"Can we get a Wikipedia page?" is one of the first questions companies ask us. The honest answer is that it isn't up to you, or to us. It's up to whether independent publications have already written about you in enough depth. Wikipedia calls this notability, and its rules for companies are stricter than most people expect.
Here's the test in plain language, so you can tell whether you clear it before paying anyone.
The short version
Three independent pieces, more than one moment in time, at least one of them national or trade. That's the bar.
More precisely, Wikipedia wants to see significant coverage of your company in multiple reliable sources that are independent of you. Each of those words matters.
What each part means
Significant coverage
The piece has to be about you, at some length. A paragraph that discusses what you do, how you came to be and why it matters counts. A passing mention in a list of twenty startups doesn't. Neither does a single quote from your founder in an article about something else.
A useful check: could someone write two or three sentences about your company using only this article? If not, it probably isn't significant coverage.
Reliable sources
Established publications with editorial oversight: national newspapers, respected trade titles, books, academic work. Not blogs, not self-published sites, not content farms, and not sites where anyone can publish anything.
Independent of you
This is where most companies fall down. Coverage you paid for, wrote yourself or fed in almost word for word doesn't count. That rules out:
- press releases, and articles that simply republish them
- sponsored or advertorial content
- interviews where you're the main source and the publication adds little of its own
- your own blog, website and social channels
- pieces by partners, investors or customers with a stake in you
Multiple, over time
One great article isn't enough. Wikipedia looks for several sources, and it's wary of coverage that all comes from one moment. If every article about you was written the week you raised money, that reads as a single news event rather than lasting significance.
What doesn't count, even though it feels like it should
Funding announcements. Even in big publications, routine coverage of a funding round is usually treated as trivial. It tells the reader you raised money, not why you matter.
Awards and rankings. Being named in a "top 50" list rarely counts, especially when the list is long and the entries are short.
Size. Wikipedia doesn't care how many employees or customers you have. A large company with no independent coverage doesn't qualify; a small one written about in depth might.
Being well known in your niche. Reputation only counts once it's been written down by someone independent.
A self-assessment you can do in an hour
- Search for every article that mentions your company, and leave out anything you paid for, wrote or supplied.
- For each remaining piece, ask: is it mostly about us, in some depth? Keep only the ones where the answer is yes.
- Check the publications: are they established outlets with editors? Keep the ones that are.
- Look at the dates: do the pieces span more than one news moment?
- Count what's left.
If you have three or more strong pieces across more than one moment, including at least one national or major trade publication, you probably qualify. If you have one or two, you probably don't yet. If you're unsure, the answer is usually "not yet".
If you don't qualify yet
That's normal, and it's not a judgement on your company. It means the independent record doesn't exist yet. The fix isn't a cleverer draft. It's getting covered.
- Work out which publications cover your category and what they actually write about.
- Find the two or three stories you genuinely have that they'd want: something new you've learned, a result, a position on a debate in your industry.
- Build visibility elsewhere in the meantime. Reddit and reviews move faster and help on their own.
- Reassess in six months or so.
If you do qualify
Write it the way an encyclopedia would: neutral, factual, every claim backed by an independent source. Leave out the marketing language entirely. And be open about the conflict of interest. Wikipedia's rules require anyone paid to edit on a company's behalf to disclose it, and the recommended route for a new page is to submit a draft for review rather than publishing it directly.
Pages written as marketing get deleted, sometimes within days. Undisclosed paid editing can get a company named publicly on Wikipedia itself. The slow, open route is the only one that lasts.
Why it's worth getting right
A Wikipedia entry is one of the sources AI models trust most for hard facts about a company: what it does, when it was founded, who runs it. Without one, models fill the gap with guesswork. With a good one, they stop hedging and simply state who you are.
But a page you don't qualify for won't survive long enough to help. Check the bar first. It saves everyone a lot of time.