[Context:] The quality of requirements engineeringartifacts, e.g. requirements specifications, is acknowledged tobe an important success factor for projects. Therefore, manycompanies spend significant amounts of money to control thequality of their RE artifacts. To reduce spending and improvethe RE artifact quality, methods were proposed that combinemanual quality control, i.e. reviews, with automated approaches.[Problem:] So far, we have seen various approaches to auto-matically detect certain aspects in RE artifacts. However, westill lack an overview what can and cannot be automaticallydetected. [Approach:] Starting from an industry guideline forRE artifacts, we classify 166 existing rules for RE artifacts alongvarious categories to discuss the share and the characteristics ofthose rules that can be automated. For those rules, that cannotbe automated, we discuss the main reasons. [Contribution:] Weestimate that 53% of the 166 rules can be checked automaticallyeither perfectly or with a good heuristic. Most rules need onlysimple techniques for checking. The main reason why some rulesresist automation is due to imprecise definition. [Impact:] Bygiving first estimates and analyses of automatically detectable andnot automatically detectable rule violations, we aim to provide anoverview of the potential of automated methods in requirementsquality control.