Sources

"Our work ranges from assessing the effects of land alteration and development on known and potential heritage areas and sites, to research relating to land claims and traditional use." That is how Sources introduces itself. To AI engines like ChatGPT and Perplexity it is partially visible, scoring 5.3 out of 10, readable in places and missing in others.

On the page itself the strengths are clear: a clearly stated business identity and visible credibility markers. It is passable on basic crawler access and partial sitemap and link coverage. What holds it back is structured data describing the business and a heading structure that lays out what it offers.

Away from its own site, other sites link to it. There is some, but not much, sign that the domain is only lightly established. Beyond that, AI engines do not yet recognise it as a distinct business, there is no press coverage to draw on, nobody is discussing it where AI engines look and it does not come up on Reddit. Those are earned elsewhere on the web, not fixed on the site itself.

AI crawlers have visited once in our tracking, including ClaudeBot (Anthropic). The site links to no social profiles, so there is nothing tying the brand to a wider presence.