Wikipedia Page Creation — United States
Wikipedia Page Creation for US Founders & Businesses.
American corporate and executive articles are reviewed against a strict conflict-of-interest standard shaped by well-publicized paid-editing enforcement cases. This service starts with an honest eligibility review, builds genuine independent sourcing from national and regional journalism, and guides eligible subjects through Wikipedia's own review process — disclosed exactly as policy requires.
What we guarantee: a transparent eligibility audit against Wikipedia's notability guidelines, then a disclosed, compliant submission through Articles for Creation. Wikipedia's volunteer reviewers decide whether a page is accepted. Built from hands-on experience with Wikipedia's actual review process, and written to survive long after that first approval. Any paid contribution made on your behalf is disclosed on-wiki, exactly as Wikipedia's Terms of Use require — undisclosed paid editing is a policy violation and is never part of this process.
Why US Articles Get Extra Scrutiny
Conflict of Interest Is Enforced, Not Assumed Away.
The Wiki-PR Legacy and What It Changed
A widely publicized 2013-2014 case involving the US-based firm Wiki-PR — banned by the Wikimedia Foundation for running large-scale undisclosed paid editing on behalf of corporate clients — is a direct reason Wikipedia's Terms of Use now explicitly mandate paid-contribution disclosure. American corporate and executive biography articles are watched closely for the same pattern: a suspiciously polished, promotional article appearing with no visible editing history or disclosure. Articles built through disclosed, policy-compliant editing don't trigger that scrutiny; the ones that try to route around disclosure usually get caught and reverted, often with the article itself deleted in the process.
National Press vs. Regional Coverage: Different Bars
A profile in The New York Times, Forbes, or Bloomberg tends to establish notability largely on its own, while coverage limited to a local city paper or a regional business journal usually needs to be paired with additional national or trade-press coverage before a standalone article clears the bar. This distinction trips up a lot of well-covered regional business figures who assume that being a known name in their city or industry automatically qualifies — Wikipedia's standard is about the type and reach of the coverage, not just local reputation.
What a Clean COI Disclosure Actually Looks Like
A compliant disclosure means the paid editor's user page states who is paying them and for what article, and edit summaries reference the same disclosure — not a buried mention or a disclosure added only after being challenged. Getting this right from the first edit is what lets a US corporate or executive article survive the scrutiny it's going to get regardless; retrofitting disclosure onto an article that's already been flagged is a much harder position to recover from.
Asynchronous review
Request a 24-Hour Wikipedia Notability Teardown
No sales calls. Submit your primary press features to verify notability against WP:GNG criteria before writing a single line.
The Process
Five Steps, In This Order.
Eligibility Review
Existing national, trade, and regional coverage is mapped against Wikipedia's notability guidelines. If the bar isn't met yet, you get told that directly.
Source Collection & Validation
Real, independent secondary sources — national press, trade publications, verifiable records — are gathered and checked against Wikipedia's reliability standards.
Neutral Drafting
The article is written in Wikipedia's neutral point of view, cited to the validated sources — not promotional copy repurposed from a company bio page.
Disclosed Submission via AfC
Submitted through Wikipedia's own Articles for Creation review queue, with any paid involvement disclosed on-wiki from the first edit.
Reviewer decisions typically take 15-30 days
Post-Publication Monitoring
30 days of monitoring after publication for edits, tagging, or deletion discussions — Wikipedia pages are never permanently "done."
Who's Doing The Work
Experience Is What Actually Moves The Odds.
Every draft is researched, sourced, and written by editors who've been through Wikipedia's actual review process repeatedly — not a general content team handed a one-off brief. Most rejected drafts aren't rejected for bad writing; they're rejected because sourcing that looked sufficient to someone unfamiliar with the notability bar didn't hold up under review. Catching that before submission, not after a rejection, is what the experience is actually for.
It doesn't turn an unready subject into a Wikipedia-ready one — nothing does. What it does is push the realistic odds as high as they can honestly go: fewer wasted submissions, fewer avoidable rejections for tone or sourcing mistakes a first attempt tends to make, and a draft built to survive extra scrutiny. It's also what makes a page hold up long after publication — an article that scrapes through one review but reads as promotional is exactly the kind that gets flagged and deleted months or years later. Writing it neutral and well-sourced from the start is as much what the experience buys as the initial approval.
Who This Is For
For US Founders and Executives With Coverage Beyond Local Press.
This works for founders, executives, and companies who already have — or are close to having — genuine national, trade, or substantial regional press coverage, not just a local write-up or a company bio page dressed up as journalism.
It is not a fit for anyone looking to route around disclosure requirements. If your current coverage isn't there yet, the honest answer is a roadmap toward real notability, not a submission likely to be declined or later deleted.
What's Included
- ✔ Free notability eligibility review before any commitment
- ✔ Independent source collection weighted toward national and trade press
- ✔ Neutral-point-of-view drafting built to survive COI scrutiny
- ✔ Disclosed submission through Wikipedia's Articles for Creation
- ✔ 30-day post-publication monitoring
- ✔ A written roadmap for building qualifying coverage if you're not eligible yet
Strong national coverage only helps if reviewers can find it. We connect source-building to search entity building and to a content plan that gives journalists a reason to cover your work.
Primary sources: Wikipedia's notability guideline (WP:GNG), conflict of interest guideline, paid-contribution disclosure policy, Articles for Creation, and the Wikimedia Terms of Use.
Common Questions
USA FAQ.
From the Blog