Wikipedia is written by volunteers who apply one published test. Most people who ask us have never seen it. Here is the test, how to find out where you stand against it today, and what happens next if you clear it.
Check where you stand, free See the testThe free audit reads what is already published about you and tells you which of it counts. No payment, and no obligation.
Every Wikipedia article about a living person stands or falls on this.
This is the part that surprises everybody. A thick folder of coverage can contain nothing Wikipedia will accept, and two quiet articles can be enough. The difference is who wrote it and why.
Four steps, and we stop at the first one if the answer is no.
Charged only once you clear the three sources. There is deliberately no buy button on this page: it is the one thing we sell that you cannot simply decide to buy, because paying does not make somebody notable and a page built short of the bar does not last.
No, and neither can anybody else. Volunteers decide, they can decline, and they can delete an article later. Anyone promising you a page is either misunderstanding how Wikipedia works or hoping you do.
What we will do is tell you honestly whether you meet the test before you spend anything.
No. The Wikimedia Terms of Use require anybody editing for payment to disclose it, and we do, on the account and on the article's talk page.
Anybody offering to do this discreetly is telling you they intend to break those rules with your name attached. Undisclosed paid editing gets accounts blocked and articles deleted, and the person left holding that is the subject, not the editor who has moved on.
Then we say so, and we do not take the money. It is the only thing we sell that is locked, and it opens on the published test rather than on a payment.
The useful answer is usually to start where the bar is lower and the work still counts later: your own page, your Wikidata entry, and coverage that would go toward the three sources. None of that is wasted if Wikipedia opens. The reverse is not true.
The discussion stays public, with your name on it, and a second attempt starts from a worse position than the first. That is the whole reason we refuse work that is short of the bar rather than trying and hoping.
No, and this is the most expensive misunderstanding in the subject. The client we can name got a knowledge panel in eleven days with no Wikipedia article, no press placed and no links bought.
What actually produces a knowledge panel covers what does.
No. A Wikipedia article is not a profile you own. You cannot approve it, you cannot quietly correct it, and anybody may edit it the day after it appears. If what you want is a record that says what you agreed it says, that is your own page, not this.
Different job, and often a faster one. Corrections go through the talk page with the same disclosure and a source for every change. Tell us on the audit and we will look at what is there.
The free audit reads what is published about you, says which of it counts toward the three sources, and tells you how far off you are. It is the same instrument we use before quoting.
Check where you stand, free