Wikipedia Notability
Session 5.5 · ~5 min read
Wikipedia is not a promotional platform. It is an encyclopedia. The editorial community enforces strict notability standards to prevent the encyclopedia from becoming a directory of every business, person, and organization that wants free publicity. Understanding these standards is essential before you attempt to create or commission a Wikipedia article. Getting it wrong wastes time and can result in a deletion that is harder to reverse than a creation.
The General Notability Guideline
Wikipedia's core notability standard is called the "General Notability Guideline" (GNG). It states:
A topic is presumed notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. "Significant" means the source treats the topic as its primary subject or provides substantial detail. "Independent" means the source has no financial, organizational, or personal relationship with the subject.
Every word in that guideline matters. Let us break it down:
- Significant coverage: A passing mention does not count. The source must dedicate substantial attention to the topic. A news article where your company is quoted in one sentence is not significant coverage. A feature article about your company is.
- Reliable sources: Published sources with editorial oversight. Major newspapers, trade journals, academic publications, and reputable magazines qualify. Blog posts, press releases, social media, and your own website do not.
- Independent of the subject: The source cannot be controlled by, affiliated with, or paid by the entity. Your own press releases are not independent. A journalist who wrote about you without being paid by you is independent.
What Counts vs. What Does Not
| Source Type | Counts as Notable Source? | Why / Why Not |
|---|---|---|
| Feature article in national newspaper | Yes | Reliable, independent, significant coverage |
| Industry trade publication feature | Yes | Reliable within domain, independent, substantial detail |
| Academic journal article about/citing entity | Yes | Peer-reviewed, independent, reliable |
| Published book that discusses the entity | Yes | Published by reputable publisher, editorial oversight |
| Government report featuring the entity | Yes | Institutional source, independent |
| Brief mention in a news article | No | Not significant. Must be primary topic or substantial detail. |
| Press release (even on major wire service) | No | Not independent. Paid/controlled by the subject. |
| Company's own blog or website | No | Not independent. Self-published. |
| Social media posts (even verified accounts) | No | Not reliable. No editorial oversight. |
| Paid advertorial or sponsored content | No | Not independent. Paid placement. |
| Directory listing (Yelp, Google Maps, etc.) | No | User-generated, no editorial analysis. |
| Blog post by an independent blogger | Usually No | Lacks editorial oversight. Exception: established expert blogs with editorial standards. |
| Awards from industry organizations | Maybe | The award itself is not a source, but independent coverage of the award can be. |
Subject-Specific Notability Guidelines
Beyond the general guideline, Wikipedia has subject-specific criteria. For organizations and companies, the relevant guideline is WP:NCORP. It adds that an organization may be notable if it:
- Is the topic of significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable secondary sources.
- Has been the subject of a significant investigation or legal proceeding (with independent coverage).
- Has played a significant role in a notable event (with independent coverage).
For people, WP:NPEOPLE applies. A person may be notable if they have made "widely recognized contributions" to their field, or if they meet the GNG through independent source coverage.
Have Wikipedia-Level
Notability?"] --> B{"3+ independent reliable
sources with significant
coverage?"} B -->|Yes| C{"Coverage is about
the entity specifically,
not just a mention?"} B -->|No| D["Not Yet Notable
Build media coverage first"] C -->|Yes| E{"Sources are independent
(not paid, affiliated,
or self-published)?"} C -->|No| D E -->|Yes| F["Likely Notable
Proceed with caution"] E -->|No| D F --> G["Draft Article
(See Session 5.6)"] D --> H["Focus on Wikidata
Build Press Coverage
Publish Credible Works"] style A fill:#222221,stroke:#c8a882,color:#ede9e3 style D fill:#222221,stroke:#c47a5a,color:#ede9e3 style F fill:#222221,stroke:#6b8f71,color:#ede9e3 style G fill:#222221,stroke:#6b8f71,color:#ede9e3 style H fill:#222221,stroke:#c8a882,color:#ede9e3
The Honest Assessment
Most small and medium businesses do not meet Wikipedia's notability standards. This is not a failure. It is a reality of Wikipedia's editorial standards. A company with 50 employees, $5M in revenue, and no major press coverage is a legitimate, successful business. It is not, by Wikipedia's standards, an entity that warrants an encyclopedic entry.
If your honest assessment is "not yet notable," the right response is not to try anyway. It is to build the coverage that will make you notable:
- Earn press coverage in trade publications and regional or national media. Not paid placements. Genuine editorial coverage.
- Publish a book with a recognized publisher (or self-publish with ISBN and library distribution). Published authorship is a strong notability signal.
- Speak at notable events and ensure independent coverage of your participation.
- Contribute to industry reports or academic publications where you are cited as a source.
- Win independently judged awards that receive their own press coverage.
This is a 12-36 month strategy for most entities. It cannot be shortcut by hiring a Wikipedia editing service (which violates Wikipedia's conflict of interest policies) or by creating an article prematurely (which results in deletion and makes future creation harder).
What Happens When an Article Is Deleted
If you create a Wikipedia article for an entity that does not meet notability standards, the article will likely be nominated for deletion within days. The deletion discussion is public. If the article is deleted, the deletion record remains. Future attempts to recreate the article face an even higher burden of proof because editors can point to the previous deletion.
This is why an honest notability assessment is critical. A premature attempt does not just fail. It makes success harder later.
Further Reading
- Wikipedia. "Wikipedia: Notability (General Notability Guideline)." Wikipedia Policies.
- Wikipedia. "Wikipedia: Notability (Organizations and Companies)." Wikipedia Guidelines.
- Wikipedia. "Wikipedia: Conflict of Interest." Wikipedia Policies.
- Wikipedia. "Wikipedia: Articles for Deletion." Wikipedia Processes.
Assignment
- Search for independent, reliable sources that provide significant coverage of your business or you as a person. List every qualifying source with its URL, publication name, and date.
- For each source, evaluate honestly: Is the coverage significant (not just a passing mention)? Is the source reliable (editorial oversight)? Is the source independent (not paid or affiliated)?
- Count your qualifying sources. If you have three or more, proceed to Session 5.6. If you have fewer than three, create a 12-month plan to build the coverage needed.
- If your entity does not yet meet notability standards, identify three specific press coverage opportunities you can pursue in the next 6 months (trade publications, regional media, speaking engagements).