Scan a site

theguardian.com looks like a blog or news site, is ranked in the top 1,000 sites and was registered in 1994. It is built with Emotion; we found no traces of an AI site builder.

Popularity

Website Traffic Checker

Among the top 1K sites.

A popularity band, not a visit count.

Tranco: #204 · Chrome UX Report: Top 1,000 · Majestic Million: #82

Each list, with its date
SourceSaysAs of
TrancoA research ranking that combines several traffic and link sources, published daily.#204list of 7 Oct 2026
Chrome UX ReportRank buckets from Google’s real Chrome traffic, published monthly.Top 1,000Aug 2026
Majestic MillionRanks sites by how many separate networks link to them (links, not visits), published daily. CC BY 3.0#82list of 8 Oct 2026

Technology

Tech Stack Checker

Built with Emotion.

  • EmotionCSS frameworkShow evidenceHide evidence
    Evidence · page source, line 234
    17 attributes starting with data-emotion
    Popular sites using Emotion Is this wrong? Report it
Everything else it uses (20)

Around it: CDN, DNS, Email, Analytics and more.

Business tools can stay listed after a site stops using them.

Trust signals

Website Trust Checker

4 of 7 trust signals found on the home page.

Signals, not a judgement: missing details are common on small, honest sites.

  • Domain registered6 Jul 1994, 32 years agoNoted
  • HTTPSLoads over HTTPS with a valid certificateFound
  • Contact detailsNo email or phone on the home pageNot found
  • Privacy policyLinked from the home page, and the page opensFound
  • TermsLinked from the home page, and the page opensFound
  • Security filterNot blocked by Cloudflare’s security filter and Quad9’s security filterNoted
Every signal we looked at

On the site

  • Contact pageLinked from the home page, and the page opensFound
  • About pageLinked from the home page, and the page opensFound
  • Privacy policyLinked from the home page, and the page opensFound
  • TermsLinked from the home page, and the page opensFound
  • Refund or returns policyNo link found on the home pageNot found
  • Contact detailsNo email or phone on the home pageNot found
  • Company detailsNo company name or address foundNot found
  • Payment providersNone on the home pageNoted
  • Trackers2 analytics and advertising tools: Comscore, Google Ad ManagerNoted

Behind the site

  • Security filterNot blocked by Cloudflare’s security filter and Quad9’s security filterNotedCloudflare’s security filter and Quad9’s security filter
  • Domain registered6 Jul 1994, 32 years agoNoteddomain registry
  • HTTPSLoads over HTTPS with a valid certificateFound
  • Protective settings6 of 6 in placeFound
  • Email protectionProtected against forged emailFoundDNS records

A second opinion on its security setup: Mozilla’s HTTP Observatory grades the site when you open it. Ten checks before you buy · A signal looks wrong? Report it

What it is

Website Summary

Looks like: Blog or news site.

In its own wordsLatest news, sport and opinion from the GuardianLatest news, sport, business, comment, analysis and reviews from the Guardian, the world's leading liberal voice

Our reading of the page, high confidence.

Show evidence (4)Hide evidence
Exhibit 1 · Wikidata
Q11148: The Guardian, newspaper
Exhibit 2 · page source, line 367
<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.theguardian.com/europe/rss">
Exhibit 3 · its own title or description
Latest news, sport and opinion from the Guardian · Latest news, sport, business, comment, analysis and reviews from the Guardian, the world's leading liberal vo
Exhibit 4 · page source, line 372
<a href="/news/audio/2026/oct/14/the-fall-of-germanys-ex-spymaster-podcast"></a>
Is this wrong? Report it

Who is behind it

  • copyright lineGuardian News
  • WikidataThe Guardian

Confirmed by 2 independent sources: copyright line and Wikidata.

Wikidata: Owned by Guardian Media Group; based in London, United Kingdom; founded by John Edward Taylor.

Its Bluesky and Facebook accounts are the ones Wikidata lists.

Show evidence (2)Hide evidence
Exhibit 1 · page source, line 583
© 2026 Guardian News
Exhibit 2 · Wikidata
Q11148: The Guardian
Is this wrong? Report it

Each name is quoted from its source. A brand and the company that owns it often go by different names.

More about it: Wikidata, profiles, AI use, page facts

In Wikidata

  • The Guardian: British national daily newspaper · newspaper, daily newspaper · since 1821

Wikidata, the free knowledge base behind Wikipedia, lists this domain as the official website of this item. Volunteers write it; each item shows its sources.

Find them on

The profiles its home page links. We haven’t checked who runs them.

AI use

  • AI training: asks CCBot, FacebookBot, Bytespider, YouBot and 5 more to stay away.
  • AI assistants: asks PerplexityBot, Claude-SearchBot, Claude-User, YandexAdditional and 4 more to stay away.
Show evidence (17)Hide evidence
Exhibit 1 · robots.txt, line 66
User-agent: CCBot · Disallow: /
Exhibit 2 · robots.txt, line 70
User-agent: FacebookBot · Disallow: /
Exhibit 3 · robots.txt, line 71
User-agent: Bytespider · Disallow: /
Exhibit 4 · robots.txt, line 75
User-agent: YouBot · Disallow: /
Exhibit 5 · robots.txt, line 81
User-agent: anthropic-ai · Disallow: /
Exhibit 6 · robots.txt, line 82
User-agent: ClaudeBot · Disallow: /
Exhibit 7 · robots.txt, line 89
User-agent: Applebot-Extended · Disallow: /
Exhibit 8 · robots.txt, line 94
User-agent: meta-externalagent · Disallow: /
Exhibit 9 · robots.txt, line 95
User-agent: Amazonbot · Disallow: /
Exhibit 10 · robots.txt, line 79
User-Agent: PerplexityBot · Disallow: /
Exhibit 11 · robots.txt, line 83
User-agent: Claude-SearchBot · Disallow: /
Exhibit 12 · robots.txt, line 84
User-agent: Claude-User · Disallow: /
Exhibit 13 · robots.txt, line 90
User-agent: YandexAdditional · Disallow: /
Exhibit 14 · robots.txt, line 91
User-agent: YandexAdditionalBot · Disallow: /
Exhibit 15 · robots.txt, line 97
User-agent: DuckAssistBot · Disallow: /
Exhibit 16 · robots.txt, line 98
User-agent: Google-CloudVertexBot · Disallow: /
Exhibit 17 · robots.txt, line 99
User-agent: Amzn-SearchBot · Disallow: /
Is this wrong? Report it

What its robots.txt and robots tags ask of AI crawlers. Each crawler chooses whether to follow it.

Site name
Not given
Language
English (en)
What it tells search engines
None

Read from what the page says about itself; we haven’t checked whether it’s true.

Built with AI?

AI Website Detector

No AI builder traces found.

Coding tools such as Cursor leave no traces, so this doesn’t mean a person made it.

AI traces: None found

How we know

AI site builders leave traces in the sites they make. We look for the traces of 53 of them and show every match with the line it came from, so you can check it yourself.

We test this on 2,312 sites whose makers we know, and publish what we get wrong.

How we test it · Every builder we know · How to tell if a site was built with AI

Score breakdown

Site Score

93 of 100: strong trust signals.

How established and checkable it is; AI traces carry no weight.

93OF 100
TransparencyContact, policies and about page26 / 30
Track recordHow long the domain has existed25 / 25
PopularityIts place in public rankings20 / 20
Security and setupHTTPS and standard protections15 / 15
ConsistencyName, description and what it tells search engines7 / 10
Why each part scored what it did
TransparencyContact, policies and about page26 / 30contact page linked · email and phone not both given · privacy policy linked · terms linked · no payments seen, so no refund policy needed · about page linked
Track recordHow long the domain has existed25 / 25domain registered 32 years ago
PopularityIts place in public rankings20 / 20Top 1K in a popularity list
Security and setupHTTPS and standard protections15 / 15loads over HTTPS · sends visitors to HTTPS · always uses HTTPS · protective settings
ConsistencyName, description and what it tells search engines7 / 10site name matches the domain · describes itself · doesn’t tell search engines what it is

A high score isn’t a promise that a business is honest. How the score works.

Domain history

Domain History

Registered in 1994; first archived in 1997.

  1. Domain registeredRDAP
  2. First captured by the web archiveInternet Archive
  3. First scanned by usCheckAnySite
  4. This scanCheckAnySite

In the web archive: captured in 28 of 30 years · see the first capture

  1. 1997: captured
  2. 1998: captured
  3. 1999: captured
  4. 2000: captured
  5. 2001: captured
  6. 2002: captured
  7. 2003: no capture
  8. 2004: captured
  9. 2005: captured
  10. 2006: captured
  11. 2007: captured
  12. 2008: no capture
  13. 2009: captured
  14. 2010: captured
  15. 2011: captured
  16. 2012: captured
  17. 2013: captured
  18. 2014: captured
  19. 2015: captured
  20. 2016: captured
  21. 2017: captured
  22. 2018: captured
  23. 2019: captured
  24. 2020: captured
  25. 2021: captured
  26. 2022: captured
  27. 2023: captured
  28. 2024: captured
  29. 2025: captured
  30. 2026: captured
Changes, earlier scans and alerts
Since our previous scan
No changes since 10 Oct 2026.
ScannedScoreAI tracesPopularity
shown above93None foundTop 1K
93None foundTop 1K

Findings can change when a site changes or when we update our signatures; each scan keeps the version it used.

How we scanned it

Only from what anyone can see: the site’s public pages and public records.

  • Politely. Our scanner, CheckAnySiteBot, says who it is and follows the site’s robots.txt.
  • With sources. Every fact above says where it came from and when.
  • Without guessing. When we couldn’t check something, we say so.
This scan, in numbers

929 checks on 14 Oct 2026, with version 0.5.0 of our checks and version 1.1 of the score.

How we work · What each version changed · About our scanner

Quick look

Built with AI?

None foundWe found no AI builder traces.

“None found” never means “made by a person”: coding assistants leave no traces.

All the evidence →

Related

Quick look

How popular is it?

Top 1KBy the best of 3 public lists.

  • Tranco#204list of 7 Oct 2026
  • Chrome UX ReportTop 1,000Aug 2026
  • Majestic Million#82list of 8 Oct 2026

A popularity band, never a visit count.

The popularity section →

Related

Quick look

What is it built with?

CSS framework
Emotion

And 20 more around it (CDN, DNS, Email, Analytics), in the section.

Each with its evidence →

Related

Quick look

Which trust signals does it show?

On the site

  • Contact pageFound
  • About pageFound
  • Privacy policyFound
  • TermsFound
  • Refund or returns policyNot found
  • Contact detailsNot found
  • Company detailsNot found
  • Payment providersNoted
  • TrackersNoted

Behind the site

  • Security filterNoted
  • Domain registeredNoted
  • HTTPSFound
  • Security headersFound
  • Software versionsNoted
  • NetworkNoted
  • Email setupFound
  • First certificateCouldn’t check
  • DNSSECNot found
  • Certificate authoritiesNot found
  • Security contactFound

Signals, not a judgement: missing details are common on small, honest sites.

Every signal with its source →

Related

How has it changed? →
Quick look

How does it add up?

93OF 100

Strong trust signals. An open formula (v1.1): every point comes from a finding above. AI traces carry no weight.

TransparencyContact, policies and about page26 / 30
Track recordHow long the domain has existed25 / 25
PopularityIts place in public rankings20 / 20
Security and setupHTTPS and standard protections15 / 15
ConsistencyName, description and what it tells search engines7 / 10
Why each part scored what it did →

Related

More sites like this: blog or news site

Automated findings from the site’s public home page and public records, as of 14 Oct 2026. They describe what we found, not the people or business behind the site, and they may be incomplete or out of date. This is information, not advice. Terms · Report an error

What this scan can’t tell you
  • Whether the business is real, honest or delivers what it sells.
  • Whether a site was made with AI when no traces were left: coding assistants and hand edits leave none.
  • How many people visit: we show popularity bands from public lists, not visits.
  • Anything beyond the home page as it was at the time of the scan.

Is this your site? Ask for a correction.

Share this result

Share theguardian.com

The result describes what we found on 14 Oct 2026, with evidence.

Side by side

Compare with another site

AI traces, popularity, trust signals and the score, side by side.

Free scan · no sign-up

What do you want to find out?

Or check one thing:

Try

One scan answers everything: AI traces, popularity, technology, trust signals, how the site describes itself, a score and its history. A quick check only decides which answer comes first. We read public pages as CheckAnySiteBot and follow robots.txt.