> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.atomicagi.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

# Mentions

> Separate existing brand mentions from missing backlink opportunities so you can focus authority work where it matters

<Frame>
  <img src="https://mintcdn.com/atomicai/lGnuIOHJ-vUOSmPx/images/data/ai-search/app-ai-search-mentions.png?fit=max&auto=format&n=lGnuIOHJ-vUOSmPx&q=85&s=698c60c371b7c06e23325a6fc8ce4c30" alt="AI Search Mentions page with mention and backlink opportunity data" width="1536" height="1024" data-path="images/data/ai-search/app-ai-search-mentions.png" />
</Frame>

Use this page to review external AI citation sources through a mentions lens. It helps you separate sources that already mention your brand from sources that still represent an authority gap.

## Questions this page should answer

1. Which sources already mention our brand?
2. Where are we missing backlinks or citation coverage?
3. Which mention gaps should we prioritize first?

## Before you analyze

* Keep the same date range as Citations and Visibility.
* Start with all platforms before filtering to one engine.
* Use prompt and topic filters when checking a specific narrative gap.

## What this page gives you

* Mention and non-mention source rows from AI citation data.
* Filters for platform, prompt, topic, and source type.
* A direct way to spot existing brand coverage versus missing opportunities.

## How to read mention rows

Read each row as a source opportunity, not just a backlink lead.

* `Source`: the domain or page appearing in AI citation context.
* `Mention status`: whether your brand is already mentioned.
* `Prompt/topic`: where the source appeared.
* `Platform`: the AI engine context where the source was observed.
* `Source type`: the kind of site or content you may need to influence.

Use this rule:

* Existing mentions reveal proof patterns worth repeating.
* Missing mentions on high-value prompts deserve outreach or stronger source-backed content.
* Missing mentions on low-value prompts should not distract from strategic authority work.

## How these metrics are calculated (simple)

```text theme={null}
Mention = cited source includes or references your brand
```

```text theme={null}
Missing mention = cited source appears in relevant AI context but does not mention your brand
```

Use this page with [Citations](/data/ai-search/citations) to understand both source presence and brand inclusion.

## How to use this page

### Prioritize strategic missing mentions

Missing mentions on high-value prompts matter more than isolated misses on low-value topics. Focus on gaps tied to commercial or high-trust topics first.

### Check the source type before acting

Editorial, institutional, reference, and corporate sources usually deserve a different outreach or content strategy than UGC sources.

### Use mention wins as proof patterns

When a source already mentions you, inspect what kind of page or evidence got picked up. That pattern often tells you what to expand next.

## Quick weekly checklist

1. Filter to your highest-priority prompt or topic.
2. Flag sources where competitors are present and you are missing.
3. Flag strong mention wins worth replicating.
4. Turn the top 3 gaps into outreach or content proof actions.

## What to fix first

| Pattern in Mentions data              | What it usually means                              | Recommended action                                       |
| ------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------- |
| Missing mentions on buying prompts    | Authority gap affects revenue intent               | Build proof, outreach, or comparison assets              |
| Strong sources mention you            | Existing proof pattern works                       | Replicate the source/content pattern                     |
| Many UGC misses                       | Not all gaps are worth pursuing                    | Prioritize editorial, institutional, or category sources |
| Competitors appear repeatedly         | They have stronger external proof                  | Review competitor citations and source strategy          |
| Mentions exist but visibility is weak | Source coverage is not translating to answer share | Pair with Visibility and Prompts diagnostics             |

## Team routine

1. Weekly: review high-value missing mentions.
2. Bi-weekly: turn the best gaps into outreach or proof-building work.
3. Monthly: compare mention wins with citation share and visibility changes.

## Keep in mind

* Not every missing mention is worth chasing.
* A strong mention on one source does not guarantee broader authority.
* Use this page with Citations, not instead of Citations.

## Where to go next

* [Citations](/data/ai-search/citations)
* [Visibility](/data/ai-search/visibility)
* [Competitors](/data/ai-search/competitors)
* [Competitors overview](/data/competitors/overview)
