Practical, expert advice on preparing Wikipedia submissions that pass editorial review the first time — from our team of Wikipedia specialists with a 98% approval rate over 15 years.
The most common reason Wikipedia pages fail is that the subject does not meet the notability threshold — and the creator finds this out after investing significant time in writing. Always confirm that sufficient independent, reliable sources exist before you start drafting. If the sources are not there, neither is the notability.
The best way to understand Wikipedia's encyclopedic style is to spend time reading Wikipedia articles about similar subjects. Notice the neutral tone, the citation density, the lead section structure, and what information is typically included or excluded. Wikipedia has a distinctive voice that takes time to recognise and replicate.
Every source cited in a Wikipedia article must be independent of the subject. Press releases, the subject's own website, LinkedIn profiles, company blogs, and social media do not count. Each cited fact must be verifiable through a reliably published, independently written source — a newspaper, industry journal, academic publication, or equivalent.
Phrases like "award-winning," "industry-leading," "innovative," "world-class," or any language that evaluates or promotes the subject are immediate red flags for Wikipedia reviewers. Write as if you are describing the subject from the outside, neutrally and factually, the way a historian or encyclopedist would — not a publicist.
Improperly formatted citations are a common reason for Wikipedia declines. Use Wikipedia's standard citation templates — |cite web|, |cite news|, |cite journal| — with author, publisher, date, and URL fully populated. Citations that cannot be verified or that use non-standard formatting raise immediate flags for reviewers.
Wikipedia's lead section — the first paragraph or two before the table of contents — should summarise the entire article. Writing it last ensures you summarise what is actually in the article rather than what you plan to include. The lead also undergoes the most editorial scrutiny, so it needs to be especially tight, neutral, and factual.
Wikipedia articles for standard subject types — companies, people, books, organisations — use specific infobox templates that structure key facts. Missing infoboxes, incorrect infobox types, or incomplete category assignments signal to reviewers that the article was not written by someone familiar with Wikipedia conventions. Get these right.
If you are being paid to create or edit a Wikipedia article, Wikipedia's Terms of Use require disclosure. Failing to disclose a paid relationship is one of the most serious violations you can commit on Wikipedia — and it can result in permanent banning of accounts. Disclosure is mandatory, non-negotiable, and non-optional.
The Bottom Line: Wikipedia article publishing is learnable — but it requires significant familiarity with Wikipedia's editorial culture, policies, and conventions. Most first-time submissions from non-experts fail. If your Wikipedia page matters to you professionally, the cost of getting it wrong — deletion, flags, reputational damage — is much higher than the cost of getting it right the first time with professional help.
We apply these principles — and 15 years of experience — to every submission we make. Start with an eligibility check.