three things follow, and each of them costs the organisation. The same fact gets taken from somewhere else, which hands a third party control of how the claim is worded. Or the claim is treated as unsupported and set aside. Or an answer is drawn from what remains on the page, and a partial account is presented as a complete one. An AI-blocked link is the worst of the three, because the page still reads as though the evidence sits one step away, so the gap is invisible and the answer carries false confidence. An AI-block on another site is still this site's matter to resolve, because this site chose to rest a claim on it. Three practical ways close it. Carry the fact being relied on in the page's own words, so the claim stands without the visit. Keep the reference but stop making it a link, showing the address as plain text, so nothing promises a route that does not open. Or point to a source that answers any reader. Where the reference has to stay live, say beside it what a reader will meet, so no one is sent to a closed door without warning. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the site's own links open, leading to live pages. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 5 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide whether content can be reached and read at all, so it carries the heaviest weight in the figure for this item. It also sets a ceiling on that figure: while this stands, the item cannot read as more ready than 40%, however well it is built elsewhere. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a frequent and direct cause of a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| DS12 | fail | 20% of the links to sources on other sites fail for an AI reader. 4 are AI-blocked: the page opens for a person in a browser, but the site refuses callers that are not a person browsing, so an AI never receives it. That is 4 of the 20 checked, which stand for the 24 links to other sites across the pages checked | |||||||||||
What we check The share of links pointing off the site, from a sample, whose targets no longer resolve. What good looks like Sources the page relies on open for any reader. Where one refuses or has gone, the page carries the fact in its own words, shows the reference without making it a link, or points somewhere that answers. A refusal by another site is still this site's to resolve, because this site chose to rest a claim on it. Why it matters Links this site offers as evidence cannot be reached by AI systems, so its claims stand unsupported in their answers. Some links are dead, the address answering that the page is not there; others open for a person but refuse automated callers, and for an AI the two are the same closed door. What we found on this page 20% of the links to sources on other sites fail for an AI reader. 4 are AI-blocked: the page opens for a person in a browser, but the site refuses callers that are not a person browsing, so an AI never receives it. That is 4 of the 20 checked, which stand for the 24 links to other sites across the pages checked The evidence, taken from the page as served The external links checked, with the status each returned
A link that fails here fails in one of two ways, and the report names them apart. A DEAD link answers, when the page is asked for in full, that the page is not there. An AI-BLOCKED link points at a page that is still published and opens for a person in a browser, but the destination refuses callers that are not a person browsing, so an AI never receives it. Opening such a link by hand proves only the human route; this assessment reflects the AI position, and from the AI position both classes land in the same place: the material this page offers as its support does not come back when it is asked for. The consequence is not a matter of tidiness. Where a link carries the weight of a claim, a figure, a policy or a regulatory statement, and the target does not open, the support behind that claim is missing at the moment it is needed. Three things follow, and each of them costs the organisation. The same fact gets taken from somewhere else, which hands a third party control of how the claim is worded. Or the claim is treated as unsupported and set aside. Or an answer is drawn from what remains on the page, and a partial account is presented as a complete one. An AI-blocked link is the worst of the three, because the page still reads as though the evidence sits one step away, so the gap is invisible and the answer carries false confidence. An AI-block on another site is still this site's matter to resolve, because this site chose to rest a claim on it. Three practical ways close it. Carry the fact being relied on in the page's own words, so the claim stands without the visit. Keep the reference but stop making it a link, showing the address as plain text, so nothing promises a route that does not open. Or point to a source that answers any reader. Where the reference has to stay live, say beside it what a reader will meet, so no one is sent to a closed door without warning. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: sources the page relies on open for any reader. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 5 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide whether content can be reached and read at all, so it carries the heaviest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 2 | |||||||||||||
| AJ04 | warning | no page offering a route to make contact or complain appears among the addresses this site publishes, so a reader looking for it has nothing to find. These are the pages checked before anything on a site is repeated. | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the site publishes and serves its terms, its privacy notice and a route to make contact or complain. What good looks like Terms, a privacy notice and a contact route are published, and each opens when asked for. Why it matters These are the pages looked for before anything on a site is repeated. Where one is absent or does not open, there is nothing to confirm who stands behind the content. What we found on this page no page offering a route to make contact or complain appears among the addresses this site publishes, so a reader looking for it has nothing to find. These are the pages checked before anything on a site is repeated. The evidence, taken from the page as served The pages a reader checks before trusting a site
The addresses the site publishes were read for each of the three, and each one found was opened.
| |||||||||||||
| IN12 | warning | 2 claims appear across the pages assessed in more than one wording, with most of the words shared and the rest changed. Several versions of one claim each carry part of its standing, and a correction made to one leaves the rest in place. | |||||||||||
What we check Claims repeated across pages in wordings that nearly match but differ in their words. What good looks like A claim repeated across pages is repeated in the same words. Why it matters Several wordings of one claim each carry part of its standing, and a correction made to one leaves the rest in place. What we found on this page 2 claims appear across the pages assessed in more than one wording, with most of the words shared and the rest changed. Several versions of one claim each carry part of its standing, and a correction made to one leaves the rest in place. The evidence, taken from the page as served The wordings found, and the pages carrying each
| |||||||||||||
Passing checks are omitted here; the full record is in the exports.
▸Pages considered 37 pages · click to view
The highest-priority pages, chosen from the site's own signals of importance.
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/ 55.4% Likely 16 out of 85
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 2 | |||||||||||||||
| CT10 | fail | the page carries no main heading, so nothing on it states what the page is about | |||||||||||||
What we check The page carries a main heading (the H1), its own statement of what the page is about. What good looks like The page carries a single main heading stating what it is about. Why it matters The page never states its own subject, so anything reading it has to guess what it is about. Guessed subjects are how content gets filed, and quoted, under the wrong topic. What we found on this page the page carries no main heading, so nothing on it states what the page is about The evidence, taken from the page as served The headings on this page, as served
The page was read for a top-level heading. These are the headings it does carry. <h2 class="heading">Shop Savings by Category</h2> <h2 class="heading text-center"> The Ones You'll Rate </h2> <h2 class="heading text-center"/> <h3 class="font-medium title-font text-lg mt-4 text-gray-900">NEW FROM</h3> <h3 class="font-medium title-font text-lg mt-4 text-gray-900">NEW FROM</h3> <h3 class="font-medium title-font text-lg mt-4 text-gray-900">NEW FROM</h3> <h3 class="font-medium title-font text-lg mt-4 text-gray-900">NEW FROM</h3> <h3 class="font-medium title-font text-lg mt-4 text-gray-900">NEW FROM</h3> <h3 class="font-medium title-font text-lg mt-4 text-gray-900">NEW FROM</h3> <h2 class="heading">September Favourites</h2> …and 18 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page carries a single main heading stating what it is about. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 60 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 57 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 60 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 57 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 14 | |||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@type":"WebSite","@context":"https://schema.org","url":"https://www.lookfantastic.com","potentialAction":{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/search/?q={search}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valu…<script type="application/ld+json">{"@type":"Organization","@context":"https://schema.org","name":"LOOKFANTASTIC","url":"https://www.lookfantastic.com","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/lookfantastic","https://www.twitter.com/lookfantastic","https://instagram.com/lookfantastic","https://www.youtube.com/user/lookfanta… | |||||||||||||||
| CT18 | warning | the page states for machines that it is a website, and leaves out a name. A statement missing what its own kind is defined to carry is set aside or half read, so the page gets no benefit from having made it. | |||||||||||||
What we check The type each page declares in the detail it states for machines, and whether that detail carries the fields the type calls for. What good looks like Detail stated for machines carries the fields its declared type calls for. Why it matters An incomplete declaration is set aside or half read, so the page gets no benefit from having made it and the facts it meant to state are not taken. What we found on this page the page states for machines that it is a website, and leaves out a name. A statement missing what its own kind is defined to carry is set aside or half read, so the page gets no benefit from having made it. The evidence, taken from the page as served What each statement this page makes for machines leaves out
Each type was read for the fields that type is defined to carry.
| |||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||
| IN23 | warning | the front page offers no route to a statement on how accessible the site is, so there is nothing published saying what standard the organisation holds itself to, what it knows is not yet right, or how to report a barrier | |||||||||||||
What we check Whether the site publishes a statement on how accessible it is, and whether it can be reached from the front page. What good looks like A statement exists, is linked, and gives a route for reporting a barrier. Why it matters The statement is the organisation saying in public what standard it holds itself to, what it knows is not yet right, and how to tell it. Its absence is read as the subject not having been considered at all. Where the site trades in the United Kingdom or the European Union it also carries legal weight. What we found on this page the front page offers no route to a statement on how accessible the site is, so there is nothing published saying what standard the organisation holds itself to, what it knows is not yet right, or how to report a barrier The evidence, taken from the page as served The routes this page offers to a statement on accessibility
The links on the front page were read for one leading to such a statement.
| |||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 23 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£42.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 23 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£42.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||
| AR03 | warning | 13% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (32589 characters delivered, 36413 once the page finishes building itself) | |||||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's content exists only once JavaScript has run. What good looks like The page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. Why it matters The page looks complete to a person, but its content is built by scripts that many AI systems never run, so they receive it near-empty. The organisation's material is missing from their answers. What we found on this page 13% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (32589 characters delivered, 36413 once the page finishes building itself) The evidence, taken from the page as served Content present only after JavaScript runs (absent from the served HTML)
The served HTML carries 32589 characters of text; after JavaScript runs the page carries 36413. 13% of the rendered page's words are absent from the HTML the server sends. What the server sends (raw HTML text, first 280 chars) LOOKFANTASTIC - Beauty, Fragrances, Skincare & Haircare Skip to main content Order by 1AM tonight for Next Day Delivery Download our App 12-months Premier Delivery - Only £9.90! Join LF Beauty Plus+ UP TO 20% OFF SELECTED BEAUTY | USE CODE: SAVE ASK LF • Sign In Enter submenu ( A…
Words present only after JavaScript runs
109710981433179242198295ableacrossactionsactiveaddedadvertisingaggregatedalertallowamountanonymousapplyaroundbackbecausebehaviourbelowblockblockingbrowserbuildingbuttoncampaignscancelcannotcapablecentrechangechatcheckboxchoiceschooseclearclickcobrowsingcollectconfirmconsumercontactingconversationcountcustomerdeactivatedefaultdifferentdirectlydoesdropemailenableenhancedensureexpectexperience
| |||||||||||||||
| AR11 | warning | 13% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered: the page arrives carrying 89% of the text it ends up showing | |||||||||||||
What we check The measured gap between the page as served and the page after the browser has built it. What good looks like The served page and the fully built page carry the same words, with little gap between them. Why it matters Two versions of the same page exist, and which words come back depends on which version was fetched. What we found on this page 13% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered: the page arrives carrying 89% of the text it ends up showing The evidence, taken from the page as served This page as first delivered, against the page once its scripts have run
Both were taken from the same request. The first is what the site sent; the second is what a person ends up looking at.
| |||||||||||||||
| AR12 | warning | 80% of this page's words sit behind panels a visitor has to open, and the page still reads soundly without them, so the risk is that an AI repeats wording a visitor never sees | |||||||||||||
What we check How much of the page a visitor is shown before opening anything, against how much the page holds in total. What good looks like A visitor is shown a sound amount of the page straight away. More than half the words behind panels is a warning; showing less than 400 characters before anything is clicked is a fail. Why it matters A visitor and an AI can be shown two different versions of the same page, so wording nobody sees can still be quoted back with your name on it, and a page that shows almost nothing until it is clicked gives a visitor an empty shell. What we found on this page 80% of this page's words sit behind panels a visitor has to open, and the page still reads soundly without them, so the risk is that an AI repeats wording a visitor never sees The evidence, taken from the page as served What this page shows before anything is clicked
Both figures were taken on the page as it arrives, once it had finished building itself and before anything was clicked.
| |||||||||||||||
| MS02 | warning | 25 of 129 links on the loaded page carry no wording in the page's code saying where each leads | |||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What good looks like The page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. Why it matters An unnamed button or form control is truly blind: nothing in the page's code says what it is for, so anything operating the site on a customer's behalf is left guessing. One such control is enough to stop a task; unnamed links are weighed by how common they are. What we found on this page 25 of 129 links on the loaded page carry no wording in the page's code saying where each leads The evidence, taken from the page as served The controls on this page that carry no name
Read on the page once its scripts had run.
| |||||||||||||||
| MS04 | warning | the page's naming markup is faulty: 1 working control(s) sit inside a section the code marks as hidden, so they work on screen but are absent from what is read out | |||||||||||||
What we check Accessibility markup faults: invented roles, labels pointing at nothing, live controls marked hidden. What good looks like The page's accessibility markup is sound, with valid roles and no labels pointing at nothing. Why it matters The page misdescribes its own buttons and controls, so assistive tools and automated helpers are told one thing and given another. Anyone relying on those descriptions is misled by the page itself. What we found on this page the page's naming markup is faulty: 1 working control(s) sit inside a section the code marks as hidden, so they work on screen but are absent from what is read out The evidence, taken from the page as served The faulty markup, as the page serves it once loaded
<button class="side-sheet-close pointer-events-auto flex h-10 w-10 cursor-pointer items-center justify-center rounded-full border-none bg-black transition-colors duration-200 hover:bg-gray-800 focus:outline-2 focus:outline-offset-2 focus:outline-white max-md:h-8 max-md:w-8" aria-label="Close panel" data-side-sheet-regi… | |||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/p/beauty-box/the-grooming-advent-calendar-worth-over-469/17691385 54.5% Likely 14 out of 84
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/p/beauty-box/the-grooming-advent-calendar-worth-over-469/17691385
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 5 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MX01 | fail | the site took 362ms to start answering, past the point where an automated reader gives up and takes its answer from elsewhere | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check How quickly the page starts to answer when it is asked for. What good looks like The page starts answering within 250ms. Between 250 and 345ms is a warning; beyond 345ms is a fail, that being the point at which an automated reader gives up. Why it matters A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it. What we found on this page the site took 362ms to start answering, past the point where an automated reader gives up and takes its answer from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served How long this page took to start answering
Timed from the request leaving our checker to the first part of the answer coming back, on the page as served, so distance from the site plays its part. 345ms is the point beyond which an automated reader gives up.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page starts answering within 250ms. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped heading level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H1 The Grooming Advent Calendar (Worth Over £469) H2 25 doors. 15 full-size products. 1 complete grooming calendar. Featuring ESPA, S H2 Frequently Bought Together H4 This item level jumped H5 The Grooming Advent Calendar (Worth Over £469) H4 Recommended Item H5 The LOOKFANTASTIC Beauty Advent Calendar (Worth Over £665) H2 Other Customers Bought H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT38 | fail | the page states the address the page gives as its own one way for machines and another in its words. A reader given both takes the machine-readable one, because that is the one written to be taken as given. Both versions are set out in the evidence | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the facts the page states for machines agree with the same facts in its words: the address it gives as its own, its dates, and its subject. What good looks like The two say the same thing. Why it matters Where the page and its machine-readable summary disagree, a reader has two answers and no way to choose between them. It usually takes the machine-readable one, because that is the one written to be taken as given. An old date recorded there against a current date on the page makes current work look stale, and a subject recorded there that differs from the heading files the page under the wrong question. What we found on this page the page states the address the page gives as its own one way for machines and another in its words. A reader given both takes the machine-readable one, because that is the one written to be taken as given. Both versions are set out in the evidence The evidence, taken from the page as served The same fact, as the page states it twice
Read from the page as served.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the two say the same thing. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS02 | fail | 1 button or form control on the loaded page carries no name in the page's code; 6 of the page's 78 links also carry no wording. An unnamed button or form control is truly blind: nothing on the page says what it is for or what using it does. | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What good looks like The page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. Why it matters An unnamed button or form control is truly blind: nothing in the page's code says what it is for, so anything operating the site on a customer's behalf is left guessing. One such control is enough to stop a task; unnamed links are weighed by how common they are. What we found on this page 1 button or form control on the loaded page carries no name in the page's code; 6 of the page's 78 links also carry no wording. An unnamed button or form control is truly blind: nothing on the page says what it is for or what using it does. The evidence, taken from the page as served The controls on this page that carry no name
Read on the page once its scripts had run.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 9 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 3 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 3 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| AR17 | warning | the page publishes a product for machines and leaves out a price and whether it can be had. A product with no price or no word on whether it can be had is listed but cannot be offered, so anything answering a buying question passes it over. | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Pages published as a product, and whether the detail they state for machines says what it is, what it costs and whether it can be had. What good looks like A page published as a product states its description, its price and its availability. Why it matters A product stated without price or availability is listed but cannot be offered. Anything answering a buying question skips it in favour of a competitor that stated both. What we found on this page the page publishes a product for machines and leaves out a price and whether it can be had. A product with no price or no word on whether it can be had is listed but cannot be offered, so anything answering a buying question passes it over. The evidence, taken from the page as served What each product this page publishes leaves out
Each product was read for a description, a price and whether it can be had.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 13 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 13 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 45 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£469”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 45 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£469”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||||||||
| AR12 | warning | 88% of this page's words sit behind panels a visitor has to open, and the page still reads soundly without them, so the risk is that an AI repeats wording a visitor never sees | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check How much of the page a visitor is shown before opening anything, against how much the page holds in total. What good looks like A visitor is shown a sound amount of the page straight away. More than half the words behind panels is a warning; showing less than 400 characters before anything is clicked is a fail. Why it matters A visitor and an AI can be shown two different versions of the same page, so wording nobody sees can still be quoted back with your name on it, and a page that shows almost nothing until it is clicked gives a visitor an empty shell. What we found on this page 88% of this page's words sit behind panels a visitor has to open, and the page still reads soundly without them, so the risk is that an AI repeats wording a visitor never sees The evidence, taken from the page as served What this page shows before anything is clicked
Both figures were taken on the page as it arrives, once it had finished building itself and before anything was clicked.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS04 | warning | the page's naming markup is faulty: 1 working control(s) sit inside a section the code marks as hidden, so they work on screen but are absent from what is read out | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Accessibility markup faults: invented roles, labels pointing at nothing, live controls marked hidden. What good looks like The page's accessibility markup is sound, with valid roles and no labels pointing at nothing. Why it matters The page misdescribes its own buttons and controls, so assistive tools and automated helpers are told one thing and given another. Anyone relying on those descriptions is misled by the page itself. What we found on this page the page's naming markup is faulty: 1 working control(s) sit inside a section the code marks as hidden, so they work on screen but are absent from what is read out The evidence, taken from the page as served The faulty markup, as the page serves it once loaded
<button class="side-sheet-close pointer-events-auto flex h-10 w-10 cursor-pointer items-center justify-center rounded-full border-none bg-black transition-colors duration-200 hover:bg-gray-800 focus:outline-2 focus:outline-offset-2 focus:outline-white max-md:h-8 max-md:w-8" aria-label="Close panel" data-side-sheet-regi… | |||||||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/p/beauty-box/the-september-beauty-box-worth-over-55/11140463 9.9% Extremely likely 19 out of 84
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/p/beauty-box/the-september-beauty-box-worth-over-55/11140463
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 7 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MX01 | fail | the site took 395ms to start answering, past the point where an automated reader gives up and takes its answer from elsewhere | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check How quickly the page starts to answer when it is asked for. What good looks like The page starts answering within 250ms. Between 250 and 345ms is a warning; beyond 345ms is a fail, that being the point at which an automated reader gives up. Why it matters A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it. What we found on this page the site took 395ms to start answering, past the point where an automated reader gives up and takes its answer from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served How long this page took to start answering
Timed from the request leaving our checker to the first part of the answer coming back, on the page as served, so distance from the site plays its part. 345ms is the point beyond which an automated reader gives up.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page starts answering within 250ms. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped heading level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H1 The September Beauty Box (Worth Over £55) H2 Think of this as your monthly beauty switch-up. Each edit is curated to bring yo H2 Frequently Bought Together H4 This item level jumped H5 LOOKFANTASTIC Beauty Box Subscription - 1 Month Renewal (New) H4 Recommended Item H5 The LOOKFANTASTIC Beauty Advent Calendar (Worth Over £665) H2 Other Customers Bought H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT37 | fail | 2 facts stated for machines appear nowhere in the page's own words, beginning with a rating given as "4.377379393695236". Facts stated that way are read straight out and repeated, so this is published as the organisation's own without the page supporting it | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The exact facts the page states in a form built for machines, a price, a telephone number, a postcode, a rating or an email address, set against what the page says in its own words. What good looks like Each fact stated for machines is also stated on the page. Why it matters Facts written for machines are taken as given. They are not weighed against the page, they are read straight out and repeated. A price, an address or a rating recorded there but absent from the page is a statement the organisation has made without knowing it, and it will be repeated with the organisation's name on it. What we found on this page 2 facts stated for machines appear nowhere in the page's own words, beginning with a rating given as "4.377379393695236". Facts stated that way are read straight out and repeated, so this is published as the organisation's own without the page supporting it The evidence, taken from the page as served Facts stated for machines, set against the page's own words
Each was looked for in the words the page shows, allowing for the way a page punctuates a number.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each fact stated for machines is also stated on the page. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 5 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide whether content can be reached and read at all, so it carries the heaviest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT38 | fail | the page states the address the page gives as its own one way for machines and another in its words. A reader given both takes the machine-readable one, because that is the one written to be taken as given. Both versions are set out in the evidence | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the facts the page states for machines agree with the same facts in its words: the address it gives as its own, its dates, and its subject. What good looks like The two say the same thing. Why it matters Where the page and its machine-readable summary disagree, a reader has two answers and no way to choose between them. It usually takes the machine-readable one, because that is the one written to be taken as given. An old date recorded there against a current date on the page makes current work look stale, and a subject recorded there that differs from the heading files the page under the wrong question. What we found on this page the page states the address the page gives as its own one way for machines and another in its words. A reader given both takes the machine-readable one, because that is the one written to be taken as given. Both versions are set out in the evidence The evidence, taken from the page as served The same fact, as the page states it twice
Read from the page as served.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the two say the same thing. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS17 | fail | 5 items on this page are written as a list or a set of steps but are not marked as one, the longest running to 5 items. Read by anything that takes the page apart, those items run together into one continuous passage, so their order and their separation are lost | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Ordered steps, sequences and lists on the page, and whether each is marked as one rather than laid out to look like one. What good looks like A list is marked as a list, and a sequence of steps as a sequence. Why it matters Anything taking the page apart relies on that marking to know where one item ends and the next begins. Where a set of steps is only styled to look separate, it comes back as one continuous run of words. Instructions lose their order and a set of options reads as a single sentence, so an answer built from it gives the steps in the wrong order or merges two into one. What we found on this page 5 items on this page are written as a list or a set of steps but are not marked as one, the longest running to 5 items. Read by anything that takes the page apart, those items run together into one continuous passage, so their order and their separation are lost The evidence, taken from the page as served The items written as a list but not marked as one
Read from the page as served, in the order they appear.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: a list is marked as a list, and a sequence of steps as a sequence. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “50ml”, “aesop”, “allies of skin” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “50ml”, “aesop”, “allies of skin” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS02 | fail | 1 button or form control on the loaded page carries no name in the page's code; 6 of the page's 80 links also carry no wording. An unnamed button or form control is truly blind: nothing on the page says what it is for or what using it does. | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What good looks like The page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. Why it matters An unnamed button or form control is truly blind: nothing in the page's code says what it is for, so anything operating the site on a customer's behalf is left guessing. One such control is enough to stop a task; unnamed links are weighed by how common they are. What we found on this page 1 button or form control on the loaded page carries no name in the page's code; 6 of the page's 80 links also carry no wording. An unnamed button or form control is truly blind: nothing on the page says what it is for or what using it does. The evidence, taken from the page as served The controls on this page that carry no name
Read on the page once its scripts had run.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 12 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT32 | warning | the page's meta description, the short summary it offers about itself, runs to 569 characters, longer than the 170 characters a listing shows, so the end of it is cut off | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page the page's meta description, the short summary it offers about itself, runs to 569 characters, longer than the 170 characters a listing shows, so the end of it is cut off The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Think of this as your monthly beauty switch-up. Each edit is curated to bring you a considered mix of hair, skincare, and makeup, featuring brands like Anastasia Beverly Hills and Wella – designed for discovery without the overwhelm. Worth over £55. Think of this as your monthly beauty… | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 3 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 3 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| AR17 | warning | the page publishes a product for machines and leaves out a price and whether it can be had. A product with no price or no word on whether it can be had is listed but cannot be offered, so anything answering a buying question passes it over. | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Pages published as a product, and whether the detail they state for machines says what it is, what it costs and whether it can be had. What good looks like A page published as a product states its description, its price and its availability. Why it matters A product stated without price or availability is listed but cannot be offered. Anything answering a buying question skips it in favour of a competitor that stated both. What we found on this page the page publishes a product for machines and leaves out a price and whether it can be had. A product with no price or no word on whether it can be had is listed but cannot be offered, so anything answering a buying question passes it over. The evidence, taken from the page as served What each product this page publishes leaves out
Each product was read for a description, a price and whether it can be had.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 19 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 19 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 40 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£55”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 40 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£55”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||||||||
| AR03 | warning | 12% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (34563 characters delivered, 38222 once the page finishes building itself) | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's content exists only once JavaScript has run. What good looks like The page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. Why it matters The page looks complete to a person, but its content is built by scripts that many AI systems never run, so they receive it near-empty. The organisation's material is missing from their answers. What we found on this page 12% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (34563 characters delivered, 38222 once the page finishes building itself) The evidence, taken from the page as served Content present only after JavaScript runs (absent from the served HTML)
The served HTML carries 34563 characters of text; after JavaScript runs the page carries 38222. 12% of the rendered page's words are absent from the HTML the server sends. What the server sends (raw HTML text, first 280 chars) The September Beauty Box (Worth Over £55) | LOOKFANTASTIC Skip to main content Order by 1AM tonight for Next Day Delivery Download our App 12-months Premier Delivery - Only £9.90! Join LF Beauty Plus+ UP TO 20% OFF SELECTED BEAUTY | USE CODE: SAVE ASK LF • Sign In Enter submenu (…
Words present only after JavaScript runs
1769185850449930ableacrossactionsactiveadvertisingaggregatedalertalwaysamountanonymousaroundassistbackbecausebehaviourbelowblockblockingbrowserbuildingbuttoncampaignscancelcannotcapablecentrechangechatcheckboxchoiceschooseclearclickcobrowsingcollectconfirmconsumercontactingconversationcookiescountcustomerdeactivatedefaultdevicedifferentdirectlydoesdropemailenableenhancedensureexpectexperiencefacebook
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| AR11 | warning | 12% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered: the page arrives carrying 90% of the text it ends up showing | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The measured gap between the page as served and the page after the browser has built it. What good looks like The served page and the fully built page carry the same words, with little gap between them. Why it matters Two versions of the same page exist, and which words come back depends on which version was fetched. What we found on this page 12% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered: the page arrives carrying 90% of the text it ends up showing The evidence, taken from the page as served This page as first delivered, against the page once its scripts have run
Both were taken from the same request. The first is what the site sent; the second is what a person ends up looking at.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| AR12 | warning | 86% of this page's words sit behind panels a visitor has to open, and the page still reads soundly without them, so the risk is that an AI repeats wording a visitor never sees | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check How much of the page a visitor is shown before opening anything, against how much the page holds in total. What good looks like A visitor is shown a sound amount of the page straight away. More than half the words behind panels is a warning; showing less than 400 characters before anything is clicked is a fail. Why it matters A visitor and an AI can be shown two different versions of the same page, so wording nobody sees can still be quoted back with your name on it, and a page that shows almost nothing until it is clicked gives a visitor an empty shell. What we found on this page 86% of this page's words sit behind panels a visitor has to open, and the page still reads soundly without them, so the risk is that an AI repeats wording a visitor never sees The evidence, taken from the page as served What this page shows before anything is clicked
Both figures were taken on the page as it arrives, once it had finished building itself and before anything was clicked.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS04 | warning | the page's naming markup is faulty: 1 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent; 1 working control(s) sit inside a section the code marks as hidden, so they work on screen but are absent from what is read out | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Accessibility markup faults: invented roles, labels pointing at nothing, live controls marked hidden. What good looks like The page's accessibility markup is sound, with valid roles and no labels pointing at nothing. Why it matters The page misdescribes its own buttons and controls, so assistive tools and automated helpers are told one thing and given another. Anyone relying on those descriptions is misled by the page itself. What we found on this page the page's naming markup is faulty: 1 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent; 1 working control(s) sit inside a section the code marks as hidden, so they work on screen but are absent from what is read out The evidence, taken from the page as served The faulty markup, as the page serves it once loaded
<div class="on-order-subs carousel-tab-wrapper justify-center carousel-wrapper flex gap-2" role="tabpanel" data-astro-cid-n4mdgx2m="" id="tabpanel-2" aria-labelledby="tab-2" tabindex="0"> <label class="size-variations w-full max-w-[110px] basis-1/4 bg-[#b3b3b3] text-center size-variations-active" data-e2e="box-subscrip… <button class="side-sheet-close pointer-events-auto flex h-10 w-10 cursor-pointer items-center justify-center rounded-full border-none bg-black transition-colors duration-200 hover:bg-gray-800 focus:outline-2 focus:outline-offset-2 focus:outline-white max-md:h-8 max-md:w-8" aria-label="Close panel" data-side-sheet-regi… | |||||||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar 54.2% Likely 17 out of 84
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 4 | |||||||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped heading level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H1 Beauty Advent Calendars H3 25 Days of Beauty level jumped H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H2 Your Guide to the LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Calendars for 2026 H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| CT41 | fail | the page shows one path to itself and states another for machines, so it is placed in two positions at once. Both are set out in the evidence | |||||||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page shows one path to itself and states another for machines, so it is placed in two positions at once. Both are set out in the evidence The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page shows, against the path it states for machines
Read from the page as served.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 1 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the supporting checks, so it carries the lightest weight in the figure for this item. Why it does not move the misinformation reading This failure makes content harder to reach or to read, but it is not a direct route to a wrong answer, so it is held out of the misinformation reading rather than counted twice. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS01 | fail | 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each box, dropdown and text area in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What good looks like Each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. Why it matters The boxes in this form carry no names of their own, so an automated helper filling it in has to guess which answer goes where. Guessed forms arrive wrong, or the form gets abandoned. What we found on this page 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone The evidence, taken from the page as served The form boxes that carry no name, as served
<input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 13 | |||||||||||||||||
| MX01 | warning | the site took 272ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up | |||||||||||||||
What we check How quickly the page starts to answer when it is asked for. What good looks like The page starts answering within 250ms. Between 250 and 345ms is a warning; beyond 345ms is a fail, that being the point at which an automated reader gives up. Why it matters A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it. What we found on this page the site took 272ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up The evidence, taken from the page as served How long this page took to start answering
Timed from the request leaving our checker to the first part of the answer coming back, on the page as served, so distance from the site plays its part. 345ms is the point beyond which an automated reader gives up.
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Beauty Advent Calendars 2026 | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Shop Beauty Advent Calendars at LOOKFANTASTIC. Unwrap daily luxury behind every door. Featuring beauty icons across skincare, makeup & fragrance."}</scrip…<script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Christmas","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.l… | |||||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 12 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£120.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 12 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£120.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||||
| AR03 | warning | 14% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (30870 characters delivered, 34652 once the page finishes building itself) | |||||||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's content exists only once JavaScript has run. What good looks like The page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. Why it matters The page looks complete to a person, but its content is built by scripts that many AI systems never run, so they receive it near-empty. The organisation's material is missing from their answers. What we found on this page 14% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (30870 characters delivered, 34652 once the page finishes building itself) The evidence, taken from the page as served Content present only after JavaScript runs (absent from the served HTML)
The served HTML carries 30870 characters of text; after JavaScript runs the page carries 34652. 14% of the rendered page's words are absent from the HTML the server sends. What the server sends (raw HTML text, first 280 chars) Beauty Advent Calendars 2026 | LOOKFANTASTIC Skip to main content Order by 1AM tonight for Next Day Delivery Download our App 12-months Premier Delivery - Only £9.90! Join LF Beauty Plus+ UP TO 20% OFF SELECTED BEAUTY | USE CODE: SAVE ASK LF • Sign In Enter submenu ( Account Sett…
Words present only after JavaScript runs
ableactionsactiveaddedadvertisingaggregatedalertallowalwaysamountanonymousapplyaroundassistbackbecausebehaviourbelowblockblockingbrowserbuildingbuttoncampaignscancelcannotcapablecentrechangechatcheckboxchoicesclickcobrowsingcollectconfirmconsumercontactingconversationcookiescountcustomerdeactivatedefaultdevicedifferentdirectlydoesdropemailenableenhancedensureexpectexperiencefacebookfilefillfillingfilter
| |||||||||||||||||
| AR11 | warning | 14% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered: the page arrives carrying 89% of the text it ends up showing | |||||||||||||||
What we check The measured gap between the page as served and the page after the browser has built it. What good looks like The served page and the fully built page carry the same words, with little gap between them. Why it matters Two versions of the same page exist, and which words come back depends on which version was fetched. What we found on this page 14% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered: the page arrives carrying 89% of the text it ends up showing The evidence, taken from the page as served This page as first delivered, against the page once its scripts have run
Both were taken from the same request. The first is what the site sent; the second is what a person ends up looking at.
| |||||||||||||||||
| AR12 | warning | 87% of this page's words sit behind panels a visitor has to open, and the page still reads soundly without them, so the risk is that an AI repeats wording a visitor never sees | |||||||||||||||
What we check How much of the page a visitor is shown before opening anything, against how much the page holds in total. What good looks like A visitor is shown a sound amount of the page straight away. More than half the words behind panels is a warning; showing less than 400 characters before anything is clicked is a fail. Why it matters A visitor and an AI can be shown two different versions of the same page, so wording nobody sees can still be quoted back with your name on it, and a page that shows almost nothing until it is clicked gives a visitor an empty shell. What we found on this page 87% of this page's words sit behind panels a visitor has to open, and the page still reads soundly without them, so the risk is that an AI repeats wording a visitor never sees The evidence, taken from the page as served What this page shows before anything is clicked
Both figures were taken on the page as it arrives, once it had finished building itself and before anything was clicked.
| |||||||||||||||||
| MS02 | warning | 11 of 77 links on the loaded page carry no wording in the page's code saying where each leads | |||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What good looks like The page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. Why it matters An unnamed button or form control is truly blind: nothing in the page's code says what it is for, so anything operating the site on a customer's behalf is left guessing. One such control is enough to stop a task; unnamed links are weighed by how common they are. What we found on this page 11 of 77 links on the loaded page carry no wording in the page's code saying where each leads The evidence, taken from the page as served The controls on this page that carry no name
Read on the page once its scripts had run.
| |||||||||||||||||
| MS04 | warning | the page's naming markup is faulty: 1 working control(s) sit inside a section the code marks as hidden, so they work on screen but are absent from what is read out | |||||||||||||||
What we check Accessibility markup faults: invented roles, labels pointing at nothing, live controls marked hidden. What good looks like The page's accessibility markup is sound, with valid roles and no labels pointing at nothing. Why it matters The page misdescribes its own buttons and controls, so assistive tools and automated helpers are told one thing and given another. Anyone relying on those descriptions is misled by the page itself. What we found on this page the page's naming markup is faulty: 1 working control(s) sit inside a section the code marks as hidden, so they work on screen but are absent from what is read out The evidence, taken from the page as served The faulty markup, as the page serves it once loaded
<button class="side-sheet-close pointer-events-auto flex h-10 w-10 cursor-pointer items-center justify-center rounded-full border-none bg-black transition-colors duration-200 hover:bg-gray-800 focus:outline-2 focus:outline-offset-2 focus:outline-white max-md:h-8 max-md:w-8" aria-label="Close panel" data-side-sheet-regi… | |||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/p/beauty-box/the-beauty-advent-calendar-worth-over-665/17691363 31.5% Very likely 17 out of 84
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/p/beauty-box/the-beauty-advent-calendar-worth-over-665/17691363
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 6 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MX01 | fail | the site took 394ms to start answering, past the point where an automated reader gives up and takes its answer from elsewhere | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check How quickly the page starts to answer when it is asked for. What good looks like The page starts answering within 250ms. Between 250 and 345ms is a warning; beyond 345ms is a fail, that being the point at which an automated reader gives up. Why it matters A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it. What we found on this page the site took 394ms to start answering, past the point where an automated reader gives up and takes its answer from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served How long this page took to start answering
Timed from the request leaving our checker to the first part of the answer coming back, on the page as served, so distance from the site plays its part. 345ms is the point beyond which an automated reader gives up.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page starts answering within 250ms. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped heading level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H1 The LOOKFANTASTIC Beauty Advent Calendar (Worth Over £665) H2 Unlock 25 days of beauty icons, handpicked by the names you trust, including 19 H2 Frequently Bought Together H4 This item level jumped H5 The LOOKFANTASTIC Beauty Advent Calendar (Worth Over £665) H4 Recommended Item H5 The Grooming Advent Calendar (Worth Over £469) H2 Other Customers Bought H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT38 | fail | the page states the address the page gives as its own one way for machines and another in its words. A reader given both takes the machine-readable one, because that is the one written to be taken as given. Both versions are set out in the evidence | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the facts the page states for machines agree with the same facts in its words: the address it gives as its own, its dates, and its subject. What good looks like The two say the same thing. Why it matters Where the page and its machine-readable summary disagree, a reader has two answers and no way to choose between them. It usually takes the machine-readable one, because that is the one written to be taken as given. An old date recorded there against a current date on the page makes current work look stale, and a subject recorded there that differs from the heading files the page under the wrong question. What we found on this page the page states the address the page gives as its own one way for machines and another in its words. A reader given both takes the machine-readable one, because that is the one written to be taken as given. Both versions are set out in the evidence The evidence, taken from the page as served The same fact, as the page states it twice
Read from the page as served.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the two say the same thing. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS17 | fail | 4 items on this page are written as a list or a set of steps but are not marked as one, the longest running to 4 items. Read by anything that takes the page apart, those items run together into one continuous passage, so their order and their separation are lost | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Ordered steps, sequences and lists on the page, and whether each is marked as one rather than laid out to look like one. What good looks like A list is marked as a list, and a sequence of steps as a sequence. Why it matters Anything taking the page apart relies on that marking to know where one item ends and the next begins. Where a set of steps is only styled to look separate, it comes back as one continuous run of words. Instructions lose their order and a set of options reads as a single sentence, so an answer built from it gives the steps in the wrong order or merges two into one. What we found on this page 4 items on this page are written as a list or a set of steps but are not marked as one, the longest running to 4 items. Read by anything that takes the page apart, those items run together into one continuous passage, so their order and their separation are lost The evidence, taken from the page as served The items written as a list but not marked as one
Read from the page as served, in the order they appear.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: a list is marked as a list, and a sequence of steps as a sequence. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS02 | fail | 1 button or form control on the loaded page carries no name in the page's code; 6 of the page's 80 links also carry no wording. An unnamed button or form control is truly blind: nothing on the page says what it is for or what using it does. | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What good looks like The page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. Why it matters An unnamed button or form control is truly blind: nothing in the page's code says what it is for, so anything operating the site on a customer's behalf is left guessing. One such control is enough to stop a task; unnamed links are weighed by how common they are. What we found on this page 1 button or form control on the loaded page carries no name in the page's code; 6 of the page's 80 links also carry no wording. An unnamed button or form control is truly blind: nothing on the page says what it is for or what using it does. The evidence, taken from the page as served The controls on this page that carry no name
Read on the page once its scripts had run.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 11 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| DS22 | warning | the page lists 2 language versions of itself but is not among them, so the versions do not point back to each other and each reads as a separate page | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether a page's language and region links carry valid locale codes, where such links are present. What good looks like Any language and region links carry valid locale codes. Why it matters A wrong language label strands the translated version, so readers in that market are shown the wrong language. What we found on this page the page lists 2 language versions of itself but is not among them, so the versions do not point back to each other and each reads as a separate page The evidence, taken from the page as served The language versions this page lists, as served
<link rel="alternate" hreflang="en-gb" href="https://www.lookfantastic.com/p/beauty-box/the-lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar-worth-over-665/17691363/"/> <link rel="alternate" hreflang="x-default" href="https://www.lookfantastic.com/p/beauty-box/the-lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar-worth-over-665/17691363/"/> | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT06 | warning | title length 74 chars | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The title's length sits in a usable window, between 10 and 65 characters. What good looks like The title's length sits in a usable window, neither too short to say anything nor too long to be cut. Why it matters A title that is too short or too long is liable to be rewritten elsewhere, and control of the page's name goes with it. What we found on this page title length 74 chars The evidence, taken from the page as served The page title, as served
<title>The LOOKFANTASTIC Beauty Advent Calendar (Worth Over £665) | LOOKFANTASTIC</title> <title> info </title> | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 3 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 3 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| AR17 | warning | the page publishes a product for machines and leaves out a price and whether it can be had. A product with no price or no word on whether it can be had is listed but cannot be offered, so anything answering a buying question passes it over. | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Pages published as a product, and whether the detail they state for machines says what it is, what it costs and whether it can be had. What good looks like A page published as a product states its description, its price and its availability. Why it matters A product stated without price or availability is listed but cannot be offered. Anything answering a buying question skips it in favour of a competitor that stated both. What we found on this page the page publishes a product for machines and leaves out a price and whether it can be had. A product with no price or no word on whether it can be had is listed but cannot be offered, so anything answering a buying question passes it over. The evidence, taken from the page as served What each product this page publishes leaves out
Each product was read for a description, a price and whether it can be had.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 13 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 13 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 50 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£665”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 50 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£665”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||||||||
| AR12 | warning | 87% of this page's words sit behind panels a visitor has to open, and the page still reads soundly without them, so the risk is that an AI repeats wording a visitor never sees | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check How much of the page a visitor is shown before opening anything, against how much the page holds in total. What good looks like A visitor is shown a sound amount of the page straight away. More than half the words behind panels is a warning; showing less than 400 characters before anything is clicked is a fail. Why it matters A visitor and an AI can be shown two different versions of the same page, so wording nobody sees can still be quoted back with your name on it, and a page that shows almost nothing until it is clicked gives a visitor an empty shell. What we found on this page 87% of this page's words sit behind panels a visitor has to open, and the page still reads soundly without them, so the risk is that an AI repeats wording a visitor never sees The evidence, taken from the page as served What this page shows before anything is clicked
Both figures were taken on the page as it arrives, once it had finished building itself and before anything was clicked.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS04 | warning | the page's naming markup is faulty: 1 working control(s) sit inside a section the code marks as hidden, so they work on screen but are absent from what is read out | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Accessibility markup faults: invented roles, labels pointing at nothing, live controls marked hidden. What good looks like The page's accessibility markup is sound, with valid roles and no labels pointing at nothing. Why it matters The page misdescribes its own buttons and controls, so assistive tools and automated helpers are told one thing and given another. Anyone relying on those descriptions is misled by the page itself. What we found on this page the page's naming markup is faulty: 1 working control(s) sit inside a section the code marks as hidden, so they work on screen but are absent from what is read out The evidence, taken from the page as served The faulty markup, as the page serves it once loaded
<button class="side-sheet-close pointer-events-auto flex h-10 w-10 cursor-pointer items-center justify-center rounded-full border-none bg-black transition-colors duration-200 hover:bg-gray-800 focus:outline-2 focus:outline-offset-2 focus:outline-white max-md:h-8 max-md:w-8" aria-label="Close panel" data-side-sheet-regi… | |||||||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all 31.4% Very likely 18 out of 84
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 5 | |||||||||||||||||
| DS06 | fail | the page tells automated readers not to list it | |||||||||||||||
What we check Pages carrying a noindex instruction, either in the page's own tags or in its response headers. What good looks like No page that should be found carries a noindex instruction. Why it matters The page carries an instruction asking to be left out of search and AI results, so what is said about the organisation is put together without it, whether or not anyone meant that. What we found on this page the page tells automated readers not to list it The evidence, taken from the page as served The noindex directive, as served in the page's markup
<meta name="robots" content="noindex"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: no page that should be found carries a noindex instruction. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 5 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide whether content can be reached and read at all, so it carries the heaviest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped heading level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H1 LOOKFANTASTIC Limited Edition Beauty Boxes H3 (no text) level jumped H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| CT41 | fail | the page shows one path to itself and states another for machines, so it is placed in two positions at once. Both are set out in the evidence | |||||||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page shows one path to itself and states another for machines, so it is placed in two positions at once. Both are set out in the evidence The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page shows, against the path it states for machines
Read from the page as served.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 1 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the supporting checks, so it carries the lightest weight in the figure for this item. Why it does not move the misinformation reading This failure makes content harder to reach or to read, but it is not a direct route to a wrong answer, so it is held out of the misinformation reading rather than counted twice. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS01 | fail | 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each box, dropdown and text area in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What good looks like Each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. Why it matters The boxes in this form carry no names of their own, so an automated helper filling it in has to guess which answer goes where. Guessed forms arrive wrong, or the form gets abandoned. What we found on this page 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone The evidence, taken from the page as served The form boxes that carry no name, as served
<input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 13 | |||||||||||||||||
| MX01 | warning | the site took 273ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up | |||||||||||||||
What we check How quickly the page starts to answer when it is asked for. What good looks like The page starts answering within 250ms. Between 250 and 345ms is a warning; beyond 345ms is a fail, that being the point at which an automated reader gives up. Why it matters A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it. What we found on this page the site took 273ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up The evidence, taken from the page as served How long this page took to start answering
Timed from the request leaving our checker to the first part of the answer coming back, on the page as served, so distance from the site plays its part. 345ms is the point beyond which an automated reader gives up.
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Limited Edition Beauty Boxes | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Shop Ltd Edition Beauty Boxes at LOOKFANTASTIC. Featuring seasonal highlights to trend-worthy gifting options ideal for any occasion. "}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Beauty Box","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.… | |||||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 7 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£120.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 7 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£120.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||||
| AR03 | warning | 15% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (29185 characters delivered, 32606 once the page finishes building itself) | |||||||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's content exists only once JavaScript has run. What good looks like The page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. Why it matters The page looks complete to a person, but its content is built by scripts that many AI systems never run, so they receive it near-empty. The organisation's material is missing from their answers. What we found on this page 15% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (29185 characters delivered, 32606 once the page finishes building itself) The evidence, taken from the page as served Content present only after JavaScript runs (absent from the served HTML)
The served HTML carries 29185 characters of text; after JavaScript runs the page carries 32606. 15% of the rendered page's words are absent from the HTML the server sends. What the server sends (raw HTML text, first 280 chars) Limited Edition Beauty Boxes | LOOKFANTASTIC Skip to main content Order by 1AM tonight for Next Day Delivery Download our App 12-months Premier Delivery - Only £9.90! Join LF Beauty Plus+ UP TO 20% OFF SELECTED BEAUTY | USE CODE: SAVE ASK LF • Sign In Enter submenu ( Account Sett…
Words present only after JavaScript runs
ableacrossactionsactiveaddedadvertisingaggregatedalertallowalwaysamountanonymousapplyaroundassistbackbeforebehaviourbelowblockblockingbrowserbuildingbuttoncampaignscancelcannotcapablecentrechangechatcheckboxchoiceschooseclickcobrowsingcollectconfirmconsumercontactingconversationcookiescountcustomerdeactivatedefaultdevicedifferentdirectlydoesdropemailenableenhancedensureexpectexperiencefacebookfilefill
| |||||||||||||||||
| AR11 | warning | 15% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered: the page arrives carrying 90% of the text it ends up showing | |||||||||||||||
What we check The measured gap between the page as served and the page after the browser has built it. What good looks like The served page and the fully built page carry the same words, with little gap between them. Why it matters Two versions of the same page exist, and which words come back depends on which version was fetched. What we found on this page 15% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered: the page arrives carrying 90% of the text it ends up showing The evidence, taken from the page as served This page as first delivered, against the page once its scripts have run
Both were taken from the same request. The first is what the site sent; the second is what a person ends up looking at.
| |||||||||||||||||
| AR12 | warning | 89% of this page's words sit behind panels a visitor has to open, and the page still reads soundly without them, so the risk is that an AI repeats wording a visitor never sees | |||||||||||||||
What we check How much of the page a visitor is shown before opening anything, against how much the page holds in total. What good looks like A visitor is shown a sound amount of the page straight away. More than half the words behind panels is a warning; showing less than 400 characters before anything is clicked is a fail. Why it matters A visitor and an AI can be shown two different versions of the same page, so wording nobody sees can still be quoted back with your name on it, and a page that shows almost nothing until it is clicked gives a visitor an empty shell. What we found on this page 89% of this page's words sit behind panels a visitor has to open, and the page still reads soundly without them, so the risk is that an AI repeats wording a visitor never sees The evidence, taken from the page as served What this page shows before anything is clicked
Both figures were taken on the page as it arrives, once it had finished building itself and before anything was clicked.
| |||||||||||||||||
| MS02 | warning | 6 of 75 links on the loaded page carry no wording in the page's code saying where each leads | |||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What good looks like The page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. Why it matters An unnamed button or form control is truly blind: nothing in the page's code says what it is for, so anything operating the site on a customer's behalf is left guessing. One such control is enough to stop a task; unnamed links are weighed by how common they are. What we found on this page 6 of 75 links on the loaded page carry no wording in the page's code saying where each leads The evidence, taken from the page as served The controls on this page that carry no name
Read on the page once its scripts had run.
| |||||||||||||||||
| MS04 | warning | the page's naming markup is faulty: 2 working control(s) sit inside a section the code marks as hidden, so they work on screen but are absent from what is read out | |||||||||||||||
What we check Accessibility markup faults: invented roles, labels pointing at nothing, live controls marked hidden. What good looks like The page's accessibility markup is sound, with valid roles and no labels pointing at nothing. Why it matters The page misdescribes its own buttons and controls, so assistive tools and automated helpers are told one thing and given another. Anyone relying on those descriptions is misled by the page itself. What we found on this page the page's naming markup is faulty: 2 working control(s) sit inside a section the code marks as hidden, so they work on screen but are absent from what is read out The evidence, taken from the page as served The faulty markup, as the page serves it once loaded
<a href="/c/waitlist/advent/"><strong>Beauty Advent Calendar</strong></a> <button class="side-sheet-close pointer-events-auto flex h-10 w-10 cursor-pointer items-center justify-center rounded-full border-none bg-black transition-colors duration-200 hover:bg-gray-800 focus:outline-2 focus:outline-offset-2 focus:outline-white max-md:h-8 max-md:w-8" aria-label="Close panel" data-side-sheet-regi… | |||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands 11.1% Extremely likely 10 out of 84
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 2 | |||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||
| AR03 | fail | 92% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (32506 characters delivered, 485 once the page finishes building itself): the page's content exists only after JavaScript runs, so it is absent on the raw-HTML fetch path | |||||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's content exists only once JavaScript has run. What good looks like The page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. Why it matters The page looks complete to a person, but its content is built by scripts that many AI systems never run, so they receive it near-empty. The organisation's material is missing from their answers. What we found on this page 92% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (32506 characters delivered, 485 once the page finishes building itself): the page's content exists only after JavaScript runs, so it is absent on the raw-HTML fetch path The evidence, taken from the page as served Content present only after JavaScript runs (absent from the served HTML)
The served HTML carries 32506 characters of text; after JavaScript runs the page carries 485. 92% of the rendered page's words are absent from the HTML the server sends. What the server sends (raw HTML text, first 280 chars) Beauty Brands | LOOKFANTASTIC Skip to main content Order by 1AM tonight for Next Day Delivery Download our App 12-months Premier Delivery - Only £9.90! Join LF Beauty Plus+ UP TO 20% OFF SELECTED BEAUTY | USE CODE: SAVE ASK LF • Sign In Enter submenu ( Account Settings ) Login Re…
Words present only after JavaScript runs
accessactionsaddressaddressesadministratoragainautomatedconnectioncontactingcorporatedifferentdoesfrequentlyhaveidentifiedinternetissuemaliciousmeanminutesnotepleasepossiblyprovidersresolverestrictedrestrictionreusedsecurityservicesystemstakentemporarilytryingusingwaitingyourself
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 5 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide whether content can be reached and read at all, so it carries the heaviest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a frequent and direct cause of a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 8 | |||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Beauty Brands | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"LOOKFANTASTIC Brand Directory. Discover over 300 premium Beauty Brands from Haircare & Fragrance, Skincare to Cosmetics & more. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||
| AR11 | warning | 92% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered: the page arrives carrying 6702% of the text it ends up showing | |||||||||||||
What we check The measured gap between the page as served and the page after the browser has built it. What good looks like The served page and the fully built page carry the same words, with little gap between them. Why it matters Two versions of the same page exist, and which words come back depends on which version was fetched. What we found on this page 92% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered: the page arrives carrying 6702% of the text it ends up showing The evidence, taken from the page as served This page as first delivered, against the page once its scripts have run
Both were taken from the same request. The first is what the site sent; the second is what a person ends up looking at.
| |||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/aromatica 10.6% Extremely likely 13 out of 84
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/aromatica
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 5 | |||||||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped heading level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H1 Aromatica H3 Scalp Care, Root to Tip level jumped H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| CT41 | fail | the page shows one path to itself and states another for machines, so it is placed in two positions at once. Both are set out in the evidence | |||||||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page shows one path to itself and states another for machines, so it is placed in two positions at once. Both are set out in the evidence The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page shows, against the path it states for machines
Read from the page as served.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 1 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the supporting checks, so it carries the lightest weight in the figure for this item. Why it does not move the misinformation reading This failure makes content harder to reach or to read, but it is not a direct route to a wrong answer, so it is held out of the misinformation reading rather than counted twice. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS01 | fail | 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each box, dropdown and text area in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What good looks like Each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. Why it matters The boxes in this form carry no names of their own, so an automated helper filling it in has to guess which answer goes where. Guessed forms arrive wrong, or the form gets abandoned. What we found on this page 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone The evidence, taken from the page as served The form boxes that carry no name, as served
<input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| AR03 | fail | 92% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (30243 characters delivered, 485 once the page finishes building itself): the page's content exists only after JavaScript runs, so it is absent on the raw-HTML fetch path | |||||||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's content exists only once JavaScript has run. What good looks like The page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. Why it matters The page looks complete to a person, but its content is built by scripts that many AI systems never run, so they receive it near-empty. The organisation's material is missing from their answers. What we found on this page 92% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (30243 characters delivered, 485 once the page finishes building itself): the page's content exists only after JavaScript runs, so it is absent on the raw-HTML fetch path The evidence, taken from the page as served Content present only after JavaScript runs (absent from the served HTML)
The served HTML carries 30243 characters of text; after JavaScript runs the page carries 485. 92% of the rendered page's words are absent from the HTML the server sends. What the server sends (raw HTML text, first 280 chars) Aromatica | LOOKFANTASTIC Skip to main content Order by 1AM tonight for Next Day Delivery Download our App 12-months Premier Delivery - Only £9.90! Join LF Beauty Plus+ UP TO 20% OFF SELECTED BEAUTY | USE CODE: SAVE ASK LF • Sign In Enter submenu ( Account Settings ) Login Regist…
Words present only after JavaScript runs
accessactionsaddressaddressesadministratoragainautomatedconnectioncontactingcorporatedifferentdoesfrequentlyhaveidentifiedinternetissuemaliciousmeanminutesnotepleasepossiblyprovidersresolverestrictedrestrictionreusedsecurityservicesystemstakentemporarilytryingusingwaitingyourself
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 5 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide whether content can be reached and read at all, so it carries the heaviest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a frequent and direct cause of a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 8 | |||||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Aromatica | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Shop Aromatica at LOOKFANTASTIC. Explore rosemary scalp care & nourishing hair treatments for balanced, healthy-looking hair. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 13 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 13 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||||
| AR11 | warning | 92% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered: the page arrives carrying 6236% of the text it ends up showing | |||||||||||||||
What we check The measured gap between the page as served and the page after the browser has built it. What good looks like The served page and the fully built page carry the same words, with little gap between them. Why it matters Two versions of the same page exist, and which words come back depends on which version was fetched. What we found on this page 92% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered: the page arrives carrying 6236% of the text it ends up showing The evidence, taken from the page as served This page as first delivered, against the page once its scripts have run
Both were taken from the same request. The first is what the site sent; the second is what a person ends up looking at.
| |||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/axisy 10.6% Extremely likely 13 out of 84
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/axisy
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 5 | |||||||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped heading level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H1 Axis-Y H3 Balance, Brightness, Daily Ease level jumped H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| CT41 | fail | the page shows one path to itself and states another for machines, so it is placed in two positions at once. Both are set out in the evidence | |||||||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page shows one path to itself and states another for machines, so it is placed in two positions at once. Both are set out in the evidence The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page shows, against the path it states for machines
Read from the page as served.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 1 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the supporting checks, so it carries the lightest weight in the figure for this item. Why it does not move the misinformation reading This failure makes content harder to reach or to read, but it is not a direct route to a wrong answer, so it is held out of the misinformation reading rather than counted twice. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS01 | fail | 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each box, dropdown and text area in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What good looks like Each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. Why it matters The boxes in this form carry no names of their own, so an automated helper filling it in has to guess which answer goes where. Guessed forms arrive wrong, or the form gets abandoned. What we found on this page 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone The evidence, taken from the page as served The form boxes that carry no name, as served
<input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| AR03 | fail | 92% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (30205 characters delivered, 485 once the page finishes building itself): the page's content exists only after JavaScript runs, so it is absent on the raw-HTML fetch path | |||||||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's content exists only once JavaScript has run. What good looks like The page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. Why it matters The page looks complete to a person, but its content is built by scripts that many AI systems never run, so they receive it near-empty. The organisation's material is missing from their answers. What we found on this page 92% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (30205 characters delivered, 485 once the page finishes building itself): the page's content exists only after JavaScript runs, so it is absent on the raw-HTML fetch path The evidence, taken from the page as served Content present only after JavaScript runs (absent from the served HTML)
The served HTML carries 30205 characters of text; after JavaScript runs the page carries 485. 92% of the rendered page's words are absent from the HTML the server sends. What the server sends (raw HTML text, first 280 chars) Axis-Y | LOOKFANTASTIC Skip to main content Order by 1AM tonight for Next Day Delivery Download our App 12-months Premier Delivery - Only £9.90! Join LF Beauty Plus+ UP TO 20% OFF SELECTED BEAUTY | USE CODE: SAVE ASK LF • Sign In Enter submenu ( Account Settings ) Login Register …
Words present only after JavaScript runs
accessactionsaddressaddressesadministratoragainautomatedconnectioncontactingcorporatedifferentdoesfrequentlyhaveidentifiedinternetissuemaliciousmeanminutesnotepleasepossiblyprovidersresolverestrictedrestrictionreusedsecurityservicesystemstakentemporarilytryingusingwaitingyourself
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 5 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide whether content can be reached and read at all, so it carries the heaviest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a frequent and direct cause of a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 8 | |||||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Axis-Y | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Shop Axis-Y at LOOKFANTASTIC. Explore glow-boosting skincare, daily SPF & targeted care for clearer, balanced-looking skin. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 12 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£17.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 12 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£17.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||||
| AR11 | warning | 92% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered: the page arrives carrying 6228% of the text it ends up showing | |||||||||||||||
What we check The measured gap between the page as served and the page after the browser has built it. What good looks like The served page and the fully built page carry the same words, with little gap between them. Why it matters Two versions of the same page exist, and which words come back depends on which version was fetched. What we found on this page 92% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered: the page arrives carrying 6228% of the text it ends up showing The evidence, taken from the page as served This page as first delivered, against the page once its scripts have run
Both were taken from the same request. The first is what the site sent; the second is what a person ends up looking at.
| |||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/beauty-of-joseon 10.8% Extremely likely 12 out of 84
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/beauty-of-joseon
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 3 | |||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 61 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 58 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 61 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 58 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||
| MS14 | fail | 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form | |||||||||||||
What we check Whether each video carries captions of its own, timed text on the video itself, judged together with whether the page holds a written transcript. What good looks like Captions carried on the video. A WARNING means the video has no captions but a written transcript on the page holds the words. A FAIL means neither exists, so nothing spoken is available as text in any form; that total absence is marked here once, not spread across two findings. Why it matters Spoken content that exists only as sound is invisible to a reader, human or machine: nothing said in the video can be found, read or quoted. What we found on this page 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form The evidence, taken from the page as served Each video on the page, as served: its code, source file and caption track
No caption track on the video and no transcript link on the page. <iframe allow="fullscreen" width="100%" height="100%" class="aspect-video w-full md:w-2/3 lg:w-1/2" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/F6Wn6lARTxg" title=""> </iframe> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: captions carried on the video. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||
| AR03 | fail | 85% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (34224 characters delivered, 485 once the page finishes building itself): the page's content exists only after JavaScript runs, so it is absent on the raw-HTML fetch path | |||||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's content exists only once JavaScript has run. What good looks like The page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. Why it matters The page looks complete to a person, but its content is built by scripts that many AI systems never run, so they receive it near-empty. The organisation's material is missing from their answers. What we found on this page 85% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (34224 characters delivered, 485 once the page finishes building itself): the page's content exists only after JavaScript runs, so it is absent on the raw-HTML fetch path The evidence, taken from the page as served Content present only after JavaScript runs (absent from the served HTML)
The served HTML carries 34224 characters of text; after JavaScript runs the page carries 485. 85% of the rendered page's words are absent from the HTML the server sends. What the server sends (raw HTML text, first 280 chars) Beauty of Joseon | LOOKFANTASTIC Skip to main content Order by 1AM tonight for Next Day Delivery Download our App 12-months Premier Delivery - Only £9.90! Join LF Beauty Plus+ UP TO 20% OFF SELECTED BEAUTY | USE CODE: SAVE ASK LF • Sign In Enter submenu ( Account Settings ) Login…
Words present only after JavaScript runs
accessactionsaddressaddressesadministratoragainautomatedconnectioncontactingcorporatedoeshaveidentifiedinternetissuemaliciousmeanminutesnotepleasepossiblyprovidersresolverestrictedrestrictionreusedsecurityservicesystemstakentemporarilytryingwaitingyourself
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 5 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide whether content can be reached and read at all, so it carries the heaviest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a frequent and direct cause of a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 9 | |||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Beauty of Joseon | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Shop Beauty of Joseon at LOOKFANTASTIC. Explore K-Beauty skincare with Hanbang ingredients to hydrate & brighten skin. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 23 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£53.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 23 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£53.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe allow="fullscreen" width="100%" height="100%" class="aspect-video w-full md:w-2/3 lg:w-1/2" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/F6Wn6lARTxg" title=""> </iframe> | |||||||||||||||
| AR11 | warning | 85% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered: the page arrives carrying 7056% of the text it ends up showing | |||||||||||||
What we check The measured gap between the page as served and the page after the browser has built it. What good looks like The served page and the fully built page carry the same words, with little gap between them. Why it matters Two versions of the same page exist, and which words come back depends on which version was fetched. What we found on this page 85% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered: the page arrives carrying 7056% of the text it ends up showing The evidence, taken from the page as served This page as first delivered, against the page once its scripts have run
Both were taken from the same request. The first is what the site sent; the second is what a person ends up looking at.
| |||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/clinique 57.0% Likely 11 out of 68
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/clinique
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 1 | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 10 | |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Clinique | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Discover Clinique at LOOKFANTASTIC. Dermatologist-developed skincare & makeup ideal for all skin types - for visible results. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 18 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 18 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||
| IN21 | warning | 2 claims of being best, largest or leading are made on this page with no figure or source beside it, such as “the best”. Taken out and repeated, a claim like this carries the weight of a measured fact while resting on nothing. | |||||||||||
What we check Claims of being largest, leading, best or first in the page's words, and whether a figure or a source sits in the same passage. What good looks like A claim of standing carries the figure or the source that supports it. Why it matters A claim of standing with no figure beside it is a statement about the organisation made by the organisation. Taken out and repeated, it carries the weight of a measured fact while resting on nothing. What we found on this page 2 claims of being best, largest or leading are made on this page with no figure or source beside it, such as “the best”. Taken out and repeated, a claim like this carries the weight of a measured fact while resting on nothing. | |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MS09 | warning | link wording that does not say where it leads: “here” | |||||||||||
What we check Link wording that names no destination, phrases such as click here, read more and details, and one such wording repeated across many links. What good looks like Link wording names its destination, rather than saying click here or read more. Why it matters The destination is stated nowhere on the link itself, so the choice rests entirely on the text around it. Where one wording such as click here covers many links, they read as one link repeated and nothing in their names tells them apart. What we found on this page link wording that does not say where it leads: “here” The evidence, taken from the page as served The links whose text names no destination, as served
<a href="/c/brands/clinique/view-all/"><b>here</b></a> | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/offers/sale/fragrance 56.0% Likely 10 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/offers/sale/fragrance
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 3 | |||||||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped heading level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H1 Fragrance Sale H3 Unmissable Savings on Fragrance Icons level jumped H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS01 | fail | 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each box, dropdown and text area in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What good looks like Each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. Why it matters The boxes in this form carry no names of their own, so an automated helper filling it in has to guess which answer goes where. Guessed forms arrive wrong, or the form gets abandoned. What we found on this page 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone The evidence, taken from the page as served The form boxes that carry no name, as served
<input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 71 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “100ml”, “125ml”, “200ml” and 68 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 71 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “100ml”, “125ml”, “200ml” and 68 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 7 | |||||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Perfume Sale & Offers | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Discover exclusive fragrance offers with the LOOKFANTASTIC Perfume Sale and get great deals on premium & luxury Fragrance Brands. Free delivery available."}<…<script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Beauty Sale","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www… | |||||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 64 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “30%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 64 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “30%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/offers/sale/skincare 56.0% Likely 10 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/offers/sale/skincare
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 3 | |||||||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped heading level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H1 Skincare Sale & Offers H3 Unmissable Savings for Every Skin Type level jumped H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS01 | fail | 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each box, dropdown and text area in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What good looks like Each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. Why it matters The boxes in this form carry no names of their own, so an automated helper filling it in has to guess which answer goes where. Guessed forms arrive wrong, or the form gets abandoned. What we found on this page 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone The evidence, taken from the page as served The form boxes that carry no name, as served
<input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “100ml”, “aesop”, “allies of skin” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “100ml”, “aesop”, “allies of skin” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 7 | |||||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Skincare Sale - Up to 50% Off | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Shop the Skincare Sale at LOOKFANTASTIC. Up to 50% off Dermatological, Korean & premium skincare from iconic brands. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Beauty Sale","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www… | |||||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 62 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “40%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 62 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “40%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/offers/sale/bodycare 56.0% Likely 10 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/offers/sale/bodycare
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 3 | |||||||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped heading level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H1 Bodycare Sale & Offers H3 Unmissable Bath & Body Savings to Pamper level jumped H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS01 | fail | 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each box, dropdown and text area in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What good looks like Each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. Why it matters The boxes in this form carry no names of their own, so an automated helper filling it in has to guess which answer goes where. Guessed forms arrive wrong, or the form gets abandoned. What we found on this page 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone The evidence, taken from the page as served The form boxes that carry no name, as served
<input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “100ml”, “400ml”, “aesop” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “100ml”, “400ml”, “aesop” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 7 | |||||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Bodycare Sale - Up to 50% Off | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Shop Bodycare Deals at LOOKFANTASTIC. Get up to 50% off on body care favourites from iconic brands you love. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Beauty Sale","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www… | |||||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 62 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “40%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 62 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “40%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar 31.7% Very likely 13 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 5 | |||||||||||||||||
| DS06 | fail | the page tells automated readers not to list it | |||||||||||||||
What we check Pages carrying a noindex instruction, either in the page's own tags or in its response headers. What good looks like No page that should be found carries a noindex instruction. Why it matters The page carries an instruction asking to be left out of search and AI results, so what is said about the organisation is put together without it, whether or not anyone meant that. What we found on this page the page tells automated readers not to list it The evidence, taken from the page as served The noindex directive, as served in the page's markup
<meta name="robots" content="noindex"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: no page that should be found carries a noindex instruction. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 5 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide whether content can be reached and read at all, so it carries the heaviest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped heading level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H1 LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection H3 (no text) level jumped H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| CT41 | fail | the page shows one path to itself and states another for machines, so it is placed in two positions at once. Both are set out in the evidence | |||||||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page shows one path to itself and states another for machines, so it is placed in two positions at once. Both are set out in the evidence The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page shows, against the path it states for machines
Read from the page as served.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 1 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the supporting checks, so it carries the lightest weight in the figure for this item. Why it does not move the misinformation reading This failure makes content harder to reach or to read, but it is not a direct route to a wrong answer, so it is held out of the misinformation reading rather than counted twice. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS01 | fail | 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each box, dropdown and text area in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What good looks like Each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. Why it matters The boxes in this form carry no names of their own, so an automated helper filling it in has to guess which answer goes where. Guessed forms arrive wrong, or the form gets abandoned. What we found on this page 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone The evidence, taken from the page as served The form boxes that carry no name, as served
<input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 8 | |||||||||||||||||
| MX01 | warning | the site took 250ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up | |||||||||||||||
What we check How quickly the page starts to answer when it is asked for. What good looks like The page starts answering within 250ms. Between 250 and 345ms is a warning; beyond 345ms is a fail, that being the point at which an automated reader gives up. Why it matters A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it. What we found on this page the site took 250ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up The evidence, taken from the page as served How long this page took to start answering
Timed from the request leaving our checker to the first part of the answer coming back, on the page as served, so distance from the site plays its part. 345ms is the point beyond which an automated reader gives up.
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Calendar Collection","description":"Our coveted Advent Calendar is back & bigger than ever! Unbox iconic beauty heroes from Sol De Janeiro, Color Wow & MAC. Free Delivery over £25."}</script…<script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Beauty Box","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.… | |||||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 3 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£120.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 3 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£120.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/offers/sale/korean-beauty 32.0% Very likely 12 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/offers/sale/korean-beauty
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 5 | |||||||||||||||||
| DS06 | fail | the page tells automated readers not to list it | |||||||||||||||
What we check Pages carrying a noindex instruction, either in the page's own tags or in its response headers. What good looks like No page that should be found carries a noindex instruction. Why it matters The page carries an instruction asking to be left out of search and AI results, so what is said about the organisation is put together without it, whether or not anyone meant that. What we found on this page the page tells automated readers not to list it The evidence, taken from the page as served The noindex directive, as served in the page's markup
<meta name="robots" content="noindex"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: no page that should be found carries a noindex instruction. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 5 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide whether content can be reached and read at all, so it carries the heaviest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped heading level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H1 Korean Beauty Sale & Offers H3 (no text) level jumped H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| CT41 | fail | the page shows one path to itself and states another for machines, so it is placed in two positions at once. Both are set out in the evidence | |||||||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page shows one path to itself and states another for machines, so it is placed in two positions at once. Both are set out in the evidence The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page shows, against the path it states for machines
Read from the page as served.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 1 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the supporting checks, so it carries the lightest weight in the figure for this item. Why it does not move the misinformation reading This failure makes content harder to reach or to read, but it is not a direct route to a wrong answer, so it is held out of the misinformation reading rather than counted twice. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS01 | fail | 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each box, dropdown and text area in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What good looks like Each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. Why it matters The boxes in this form carry no names of their own, so an automated helper filling it in has to guess which answer goes where. Guessed forms arrive wrong, or the form gets abandoned. What we found on this page 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone The evidence, taken from the page as served The form boxes that carry no name, as served
<input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “15ml”, “40ml”, “aesop” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “15ml”, “40ml”, “aesop” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 7 | |||||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Korean Beauty Sale & Offers","description":"Shop Korean Beauty Sale & Offers on LOOKFANTASTIC. Free delivery available!"}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Beauty Sale","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www… | |||||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 60 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 60 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/student-discount 57.6% Likely 9 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/student-discount
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 2 | |||||||||||||
| MX01 | fail | the site took 372ms to start answering, past the point where an automated reader gives up and takes its answer from elsewhere | |||||||||||
What we check How quickly the page starts to answer when it is asked for. What good looks like The page starts answering within 250ms. Between 250 and 345ms is a warning; beyond 345ms is a fail, that being the point at which an automated reader gives up. Why it matters A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it. What we found on this page the site took 372ms to start answering, past the point where an automated reader gives up and takes its answer from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served How long this page took to start answering
Timed from the request leaving our checker to the first part of the answer coming back, on the page as served, so distance from the site plays its part. 345ms is the point beyond which an automated reader gives up.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page starts answering within 250ms. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 7 | |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"LOOKFANTASTIC Student Discount","description":"Discover some of the great opportunities for students we offer here at Lookfantastic, with discounts and voucher codes available through UniDays and Student Beans."}</scrip…<script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Student Discount","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https:… | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/info/delivery 56.8% Likely 10 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/info/delivery
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 2 | |||||||||||||
| CT10 | fail | the page carries no main heading, so nothing on it states what the page is about | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries a main heading (the H1), its own statement of what the page is about. What good looks like The page carries a single main heading stating what it is about. Why it matters The page never states its own subject, so anything reading it has to guess what it is about. Guessed subjects are how content gets filed, and quoted, under the wrong topic. What we found on this page the page carries no main heading, so nothing on it states what the page is about The evidence, taken from the page as served The headings on this page, as served
The page was read for a top-level heading. These are the headings it does carry. <h2 class="text-center heading"> UK Delivery Information </h2> <h2 class="footer-item-title-style text-sm font-semibold uppercase tracking-widest"> Help & Information </h2> <h2 class="footer-item-title-style text-sm font-semibold uppercase tracking-widest"> Company Information </h2> <h2 class="footer-item-title-style text-sm font-semibold uppercase tracking-widest"> About LOOKFANTASTIC </h2> <h2 class="footer-item-title-style text-sm font-semibold uppercase tracking-widest"> Stores and Salons </h2> <h2 class="footer-item-title-style text-xs font-semibold uppercase tracking-widest" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> Help & Information </h2> <h2 class="footer-item-title-style text-xs font-semibold uppercase tracking-widest" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> Company Information </h2> <h2 class="footer-item-title-style text-xs font-semibold uppercase tracking-widest" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> About LOOKFANTASTIC </h2> <h2 class="footer-item-title-style text-xs font-semibold uppercase tracking-widest" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> Stores and Salons </h2> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page carries a single main heading stating what it is about. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 8 | |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Delivery Information","description":"Shop Delivery Information on LOOKFANTASTIC. Free delivery available!"}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Info","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfa… | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 9 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£9.90”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 9 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£9.90”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/premier-delivery 56.8% Likely 10 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/premier-delivery
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 2 | |||||||||||||
| CT10 | fail | the page carries no main heading, so nothing on it states what the page is about | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries a main heading (the H1), its own statement of what the page is about. What good looks like The page carries a single main heading stating what it is about. Why it matters The page never states its own subject, so anything reading it has to guess what it is about. Guessed subjects are how content gets filed, and quoted, under the wrong topic. What we found on this page the page carries no main heading, so nothing on it states what the page is about The evidence, taken from the page as served The headings on this page, as served
The page was read for a top-level heading. These are the headings it does carry. <h2 class="text-3xl primary-banner-title font-bold mb-6 w-full text-black global-primary-banner-light-text text-left"> 12 Months Premier Delivery - Only £9.90 </h2> <h2 class="heading">Already Subscribed?</h2> <h2 class="font-medium title-font text-lg mt-2 text-gray-900">Sign up</h2> <h2 class="font-medium title-font text-lg mt-2 text-gray-900">Choose your delivery</h2> <h2 class="font-medium title-font text-lg mt-2 text-gray-900">12 months free delivery</h2> <h2 class="text-center heading"> FAQs </h2> <h2 class="footer-item-title-style text-sm font-semibold uppercase tracking-widest"> Help & Information </h2> <h2 class="footer-item-title-style text-sm font-semibold uppercase tracking-widest"> Company Information </h2> <h2 class="footer-item-title-style text-sm font-semibold uppercase tracking-widest"> About LOOKFANTASTIC </h2> <h2 class="footer-item-title-style text-sm font-semibold uppercase tracking-widest"> Stores and Salons </h2> …and 4 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page carries a single main heading stating what it is about. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 8 | |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"LOOKFANTASTIC Premier Delivery | Free Unlimited Delivery","description":"Become an LOOKFANTASTIC Premier Delivery member and enjoy 12 months of unlimited FREE delivery on orders over £10 for just £5.95."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}}]}</script> | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 5 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£9.90”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 5 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£9.90”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/111skin 58.1% Likely 9 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/111skin
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 1 | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 8 | |||||||||||||
| MX01 | warning | the site took 266ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up | |||||||||||
What we check How quickly the page starts to answer when it is asked for. What good looks like The page starts answering within 250ms. Between 250 and 345ms is a warning; beyond 345ms is a fail, that being the point at which an automated reader gives up. Why it matters A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it. What we found on this page the site took 266ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up The evidence, taken from the page as served How long this page took to start answering
Timed from the request leaving our checker to the first part of the answer coming back, on the page as served, so distance from the site plays its part. 345ms is the point beyond which an automated reader gives up.
| |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"111SKIN | LOOKFANTASTIC UK","description":"Shop 111SKIN at LOOKFANTASTIC. Luxury skincare including masks, moisturisers and toners for a refined, radiant-looking finish. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/aesop 57.5% Likely 10 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/aesop
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 1 | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 9 | |||||||||||||
| MX01 | warning | the site took 250ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up | |||||||||||
What we check How quickly the page starts to answer when it is asked for. What good looks like The page starts answering within 250ms. Between 250 and 345ms is a warning; beyond 345ms is a fail, that being the point at which an automated reader gives up. Why it matters A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it. What we found on this page the site took 250ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up The evidence, taken from the page as served How long this page took to start answering
Timed from the request leaving our checker to the first part of the answer coming back, on the page as served, so distance from the site plays its part. 345ms is the point beyond which an automated reader gives up.
| |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Aesop | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Discover Aesop at LOOKFANTASTIC. Luxurious skin, body & haircare with botanical extracts for a radiant, refreshed glow. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 10 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£64.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 10 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£64.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/aveda 56.4% Likely 11 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/aveda
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS14 | fail | 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether each video carries captions of its own, timed text on the video itself, judged together with whether the page holds a written transcript. What good looks like Captions carried on the video. A WARNING means the video has no captions but a written transcript on the page holds the words. A FAIL means neither exists, so nothing spoken is available as text in any form; that total absence is marked here once, not spread across two findings. Why it matters Spoken content that exists only as sound is invisible to a reader, human or machine: nothing said in the video can be found, read or quoted. What we found on this page 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form The evidence, taken from the page as served Each video on the page, as served: its code, source file and caption track
No caption track on the video and no transcript link on the page. <iframe allow="fullscreen" width="100%" height="100%" class="aspect-video w-full md:w-2/3 lg:w-1/2" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hleIfeAmc8s" title=""> </iframe> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: captions carried on the video. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| DS28 | fail | one link to sources on other sites is AI-blocked: the page opens for a person in a browser, but the site refuses callers that are not a person browsing, so an AI never receives it. It is listed in the view | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check For a single page, the share of its links to OTHER sites, sampled, that lead nowhere. The site's own links are assessed separately. What good looks like The page's references to other sites open for any reader. Where one refuses or has gone, the page carries the fact itself, shows the reference as plain text rather than as a link, or points to a source that answers. Why it matters The outside sources this page cites as evidence cannot be reached by an AI, whether dead, the address answering that the page is not there or blocked to automated callers, so its claims rest on material an AI cannot check. In a regulated business that is the difference between an evidenced statement and a bare assertion. What we found on this page one link to sources on other sites is AI-blocked: the page opens for a person in a browser, but the site refuses callers that are not a person browsing, so an AI never receives it. It is listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served The external links checked on this page, with the status each returned
A link that fails here fails in one of two ways, and the report names them apart. A DEAD link answers, when the page is asked for in full, that the page is not there. An AI-BLOCKED link points at a page that is still published and opens for a person in a browser, but the destination refuses callers that are not a person browsing, so an AI never receives it. Opening such a link by hand proves only the human route; this assessment reflects the AI position, and from the AI position both classes land in the same place: the material this page offers as its support does not come back when it is asked for. The consequence is not a matter of tidiness. Where a link carries the weight of a claim, a figure, a policy or a regulatory statement, and the target does not open, the support behind that claim is missing at the moment it is needed. Three things follow, and each of them costs the organisation. The same fact gets taken from somewhere else, which hands a third party control of how the claim is worded. Or the claim is treated as unsupported and set aside. Or an answer is drawn from what remains on the page, and a partial account is presented as a complete one. An AI-blocked link is the worst of the three, because the page still reads as though the evidence sits one step away, so the gap is invisible and the answer carries false confidence. An AI-block on another site is still this site's matter to resolve, because this site chose to rest a claim on it. Three practical ways close it. Carry the fact being relied on in the page's own words, so the claim stands without the visit. Keep the reference but stop making it a link, showing the address as plain text, so nothing promises a route that does not open. Or point to a source that answers any reader. Where the reference has to stay live, say beside it what a reader will meet, so no one is sent to a closed door without warning.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's references to other sites open for any reader. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 15 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide whether content can be reached and read at all, so it carries the heaviest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 8 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Aveda | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Discover AVEDA at LOOKFANTASTIC. 100% vegan, plant-powered haircare with salon-quality performance for hair & scalp wellness. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 11 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 11 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe allow="fullscreen" width="100%" height="100%" class="aspect-video w-full md:w-2/3 lg:w-1/2" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hleIfeAmc8s" title=""> </iframe> | |||||||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/augustinus-bader 57.1% Likely 10 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/augustinus-bader
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 2 | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS14 | fail | 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form | |||||||||||
What we check Whether each video carries captions of its own, timed text on the video itself, judged together with whether the page holds a written transcript. What good looks like Captions carried on the video. A WARNING means the video has no captions but a written transcript on the page holds the words. A FAIL means neither exists, so nothing spoken is available as text in any form; that total absence is marked here once, not spread across two findings. Why it matters Spoken content that exists only as sound is invisible to a reader, human or machine: nothing said in the video can be found, read or quoted. What we found on this page 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form The evidence, taken from the page as served Each video on the page, as served: its code, source file and caption track
No caption track on the video and no transcript link on the page. <iframe title="About Augustinus Bader" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/J6La7ptNhSo?autoplay=0" allow="fullscreen" class="aspect-video w-full lg:w-1/2"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: captions carried on the video. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 8 | |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Augustinus Bader | LOOKFANTASTIC UK","description":"Discover luxury skin, body & haircare from Augustinus Bader on LOOKFANTASTIC. Next day delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 8 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “25%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 8 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “25%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/anua 57.5% Likely 10 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/anua
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 1 | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 9 | |||||||||||||
| MX01 | warning | the site took 251ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up | |||||||||||
What we check How quickly the page starts to answer when it is asked for. What good looks like The page starts answering within 250ms. Between 250 and 345ms is a warning; beyond 345ms is a fail, that being the point at which an automated reader gives up. Why it matters A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it. What we found on this page the site took 251ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up The evidence, taken from the page as served How long this page took to start answering
Timed from the request leaving our checker to the first part of the answer coming back, on the page as served, so distance from the site plays its part. 345ms is the point beyond which an automated reader gives up.
| |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Anua | Anua Korean Skincare | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Discover Anua at LOOKFANTASTIC. Gentle K-Beauty skincare powered by heartleaf & rice for calm, hydrated skin. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 11 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 11 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/acqua-di-parma 58.2% Likely 9 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/acqua-di-parma
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 1 | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “acqua di parma”, “acqua di parma blu mediterraneo arancia di capri hand & body”, “aesop” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “acqua di parma”, “acqua di parma blu mediterraneo arancia di capri hand & body”, “aesop” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 8 | |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Acqua di Parma | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Discover Acqua di Parma at LOOKFANTASTIC. Hand-crafted Italian fragrance, skincare and home scents inspired by the art of living beautifully. Free delivery available."}</sc…<script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 14 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “30%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 14 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “30%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/balmain 57.1% Likely 10 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/balmain
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS14 | fail | 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether each video carries captions of its own, timed text on the video itself, judged together with whether the page holds a written transcript. What good looks like Captions carried on the video. A WARNING means the video has no captions but a written transcript on the page holds the words. A FAIL means neither exists, so nothing spoken is available as text in any form; that total absence is marked here once, not spread across two findings. Why it matters Spoken content that exists only as sound is invisible to a reader, human or machine: nothing said in the video can be found, read or quoted. What we found on this page 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form The evidence, taken from the page as served Each video on the page, as served: its code, source file and caption track
No caption track on the video and no transcript link on the page. <iframe allow="fullscreen" width="100%" height="100%" class="aspect-video w-full md:w-2/3 lg:w-1/2" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FJCsXIsIB2w" title=""> </iframe> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: captions carried on the video. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 8 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Balmain Fragrance | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Shop Balmain at LOOKFANTASTIC. Luxe French fragrance with couture attitude, from Les Éternels signatures to refined gifts. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 8 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 8 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 12 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£30.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 12 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£30.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe allow="fullscreen" width="100%" height="100%" class="aspect-video w-full md:w-2/3 lg:w-1/2" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FJCsXIsIB2w" title=""> </iframe> | |||||||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/benefit 56.9% Likely 11 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/benefit
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 1 | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 10 | |||||||||||||
| MX01 | warning | the site took 272ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up | |||||||||||
What we check How quickly the page starts to answer when it is asked for. What good looks like The page starts answering within 250ms. Between 250 and 345ms is a warning; beyond 345ms is a fail, that being the point at which an automated reader gives up. Why it matters A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it. What we found on this page the site took 272ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up The evidence, taken from the page as served How long this page took to start answering
Timed from the request leaving our checker to the first part of the answer coming back, on the page as served, so distance from the site plays its part. 345ms is the point beyond which an automated reader gives up.
| |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"benefit | benefit Cosmetics | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Shop benefit at LOOKFANTASTIC. Explore playful, high-performance makeup for brows, lashes, lips & cheeks. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 19 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 19 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||
| IN21 | warning | 3 claims of being best, largest or leading are made on this page with no figure or source beside it, such as “the best”. Taken out and repeated, a claim like this carries the weight of a measured fact while resting on nothing. | |||||||||||
What we check Claims of being largest, leading, best or first in the page's words, and whether a figure or a source sits in the same passage. What good looks like A claim of standing carries the figure or the source that supports it. Why it matters A claim of standing with no figure beside it is a statement about the organisation made by the organisation. Taken out and repeated, it carries the weight of a measured fact while resting on nothing. What we found on this page 3 claims of being best, largest or leading are made on this page with no figure or source beside it, such as “the best”. Taken out and repeated, a claim like this carries the weight of a measured fact while resting on nothing. The evidence, taken from the page as served The claims of standing made with no figure or source beside them
| |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/burberry 57.0% Likely 10 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/burberry
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 2 | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS14 | fail | 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form | |||||||||||
What we check Whether each video carries captions of its own, timed text on the video itself, judged together with whether the page holds a written transcript. What good looks like Captions carried on the video. A WARNING means the video has no captions but a written transcript on the page holds the words. A FAIL means neither exists, so nothing spoken is available as text in any form; that total absence is marked here once, not spread across two findings. Why it matters Spoken content that exists only as sound is invisible to a reader, human or machine: nothing said in the video can be found, read or quoted. What we found on this page 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form The evidence, taken from the page as served Each video on the page, as served: its code, source file and caption track
No caption track on the video and no transcript link on the page. <iframe allow="fullscreen" width="100%" height="100%" class="aspect-video w-full md:w-2/3 lg:w-1/2" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ctF-qNoQ8Q4" title=""> </iframe> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: captions carried on the video. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 8 | |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Burberry Fragrances | LOOKFANTASTIC UK","description":"Discover the iconic Burberry perfume collection at LOOKFANTASTIC. Next day delivery available!"}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 14 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “30%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 14 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “30%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe allow="fullscreen" width="100%" height="100%" class="aspect-video w-full md:w-2/3 lg:w-1/2" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ctF-qNoQ8Q4" title=""> </iframe> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/bvlgari 56.2% Likely 11 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/bvlgari
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 2 | |||||||||||||
| CT10 | fail | the page carries no main heading, so nothing on it states what the page is about | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries a main heading (the H1), its own statement of what the page is about. What good looks like The page carries a single main heading stating what it is about. Why it matters The page never states its own subject, so anything reading it has to guess what it is about. Guessed subjects are how content gets filed, and quoted, under the wrong topic. What we found on this page the page carries no main heading, so nothing on it states what the page is about The evidence, taken from the page as served The headings on this page, as served
The page was read for a top-level heading. These are the headings it does carry. <h2 class="heading"/> <h2 class="heading text-center"> BVLGARI HIGHLIGHTS </h2> <h2 class="heading text-center">BVLGARI COLLECTIONS</h2> <h3 class="font-medium title-font text-lg mt-4 text-gray-900">Eau Parfumée</h3> <h3 class="font-medium title-font text-lg mt-4 text-gray-900">Omnia</h3> <h3 class="font-medium title-font text-lg mt-4 text-gray-900">BVLGARI Man</h3> <h3 class="font-medium title-font text-lg mt-4 text-gray-900">Pour Homme</h3> <h2 class="footer-item-title-style text-sm font-semibold uppercase tracking-widest"> Help & Information </h2> <h2 class="footer-item-title-style text-sm font-semibold uppercase tracking-widest"> Company Information </h2> <h2 class="footer-item-title-style text-sm font-semibold uppercase tracking-widest"> About LOOKFANTASTIC </h2> …and 5 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page carries a single main heading stating what it is about. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “#”, “aesop”, “allies of skin” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “#”, “aesop”, “allies of skin” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 9 | |||||||||||||
| MX01 | warning | the site took 251ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up | |||||||||||
What we check How quickly the page starts to answer when it is asked for. What good looks like The page starts answering within 250ms. Between 250 and 345ms is a warning; beyond 345ms is a fail, that being the point at which an automated reader gives up. Why it matters A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it. What we found on this page the site took 251ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up The evidence, taken from the page as served How long this page took to start answering
Timed from the request leaving our checker to the first part of the answer coming back, on the page as served, so distance from the site plays its part. 345ms is the point beyond which an automated reader gives up.
| |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"BVLGARI Perfume | LOOKFANTASTIC UK","description":"Where jewellery & fragrance meet. Discover unique fragrances for women & men from BVLGARI. Next day delivery available!"}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 4 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£125.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 4 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£125.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/beauty-works 57.1% Likely 10 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/beauty-works
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 2 | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 61 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aeris multi-styler”, “aesop”, “allies of skin” and 58 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 61 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aeris multi-styler”, “aesop”, “allies of skin” and 58 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS14 | fail | 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form | |||||||||||
What we check Whether each video carries captions of its own, timed text on the video itself, judged together with whether the page holds a written transcript. What good looks like Captions carried on the video. A WARNING means the video has no captions but a written transcript on the page holds the words. A FAIL means neither exists, so nothing spoken is available as text in any form; that total absence is marked here once, not spread across two findings. Why it matters Spoken content that exists only as sound is invisible to a reader, human or machine: nothing said in the video can be found, read or quoted. What we found on this page 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form The evidence, taken from the page as served Each video on the page, as served: its code, source file and caption track
No caption track on the video and no transcript link on the page. <iframe allow="fullscreen" width="100%" height="100%" class="aspect-video w-full md:w-2/3 lg:w-1/2" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/G4BI_0bO-UQ" title=""> </iframe> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: captions carried on the video. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 8 | |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Beauty Works | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Discover Beauty Works at LOOKFANTASTIC. Professional haircare & tools designed to smooth, style & enhance every hair type. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 4 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£89.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 4 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£89.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe allow="fullscreen" width="100%" height="100%" class="aspect-video w-full md:w-2/3 lg:w-1/2" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/G4BI_0bO-UQ" title=""> </iframe> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/bondi-sands 56.5% Likely 11 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/bondi-sands
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 2 | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “#”, “aesop”, “allies of skin” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “#”, “aesop”, “allies of skin” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS14 | fail | 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form | |||||||||||
What we check Whether each video carries captions of its own, timed text on the video itself, judged together with whether the page holds a written transcript. What good looks like Captions carried on the video. A WARNING means the video has no captions but a written transcript on the page holds the words. A FAIL means neither exists, so nothing spoken is available as text in any form; that total absence is marked here once, not spread across two findings. Why it matters Spoken content that exists only as sound is invisible to a reader, human or machine: nothing said in the video can be found, read or quoted. What we found on this page 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form The evidence, taken from the page as served Each video on the page, as served: its code, source file and caption track
No caption track on the video and no transcript link on the page. <iframe allow="fullscreen" width="100%" height="100%" class="aspect-video w-full md:w-2/3 lg:w-1/2" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7ckF0chqroQ?si=zl1ET6P1vleNRxms" title=""> </iframe> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: captions carried on the video. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 9 | |||||||||||||
| MX01 | warning | the site took 251ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up | |||||||||||
What we check How quickly the page starts to answer when it is asked for. What good looks like The page starts answering within 250ms. Between 250 and 345ms is a warning; beyond 345ms is a fail, that being the point at which an automated reader gives up. Why it matters A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it. What we found on this page the site took 251ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up The evidence, taken from the page as served How long this page took to start answering
Timed from the request leaving our checker to the first part of the answer coming back, on the page as served, so distance from the site plays its part. 345ms is the point beyond which an automated reader gives up.
| |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Bondi Sands | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Shop Bondi Sands at LOOKFANTASTIC. Explore hydrating suncare & self tan for a flawless, Aussie sun-kissed glow. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 20 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 20 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe allow="fullscreen" width="100%" height="100%" class="aspect-video w-full md:w-2/3 lg:w-1/2" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7ckF0chqroQ?si=zl1ET6P1vleNRxms" title=""> </iframe> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/bioeffect 56.4% Likely 11 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/bioeffect
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 2 | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS14 | fail | 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form | |||||||||||
What we check Whether each video carries captions of its own, timed text on the video itself, judged together with whether the page holds a written transcript. What good looks like Captions carried on the video. A WARNING means the video has no captions but a written transcript on the page holds the words. A FAIL means neither exists, so nothing spoken is available as text in any form; that total absence is marked here once, not spread across two findings. Why it matters Spoken content that exists only as sound is invisible to a reader, human or machine: nothing said in the video can be found, read or quoted. What we found on this page 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form The evidence, taken from the page as served Each video on the page, as served: its code, source file and caption track
No caption track on the video and no transcript link on the page. <iframe allow="fullscreen" width="100%" height="100%" class="aspect-video w-full md:w-2/3 lg:w-1/2" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/v3suBp66LCg" title=""> </iframe> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: captions carried on the video. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 9 | |||||||||||||
| MX01 | warning | the site took 250ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up | |||||||||||
What we check How quickly the page starts to answer when it is asked for. What good looks like The page starts answering within 250ms. Between 250 and 345ms is a warning; beyond 345ms is a fail, that being the point at which an automated reader gives up. Why it matters A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it. What we found on this page the site took 250ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up The evidence, taken from the page as served How long this page took to start answering
Timed from the request leaving our checker to the first part of the answer coming back, on the page as served, so distance from the site plays its part. 345ms is the point beyond which an automated reader gives up.
| |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"BIOEFFECT | LOOKFANTASTIC UK","description":"Discover BIOEFFECT, the powerful anti-ageing skincare range developed in Iceland. Shop the range on LOOKFANTASTIC including the best selling BIOEFFECT EGF Serum."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 4 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£139.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 4 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£139.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe allow="fullscreen" width="100%" height="100%" class="aspect-video w-full md:w-2/3 lg:w-1/2" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/v3suBp66LCg" title=""> </iframe> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/biodance 57.5% Likely 10 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/biodance
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 1 | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 57 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 54 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 9 | |||||||||||||
| MX01 | warning | the site took 281ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up | |||||||||||
What we check How quickly the page starts to answer when it is asked for. What good looks like The page starts answering within 250ms. Between 250 and 345ms is a warning; beyond 345ms is a fail, that being the point at which an automated reader gives up. Why it matters A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it. What we found on this page the site took 281ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up The evidence, taken from the page as served How long this page took to start answering
Timed from the request leaving our checker to the first part of the answer coming back, on the page as served, so distance from the site plays its part. 345ms is the point beyond which an automated reader gives up.
| |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Biodance | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Explore Biodance at LOOKFANTASTIC. Korean skincare focused on pure K-Beauty with collagen for plump, radiant skin. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 10 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 10 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/carolina-herrera 57.1% Likely 10 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/carolina-herrera
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 2 | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “#”, “aesop”, “allies of skin” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “#”, “aesop”, “allies of skin” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS14 | fail | 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form | |||||||||||
What we check Whether each video carries captions of its own, timed text on the video itself, judged together with whether the page holds a written transcript. What good looks like Captions carried on the video. A WARNING means the video has no captions but a written transcript on the page holds the words. A FAIL means neither exists, so nothing spoken is available as text in any form; that total absence is marked here once, not spread across two findings. Why it matters Spoken content that exists only as sound is invisible to a reader, human or machine: nothing said in the video can be found, read or quoted. What we found on this page 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form The evidence, taken from the page as served Each video on the page, as served: its code, source file and caption track
No caption track on the video and no transcript link on the page. <iframe title="" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/R6_CjSLKjiI?autoplay=0" allow="fullscreen" class="aspect-video w-full lg:w-1/2"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: captions carried on the video. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 8 | |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Carolina Herrera | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Discover Carolina Herrera at LOOKFANTASTIC. Iconic fragrances capturing effortless elegance and New York style. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 8 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£132.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 8 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “£132.00”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe title="" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/R6_CjSLKjiI?autoplay=0" allow="fullscreen" class="aspect-video w-full lg:w-1/2"/> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/caudalie 56.4% Likely 11 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/brands/caudalie
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 2 | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 58 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 55 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS14 | fail | 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form | |||||||||||
What we check Whether each video carries captions of its own, timed text on the video itself, judged together with whether the page holds a written transcript. What good looks like Captions carried on the video. A WARNING means the video has no captions but a written transcript on the page holds the words. A FAIL means neither exists, so nothing spoken is available as text in any form; that total absence is marked here once, not spread across two findings. Why it matters Spoken content that exists only as sound is invisible to a reader, human or machine: nothing said in the video can be found, read or quoted. What we found on this page 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form The evidence, taken from the page as served Each video on the page, as served: its code, source file and caption track
No caption track on the video and no transcript link on the page. <iframe allow="fullscreen" width="100%" height="100%" class="aspect-video w-full md:w-2/3 lg:w-1/2" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/c5tNdeI9iKk" title=""> </iframe> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: captions carried on the video. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| Warnings · 9 | |||||||||||||
| MX01 | warning | the site took 270ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up | |||||||||||
What we check How quickly the page starts to answer when it is asked for. What good looks like The page starts answering within 250ms. Between 250 and 345ms is a warning; beyond 345ms is a fail, that being the point at which an automated reader gives up. Why it matters A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it. What we found on this page the site took 270ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up The evidence, taken from the page as served How long this page took to start answering
Timed from the request leaving our checker to the first part of the answer coming back, on the page as served, so distance from the site plays its part. 345ms is the point beyond which an automated reader gives up.
| |||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||
| CT41 | warning | the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other | |||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page states a path to itself for machines but shows none to a reader, so the two do not corroborate each other The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page gives to itself
Read from the page as served: the trail shown to a reader, and the trail stated in a form a machine can take as given.
| |||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Caudalie | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Discover the essence of French beauty with Caudalie. Premium skincare with natural ingredients for glowing, healthy skin. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brands","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.look… | |||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 4 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 12 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “44%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 12 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “44%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe allow="fullscreen" width="100%" height="100%" class="aspect-video w-full md:w-2/3 lg:w-1/2" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/c5tNdeI9iKk" title=""> </iframe> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all 56.0% Likely 10 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 3 | |||||||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped heading level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H1 Shop All Beauty Deals H3 Unmissable Offers, Iconic Beauty level jumped H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS01 | fail | 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each box, dropdown and text area in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What good looks like Each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. Why it matters The boxes in this form carry no names of their own, so an automated helper filling it in has to guess which answer goes where. Guessed forms arrive wrong, or the form gets abandoned. What we found on this page 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone The evidence, taken from the page as served The form boxes that carry no name, as served
<input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 64 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “100ml”, “250ml”, “30ml” and 61 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 64 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “100ml”, “250ml”, “30ml” and 61 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 7 | |||||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Shop All Beauty Deals - Up to 50% Off | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Shop Beauty Deals at LOOKFANTASTIC. Get up to 50% off on your favourite beauty brands. Free & Next Day Delivery Available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Beauty Sale","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www… | |||||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 60 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “44%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 60 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “44%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/offers/sale/makeup 55.1% Likely 12 out of 67
The page https://www.lookfantastic.com/c/offers/sale/makeup
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fails · 4 | |||||||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped heading level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H1 Makeup Sale & Offers H3 Unmissable Beauty Deals for Every Look level jumped H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H3 (no text) H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons H2 Help & Information H2 Company Information H2 About LOOKFANTASTIC H2 Stores and Salons
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| CT41 | fail | the page shows one path to itself and states another for machines, so it is placed in two positions at once. Both are set out in the evidence | |||||||||||||||
What we check The trail showing the path from the front page to this one, and whether the machine-readable version of that trail says the same. What good looks like The page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. Why it matters A page read on its own gives no sense of what it belongs to. The trail supplies it: one product within a range, one policy within a set. A reader deciding whether a page answers a question uses that to judge whether it has the right one, and how to describe it when it quotes it. Where the shown trail and the machine-readable one disagree, the page is placed in two positions at once and neither can be relied on. What we found on this page the page shows one path to itself and states another for machines, so it is placed in two positions at once. Both are set out in the evidence The evidence, taken from the page as served The path this page shows, against the path it states for machines
Read from the page as served.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page shows its place in the site, and says the same thing to a machine. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 1 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the supporting checks, so it carries the lightest weight in the figure for this item. Why it does not move the misinformation reading This failure makes content harder to reach or to read, but it is not a direct route to a wrong answer, so it is held out of the misinformation reading rather than counted twice. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS01 | fail | 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each box, dropdown and text area in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What good looks like Each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. Why it matters The boxes in this form carry no names of their own, so an automated helper filling it in has to guess which answer goes where. Guessed forms arrive wrong, or the form gets abandoned. What we found on this page 8 of 18 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone The evidence, taken from the page as served The form boxes that carry no name, as served
<input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-min="" facet-binding="min" value="" name="min" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-from-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input type="range" facet-slider-max="" facet-binding="max" value="" min="" max="" step="1" class="elements-facets-slider-to-slider elements-facets-slider"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> <input class="elements-facet-option-checkbox elements-facets-option" type="checkbox" value="" name="" facet-option-group-raw="" facet-option-name-raw="" facet-trigger="option"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters Identical links on one page lead to different places, so which one gets followed is a coin toss. A reader or system lands on the wrong page while believing it chose correctly. What we found on this page 59 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: “aesop”, “allies of skin”, “anti-ageing” and 56 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a data-track="clickUSP" href="/c/lookfantastic-app/" domain="https://www.lookfantastic.com/" nativeapp="false" class="usp-item quality-order justify-center flex flex-[0_0_100%] items-center gap-3 lg:flex-initial"> <svg fill="none" viewbox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="2" stroke="currentColor" class="w-6 h-6" slot="quality… <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" aria-label="Download our App" class="footer-style">Download our App</a> <a href="https://lookfantastic.onelink.me/hKV8/m5pzarmx" class="hover:underline" aria-label="Download our App" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Download our App</a> <a href="/c/seasonal/christmas/advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true" class="category-heading flex items-center"> <div class="sub-nav-item" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c=""> </div> <p class="flex-grow text-left" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</p> </a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a data-astro-prefetch="tap" tabindex="-1" href="/c/offers/beauty-box/lookfantastic-beauty-advent-calendar/" aria-label="New InLOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection" data-astro-cid-37bvxqo4="true">LOOKFANTASTIC Advent Collection</a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/offers/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> <a href="/c/offers/beauty-box/limited-edition/view-all/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All </a> <a href="/c/health-beauty/new/new-in/" class="navigation-item" data-astro-prefetch="hover" data-astro-cid-r6zccy7c="true">Shop All</a> …and 2 more like it. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| Warnings · 8 | |||||||||||||||||
| MX01 | warning | the site took 265ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up | |||||||||||||||
What we check How quickly the page starts to answer when it is asked for. What good looks like The page starts answering within 250ms. Between 250 and 345ms is a warning; beyond 345ms is a fail, that being the point at which an automated reader gives up. Why it matters A page that is slow to answer is left behind: the reader gives up and takes its answer from someone else's material, so your own words play no part in it. What we found on this page the site took 265ms to start answering, close to the point where an automated reader gives up The evidence, taken from the page as served How long this page took to start answering
Timed from the request leaving our checker to the first part of the answer coming back, on the page as served, so distance from the site plays its part. 345ms is the point beyond which an automated reader gives up.
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT40 | warning | the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself | |||||||||||||||
What we check The short title, description and image the page offers to services that show a preview of it, and whether they match the page. What good looks like The page offers a summary for preview, and the summary is true to the page. Why it matters This summary travels further than the page does. It is what appears when the address is shared, and several services read it in preference to the page itself because it is short and already written for the purpose. Where it is absent, those services compose their own from whatever they find first, which is often navigation. Where it is present but out of step, the organisation is described to a wide audience by a sentence it wrote once and forgot. What we found on this page the page offers a partial summary for preview: 2 of the four parts are present, so a service showing it fills the rest in itself The evidence, taken from the page as served The summary this page offers for preview
Read from the page as served.
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT26 | warning | this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by | |||||||||||||||
What we check Pages that publish themselves as an article or a news item, and whether each one names the person or team who wrote it. What good looks like A page published as an article names its author. Why it matters An article with no named author gives the reader nothing to weigh. Where the page states its own type for machines, the writer is part of what that type is expected to carry, and the gap is read as a missing record rather than a choice of style. What we found on this page this page is a news item or an article and names nobody as its author, so a reader has nothing to weigh the words by The evidence, taken from the page as served The detail this page states for machines, as served
This was read for the name of an author, and so were the page's head and its own words. <script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"CollectionPage","name":"Makeup Sale - Up to 50% Off | LOOKFANTASTIC","description":"Shop Makeup Offers at LOOKFANTASTIC. Get up to 50% off the iconic beauty brands you know & love. Free delivery available."}</script><script type="application/ld+json">{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www.lookfantastic.com/"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Beauty Sale","item":{"@type":"Thing","@id":"https://www… | |||||||||||||||||
| CT43 | warning | 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees | |||||||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's underlying construction holds together, or contains faults that change how it is read. What good looks like The page is built soundly enough that anything reading it sees the structure its author intended. Why it matters Anything reading the page has to take it apart before it can judge anything on it. Faults in construction can move where a section appears to end, place a heading inside a paragraph, or lose part of the page altogether. When that happens, what is read is not quite the page that was published, and neither is the answer built from it. The damage is invisible on screen, because a browser repairs quietly what a plain reader does not. What we found on this page 6 faults in this page's construction, none of which changes the structure anything reading it sees The evidence, taken from the page as served Faults in the page's construction
Found while taking the page apart exactly as a reader would.
| |||||||||||||||||
| AR06 | warning | 61 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Percentages and money figures in the page's words, and whether a source is named or linked in the same passage. What good looks like A published figure names its source in the same passage. Why it matters A figure with no source cannot be checked by a reader or by anything quoting it. It travels on the organisation's name alone, and it is repeated that way. What we found on this page 61 figures on this page have no source named in the same passage, such as “20%”. A figure with nothing beside it cannot be checked by a reader, or by anything quoting the page. The evidence, taken from the page as served The figures published with no source in the same passage
| |||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by | |||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters An old copyright year reads as a site nobody is looking after, and it dates the page for anything that relies on dates. Content can be treated as years older than it really is. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page carries no year, so there is nothing on the page as served to date it by The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line on this page, as served
This is the copyright line as the page serves it. It was read for a year, and carries none. basket":{"displayProductBrand":false,"displayAddToWishlist":true},"footer":{"showIngenuityCopyright":false,"paymentOptions":["visa","mastercard","amex","paypal","applepay","googlepay","klarna","clearpay","frasers_plus","amazonpay","wechatpay","alipa | |||||||||||||||||
| MX10 | warning | 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. | |||||||||||||||
What we check Links that open a file, and whether the wording states the format and the size. What good looks like A link to a file states its format and its size. Why it matters A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. What we found on this page 2 links to a file on this page do not say what the file is and how big it is before it is opened. A reader deciding whether to open a file has nothing to judge it by, and on a slow or metered connection an unnamed file is a risk rather than an offer. The evidence, taken from the page as served The links to a file, and what each one states
| |||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 1 of 1 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters Content brought into the page from elsewhere, a map, a form, a video player, carries no name saying what it is. Anything reading the page sees a hole where that content sits. What we found on this page 1 of 1 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://sgtm.lookfantastic.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NHWTTFSL" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||||
▸PDF documents 0 documents · click to view
No PDF documents were part of this assessment.
▸How the scores work method and bands · click to view
This report is Stage 1, Foundations: each automated test the engine can run without human input, so there is a usable result at the first stage. Governance (owner-confirmed truth) and Visibility (how AI agents find the estate) are later stages and are shown greyed above.
What was assessed. 37 pages were assessed, selected from 120 reviewed using the site's own signals of importance (its navigation, homepage links, most-linked pages, sitemap, and any llms.txt file), and the first 0 PDF documents found were assessed separately. The industry in the header is classified from the site's own content. The traffic classification comes from a recognised top-sites list or a connected traffic provider; it reads NA when the domain is not connected to a traffic source.
Header identity signals. The regulated sector and listed company values are inferred from the same crawled content, and shown here so the header can stay to the answer alone. Regulated sector reads “None found”: no regulator statements, and the established sector carries no statutory regulator. Listed company reads “Not established”: no clear public-listing indicators in the sampled pages.
AI readiness is the weighted share of checks that passed, reported separately for pages and for PDF documents because each is reached and corrected differently. Grade A checks decide whether content can be reached and read at all; grade B whether it is understood correctly; grade C support reliability. A measured score is scaled into a ceiling when an access gate binds it (for example the site blocking AI crawlers at its edge): content that cannot be reached is not partially ready. Scores never read exactly 25, 50, 75 or 100, because those are buckets, not measurements.
Likelihood of misinformation is a band, given as a worst case (the highest any single item or estate-wide finding reaches) and a typical position across the pages or documents. Only checks whose failure is a direct route to a wrong answer carry a band; the rest affect readiness only.
| Band | Range | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Likely zero | 0-5% | No failing misinformation-bearing checks. |
| Very little | 6-25% | Unlikely to cause wrong information. |
| Likely | 26-50% | Could contribute to wrong information in some cases. |
| Very likely | 51-75% | A real and common route to wrong information. |
| Extremely likely | 76-100% | A frequent and direct cause of wrong information. |
Of the register's 207 checks, 123 ran automatically in this Foundations stage. 43 are questions for the person accountable for the content, asked at the next stage. 32 are built and found nothing of their kind published on this site, so they had nothing to read. One is defined in the register and not yet built. 7 need information supplied by the organisation. Each check that did not run is listed in the exports, with its reason.
About us
Built on evidence, not assumptions.
We have been doing this for 25 years. For the last two years, we have been training AI to understand and map AI Readiness (fundamentals, governance, visibility), against our unique dataset of more than 3.7 trillion data points.
3.7
Trillion
Data points, with each result kept since the beginning: probably the largest experience and compliance dataset of its kind. Our AI is trained on factual, controlled, real-world evidence.
$106
Billion
Estimated manual effort avoided through automation. An estimate, and a conservative one: since ARTY was introduced, we have removed 95% of costs and delivered efficiency gains beyond 70x.
119
Million
Websites analysed and mapped for content fundamentals, from the outside in. AI Readiness begins by removing the human issues that undermine Value and create unnecessary Risk.
25
Years
When we started, we were labelled 'the pioneers' of website automation and checking. In 2023, we launched our first AI analysis tools.
Who’s talking about us
