Quotable Sentence Finder
Free, no signup. Find the sentences that can survive being lifted out of your page: direct, self-contained, specific answers with enough information density to cite.
| Signal | Working interpretation |
|---|---|
| Flesch Reading Ease | 60–70 is commonly considered plain English |
| Grade formulas | Use as audience estimates, not requirements |
| Quotability | A sentence-level writing heuristic; not a rank prediction |
Pasted content is analyzed in your browser. A URL is sent only to the protected fetch endpoint; paste content takes priority. After a successful URL check, only its domain is remembered locally.
Runs entirely in your browser — nothing you paste is uploaded or stored. Pasted text stays local; only an optional URL is fetched. Anonymous run-level outcome counters may be used for aggregate research; URLs, domains, IPs, and identifiers are never included, and no statistic is released below 100 runs.
Site passport Local context for this saved site
Local data
Saved targets, named lists, and recent check summaries remain only in this browser.
Rate this tool
How to use it
- Paste a page, article section, or HTML fragment.
- Select Find quotable sentences. Start with the word, sentence, audience, and readability summary.
- Review sentence scores and factor breakdowns, especially low self-containment, direct-answer, entity, or specificity factors.
- Revise the source for clarity and factual completeness, then rerun it. Do not optimize for the total at the expense of nuance.
Sample report Example data — engine calculation
The interactive canonical-tag example contains 48 words and three sentences. The current engine returns:
Readability for the full example is Flesch 39, Flesch–Kincaid grade 11.8, with the audience label “High-school to early college reader.” These are formula outputs, not quality verdicts.
What the results mean
Quotability is the weighted total of six visible factors. Density compares concrete-information cues with sentence length. The readability summary reports six established formulas and maps Flesch–Kincaid grade to a broad audience label. A high result identifies a review candidate; it cannot establish accuracy, originality, retrieval, or citation likelihood.
How it works
The extractor converts pasted text or HTML into content blocks, joins their text, and splits it into sentences. The scorer applies fixed weights: self-containment 25%, direct answer 25%, entity clarity 15%, structure 15%, specificity 10%, and lead position 10%. Separate readability formulas use local counts of words, sentences, syllables, letters, and polysyllabic words.
Features
- Sentence-level scores with every factor exposed.
- Information-density cue beside the composite score.
- Six readability formulas and a broad audience estimate.
- Plain text or HTML input, processed entirely in the browser.
Limitations
- Rules are English-oriented and can misread names, abbreviations, fragments, and specialized vocabulary.
- Specificity uses surface cues such as numbers and certain modifiers; it does not fact-check details.
- Entity clarity and direct-answer patterns are lexical, not semantic.
- No answer engine, retrieval system, ranking system, or citation corpus is tested.
Frequently asked questions
Does this measure a search engine score?
No. The scorer is a transparent writing heuristic. It highlights sentences that stand alone and carry useful detail; it does not predict a particular model, citationAn AI citation is the visible source link an AI answer engine shows next to its generated text — the clickable reference that credits the web page it used. A citation's presence is a separate thing from whether the cited page actually supports the statement, and from being retrieved (read behind the scenes) or merely mentioned (named without a link); citation is driven more by brand mentions and being retrievable than by traditional ranking., or ranking.
Is pasted content uploaded?
No. This tool analyzes only the text or HTML you paste, entirely in your browser.
What raises the quotability score?
The fixed factors reward a self-contained subject, direct-answer language, a clear entity, useful sentence structure, concrete specificity, and appearing early in the supplied passage.
Why can two sentences receive the same score?
The factors use a few discrete values and fixed weights, so different sentences can land on the same total. Read the factor breakdown and sentence itself instead of treating rank order as precise.
What do the readability grades mean?
They are established formula outputs based on sentence length, word length, syllables, or letters. They are audience estimates, not requirements and not AI retrieval signals.
Feature requests for Quotable Sentence Finder
Upvote what you want most. New ideas can be submitted from the floating Feedback menu; requests appear here once approved, and the most-wanted rise to the top.
You won't be emailed about that request anymore.
Loading…
➕ Request a feature
New requests are reviewed before they appear here.
Common issues & how to fix them
- Warnings Sentence depends on surrounding context Fix: Rewrite the sentence so it names its subject and remains accurate without the surrounding paragraph.
- Warnings Sentence does not name its subject Fix: Replace pronouns or vague references with the specific person, organization, concept, or object being discussed.
- Warnings Sentence makes a vague claim Fix: Replace vague qualifiers with a precise, bounded, and attributable statement.
- Warnings Sentence lacks specific evidence Fix: Add the relevant number, source, date, example, or citation directly beside the claim.
- Information Sentence is too long to quote cleanly Fix: Split the sentence into one focused claim and move secondary qualifications into a separate sentence.
- Warnings No sentence is strongly self-contained Fix: Add one concise, self-contained sentence that states the section’s strongest supported takeaway.