Wikipedia Cited 16x More Than Reddit, But Represents Only 1.7% of AI Citations

For months, the GEO community has debated which sources AI models trust most. Does Wikipedia dominate? Is Reddit the secret weapon? Do news outlets control the narrative?

We analyzed 950,428 source mentions from AI responses across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, and 6 other major models during Q3 2025 to settle this question with data.

Our findings align with Princeton's GEO research showing GEO optimization can boost visibility by up to 40%, and Search Engine Land's analysis revealing that Wikipedia accounts for 47.9% of ChatGPT's top 10 citations.

The answer challenges everything conventional wisdom suggests about AI citations.

The Citation Landscape: Raw Numbers

Here's what 950,000+ citations reveal about source preferences:

Three critical insights emerge immediately:

1. Wikipedia is cited 15.99x more than Reddit - but this only translates to 1.7% of total citations
2. Reddit, forums, news, and government sites combined represent less than 1% of citations
3. 97.5% of all AI citations come from specialized, vertical-specific websites you've probably never heard of

This isn't what most GEO guides suggest. The conventional wisdom - "get on Wikipedia, get Reddit mentions, get press coverage" - addresses less than 2% of the citation landscape.

What Are These "Specialized Sites"?

Let's make this concrete. Here are the top 10 most-cited sources during Q3 2025:

Notice the pattern: French legal and business service platforms collectively receive 25,923 citations - more than 2x Wikipedia's total.

These aren't household names. They're specialized platforms that became authorities in narrow verticals:

• Legal services platforms: Document automation for French businesses
• B2B comparison sites: Software and service comparisons
• Fintech platforms: Banking and financial services for freelancers
• Business blogs: Management advice and entrepreneurship guidance

What they share: Deep expertise in specific domains, comprehensive coverage of niche topics, and structured content that directly answers user questions.

The Wikipedia Paradox: Authority Without Volume

Wikipedia's position reveals something fascinating about how AI models construct responses.

The numbers:

• Only 1.7% of total citations
• Average position: 3.28 (very early in responses)
• 12,459 citations across 950K mentions

The paradox: Wikipedia gets cited early but infrequently.

Why this matters: AI models appear to use Wikipedia as a "foundation layer" - citing it early to establish context and definitions, then pivoting to specialized sources for detailed information.

Example pattern we observed:

1. Position 1-3: Wikipedia (defines the topic)
2. Position 4-7: Specialized sites (provide specific information)
3. Position 8+: Supporting sources (additional context)

Strategic insight: Wikipedia presence signals authority and improves your positioning in responses, but it won't drive citation volume. It's a credibility boost, not a traffic driver.

The Reddit Reality Check

Reddit has been positioned as essential for GEO. Our data suggests otherwise.

Reddit's performance:

• 0.1% of citations (779 mentions)
• Average position: 7.30 (late in responses)
• 16x less cited than Wikipedia

What this tells us: AI models view Reddit as supplementary, not primary. When Reddit appears, it's typically:

• Late in responses (after authoritative sources)
• For anecdotal examples or user experiences
• As supporting evidence, not primary claims

Three brands mentioned frequently on Reddit but rarely cited by AI:

• Gaming peripherals with active subreddit communities
• Developer tools with r/programming presence
• Consumer products with review threads

Why? Reddit discussions are conversational, opinion-based, and lack the structured authority signals AI models prioritize.

Bottom line: Don't build your GEO strategy around Reddit presence. It's valuable for brand awareness and community, but not for AI citations.

What Wins: The Specialized Authority Model

The 97.5% tells the real story. Specialized, vertical-specific content dominates AI citations.

Winning characteristics we identified:

1. Deep Domain Expertise

• Not broad coverage, but comprehensive depth
• Example: Leading legal platforms cover every aspect of French business law, not general legal advice

2. Structured, Scannable Content

• Clear headings and sections
• Definitive answers, not open-ended discussions
• Example: Government portals use consistent structure across all administrative topics

3. Query-Specific Pages

• Content that directly answers specific questions
• Example: Comparison sites have dedicated pages for specific software categories

4. Authority Signals in Your Niche

• Recognized expertise within your vertical
• Example: Specialized fintech platforms become the reference within their vertical, even if unknown globally

What doesn't work:

• Generic content marketing blogs
• Thin affiliate sites
• Opinion pieces without data
• Conversational, blog-style writing

Strategic Implications for GEO

Based on 950,000+ citations, here's what actually moves the needle:

✅ Priority 1: Become THE Authority in Your Niche

Not "an authority" - THE authority.

Leading specialized platforms don't try to compete with Wikipedia's breadth. They own specific verticals completely. One legal services platform earned 10,461 citations in one quarter through this focused approach.

How to implement:

1. Pick your vertical: Narrow is better than broad
2. Map all questions: What does your audience ask? Answer all of them comprehensively
3. Structure for scanning: AI models parse content quickly - make key information easy to extract
4. Update regularly: Outdated content gets deprioritized

✅ Priority 2: Optimize for Early Position (3-5)

Sources cited in positions 3-5 drive the most impact. Getting cited 10x at position 8 is less valuable than 3x at position 3.

How to achieve:

• Lead with clear, definitive answers
• Use structured data and schema markup
• Maintain authoritative, neutral tone
• Provide comprehensive coverage without fluff

✅ Priority 3: Wikipedia for Authority, Not Volume

A Wikipedia page won't drive citation volume (1.7% share proves this), but it will improve your positioning when you do get cited.

Use Wikipedia for:

• Credibility and authority signals
• Improved positioning (closer to position 3 vs 7)
• Brand legitimacy

Don't expect Wikipedia to:

• Drive significant citation volume
• Replace specialized content strategy
• Work as your primary GEO tactic

❌ Don't: Chase Reddit, News, or Forums

Combined, these represent less than 1% of citations. They're valuable for other reasons (brand awareness, backlinks, community), but they're not GEO priorities.

The mistake: Investing 80% of effort into tactics that address 1% of citations.

What's Next

This is part of our Q3 2025 research series on AI citation behavior.

Overview Studies:

• 184K Queries Analysis - Comprehensive LLM ranking factors study
• Query Fan-Out Study - Provider-specific search behavior patterns

Deep Dive Reports:

• ✅ #1: Source Analysis (this report)
• #2: Provider Comparison - Platform-specific behavior
• #3: Wikipedia & Reddit Effect - Platform presence impact
• #4: Source Types Impact - Authority hierarchy
• #5: Content Freshness - Dynamic citation landscape
• #6: Sentiment Analysis - How AI judges sources

External validation:

Our findings are corroborated by multiple 2025 industry studies:

• Princeton GEO Research: GEO can boost visibility by up to 40% in generative engine responses
• Search Engine Land Analysis: Insights from 8,000 AI citations on source patterns
• Visual Capitalist Market Report: ChatGPT dominates with 59.5-82.7% market share

Research powered by Qwairy - Track your brand's AI visibility across 10+ models and get actionable GEO insights.