How to Create a Wikipedia Page: A Complete Step-by-Step Guide
Almost anyone can technically create a new Wikipedia page. That does not mean every company, founder, product, artist, or project qualifies for one. The difficult part is not learning where the Publish button is. It is demonstrating that the subject is notable, finding strong independent sources, writing without promotion, and following Wikipedia's disclosure rules.
This guide explains how to assess a topic before investing time in a draft, how to research and cite sources, what to do if you are connected to the subject, and what happens after a page is submitted or published.
The short answer: Start by checking whether the subject has significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent, secondary sources. If it does, create a neutral, fully cited draft in your own words. If you have a personal, professional, or financial connection to the subject, disclose it and submit the draft through Articles for Creation rather than publishing it directly. Publication is never a guarantee that a page will remain unchanged or permanently online.
Wikipedia is not a company profile
Wikipedia is a community-written encyclopedia. It is not a business directory, personal website, press room, or reputation-management platform. An article is not supposed to present a subject as its owner, founder, or marketing team would like it to be presented. It should summarize what reliable, independent publications have already said about the subject.
That distinction has practical consequences:
Wikipedia does not charge a fee for publishing an article;
the subject does not own or approve the final page;
independent editors can revise, challenge, merge, or remove content;
well-sourced criticism may be included when it is relevant and given appropriate weight;
professional drafting does not guarantee acceptance or permanence.
If your goal is a fully controlled brand narrative, use your website, newsroom, executive biography, or another owned channel. A Wikipedia article is appropriate only when the available sources support a genuine encyclopedic entry.
Check whether the subject is notable
The first question is not “Can we write a page?” It is “Has the subject already received enough independent coverage to support a stand-alone encyclopedia article?”
Under the English Wikipedia's general notability guideline, a topic is presumed suitable for a stand-alone article when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. “Presumed” is important: strong coverage creates a reasonable case, not an automatic right to a page.
What makes a source useful for notability?
Test | What it means | What usually fails the test |
Independent | Neither the author nor publisher has a financial, personal, or organizational connection to the subject. | Company websites, press releases, sponsored content, most interviews, client-authored material. |
Significant coverage | The source discusses the subject directly and in enough detail to support encyclopedic content. | Passing mentions, directory listings, event programmes, partner lists, database entries. |
Reliable | The publisher has appropriate editorial oversight and a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. | Anonymous blogs, content farms, uncontrolled user submissions, promotional outlets. |
There is no fixed source count
Wikipedia does not require a magic number of articles. Multiple sources are generally expected, but their quality and depth matter more than a numerical threshold. The current first-article guidance notes that many reviewers look for at least three sources, but this is a practical review expectation, not a guarantee of notability.
Five websites repeating the same press release may still represent only one originating source. By contrast, several substantial articles produced independently by respected publications can provide a much stronger foundation. Sources can be offline and do not need to be written in English, provided editors can identify and verify them.
A quick source assessment
Source type | Establishes notability? | Why |
Official company or personal website | No | Useful for limited routine facts, but not independent. |
Press release or syndicated rewrite | Usually no | The information originates with the subject. |
Sponsored article or advertorial | Usually no | Payment undermines independence. |
Short database listing | Usually no | The coverage is normally too shallow. |
Substantial profile in a reputable publication | Often | It may satisfy independence, reliability, and significant coverage. |
Analytical book or scholarly publication | Often | It can provide strong secondary coverage if the publisher and author are reliable. |
Read the companion guides What Wikipedia Notability Means and How to Identify Reliable, Independent Sources for a deeper assessment framework.
Not sure whether your sources are strong enough? Start with a notability audit before paying for a complete draft. You will learn whether the topic has a realistic foundation and which gaps still matter. Request a free source assessment
Check for existing Wikipedia content
Search Wikipedia before drafting. Use former names, abbreviations, spelling variants, subsidiaries, and the names of closely related people or organizations. Check whether:
an article already exists under a different title;
the proposed title redirects to another page or disambiguation page;
the subject is already covered within a broader article;
a previous version was deleted or discussed at Articles for Deletion;
reliable sources use a different common name for the subject.
A stand-alone page is not always the correct outcome. When coverage is too limited for a separate article, a concise, well-sourced section in a broader article may be more appropriate. This should never be used to insert advertising or bypass a previous community decision.
Build a source-led research file
Do not write the page from company materials and then search for citations that appear to support it. Reverse the order: investigate the sources first and allow them to determine what belongs in the draft.
A practical source matrix contains four columns:
full citation and URL or archive reference;
author, publisher, and publication date;
the facts or viewpoints the source directly supports;
an assessment of independence, depth, reliability, and whether it is primary or secondary.
Separate sources that help establish notability from sources used only to verify individual details. A government register may confirm an incorporation date, for example, but does not normally prove that a company merits a stand-alone article.
Record disagreements between sources instead of silently choosing the version preferred by the subject. If reliable publications differ on a founding date, number of employees, attribution, or the significance of an event, the draft should represent that uncertainty accurately and proportionately.
Primary sources may sometimes support straightforward, uncontroversial facts, but they should be used sparingly. They do not establish notability and should not be interpreted to reach conclusions that no reliable secondary source has published.
Handle conflicts of interest and paid editing
A conflict of interest exists when you write about yourself, an employer, client, family member, organization you represent, product you sell, or another closely connected subject. Even if you believe you can write neutrally, the relationship creates an appearance of bias and makes independent judgement difficult.
The English Wikipedia strongly discourages editors with a conflict of interest from editing affected articles directly. It advises them to disclose the relationship, propose changes on talk pages, and put new articles through the Articles for Creation process for independent review.
If you receive or expect compensation for a contribution, you must disclose:
your employer — the person or organization paying you;
the client on whose behalf the work is performed;
your relevant affiliation with the subject or contribution.
The disclosure may be made on your user page, on the relevant talk page, or in an edit summary. English Wikipedia also requires paid contributors to use a registered account rather than a temporary account. A confidentiality agreement does not override the disclosure requirement. Paid editors who cannot make the required disclosure are prohibited from editing.
Disclosure does not turn promotional copy into acceptable encyclopedia content. The subject must still be notable, every claim must remain verifiable, the draft must be neutral, and copyright rules must be respected. See Paid Wikipedia Editing: Disclosure and Ethical Practice for a complete process.
Write a neutral encyclopedic draft
A neutral article does not say how a subject wants to be perceived. It summarizes significant viewpoints published by reliable sources and gives them weight in proportion to their prominence in those sources. This applies to favourable coverage and well-documented criticism alike.
Remove promotional language
first-person phrases such as “we provide” or “our customers”;
unsupported superlatives such as “leading,” “revolutionary,” “world-class,” or “unique”;
catalogues of products, services, locations, prices, awards, or partnerships without encyclopedic relevance;
corporate mission statements, slogans, calls to action, and sales claims;
vague praise such as “customers value its exceptional quality”;
conclusions or comparisons that no cited source has explicitly published;
selective use of positive sources while omitting significant, reliably documented criticism.
Marketing copy | Encyclopedic treatment |
“The company is the leading provider in its category.” | Include a specific, relevant fact attributed to an independent source. Remove the claim if no suitable source supports it. |
“Its innovative solution transformed the market.” | Describe the product or event factually and summarize documented impact without promotional adjectives. |
“Customers worldwide trust the brand.” | Do not use vague social proof. Include only a relevant, methodologically sound independent study or attributed assessment. |
A possible structure for a company article
a concise lead defining the organization and its significance;
history and major developments covered by independent sources;
activities only to the extent they receive encyclopedic coverage;
ownership and leadership where relevant;
reception, independently recognized achievements, and significant controversies;
references, relevant internal links, and categories.
A biography will usually focus on early life, career, work, reception, and significant awards. Content about living people requires exceptional care: contentious material, whether negative, positive, or neutral, must be supported by high-quality inline citations. See Wikipedia Pages for Companies and Wikipedia Pages for Founders and Public Figures for topic-specific considerations.
Use Draft space and cite every challengeable claim
English Wikipedia recommends that new editors use the Article Wizard, which creates a page in Draft space and guides the submission process. A personal sandbox is useful for learning the editor, but Draft space is the appropriate route for a draft intended for review through Articles for Creation.
Add inline citations while writing. Do not place a list of sources at the end with no clear connection to individual claims. A reader should be able to identify which reference supports each challengeable statement. For online material, include the title, author, publication, date, URL, and access date when available.
Before submission, check that:
the first sentence identifies the subject in plain English;
the lead explains the topic without sales language;
each challenged or likely-to-be-challenged statement has an inline citation;
quotations and contentious claims about living people are impeccably sourced;
sections reflect the weight of coverage in reliable sources;
internal Wikipedia links, categories, and any infobox are relevant and restrained;
the text is original and has not been copied from a website, press pack, or publication;
every citation actually supports the sentence attached to it.
Owning the source website does not automatically give you the right to copy its wording into Wikipedia. Wikipedia uses free licences, and copied material can create copyright problems even when the client supplied it.
English Wikipedia's current first-article guidance also tells contributors not to use large language models to generate Wikipedia article content. AI tools can invent facts and references, and the person making the edit remains responsible for every contribution. Any professional workflow should therefore rely on human research, source verification, writing, and review rather than unverified automated drafting.
Submit or publish the article correctly
If you have a conflict of interest, you should not move the article directly into mainspace. Disclose the relationship and submit the draft through Articles for Creation, where an independent reviewer may accept it or provide feedback.
An experienced editor without a conflict may move a ready draft directly to mainspace, but a live page is not the same as a formally approved page. New pages can be reviewed by volunteers, tagged for problems, edited, redirected, merged, nominated for deletion, or speedily deleted when they meet specific criteria.
Use a clear and truthful edit summary. Do not use several accounts to create the appearance of independent support, coordinate undisclosed advocacy, or pressure volunteers to approve a commercial outcome.
Understand what happens after publication
Publication begins a community process; it does not end one. Editors may improve the page, challenge its sourcing, add missing context, or open a deletion discussion. A reviewer may also decline an Articles for Creation submission and explain what needs improvement.
Respond with concise, policy-based arguments and reliable sources. Wikipedia discussion is not customer support, and the subject of an article does not receive editorial veto power. Clients should understand before the work begins that the precise wording cannot be controlled after publication.
Maintaining a page should mean correcting errors, updating outdated facts, and proposing well-sourced changes transparently. It should not mean removing uncomfortable but properly sourced information or repeatedly restoring a preferred version. If a page was declined or deleted, read Why Wikipedia Removed Your Article — and What to Do Next.
Common reasons for rejection or deletion
The sources do not establish notability
The draft depends on official websites, interviews, press releases, sponsored placements, databases, or passing mentions rather than substantial independent secondary coverage.
The page reads like advertising
The text uses slogans, superlatives, product lists, sales claims, or promotional images. Severe promotion can lead to speedy deletion, while less obvious issues may result in tags, rejection, or a deletion discussion.
Claims are not verifiable
Important statements have no inline citations, the references do not support the attached claim, or the selected publisher is unsuitable for that statement.
A paid relationship was not disclosed
An editor was compensated but concealed the employer, client, or affiliation. Undisclosed paid editing violates Wikimedia's terms and English Wikipedia's policy.
Copyrighted content was copied
The draft reproduces wording or images from a website, brochure, press release, news article, or another source without a compatible licence and proper attribution.
The topic duplicates existing coverage
The material belongs in an existing article, the proposed title is redundant, or the subject does not support enough encyclopedic content for a stand-alone page.
The draft contains original research
The writer combines facts to reach a conclusion that no reliable source has published, includes unpublished claims, or advances a new interpretation.
How long does Wikipedia page creation take?
There is no universal timeline. The availability and complexity of sources matter most. Researching and preparing a strong draft may take days or weeks when substantial coverage already exists. If independent coverage does not exist, spending more time on writing will not solve the underlying problem. Notability cannot be manufactured by producing a draft or commissioning sponsored media placements.
Articles for Creation review times vary according to the volunteer backlog and complexity of the submission. There is no deadline by which a reviewer must accept or decline a draft. Likewise, there is no period after publication when an article becomes permanently “approved.” Wikipedia content can be reassessed whenever new concerns or evidence arise.
Stage | Deliverable | What can slow it down |
Initial assessment | A go/no-go decision based on real-world sourcing | Ambiguous subject identity or insufficient independent coverage. |
Research | A source matrix and set of verifiable claims | Archives, paywalls, multiple languages, and conflicting reports. |
Drafting | A neutral article with inline citations | Complex history, living-person issues, or controversial claims. |
Disclosure and submission | A transparent Draft-space submission | Conflict-of-interest requirements and incomplete disclosure. |
Community review | Acceptance, feedback, revision, or decline | Volunteer capacity and the quality of the draft; timing cannot be guaranteed. |
Should you create the page yourself or hire a specialist?
You can create a Wikipedia article yourself, and Wikipedia does not charge a publishing fee. A do-it-yourself approach may be appropriate if you understand the sourcing rules, have no close connection to the topic, and are prepared to accept independent community decisions.
Professional help can be valuable for notability assessment, source research, neutral drafting, citation management, disclosure, and navigating Articles for Creation. You are paying for professional work, not buying space on Wikipedia. An ethical provider cannot guarantee acceptance, exact wording, a Knowledge Panel, search rankings, AI visibility, or permanent publication.
Before hiring a provider, ask whether they:
begin with an independent-source audit;
will tell you when a subject does not qualify;
explain paid-editing disclosure and Articles for Creation;
reject undisclosed accounts, promotional drafting, and permanence claims;
provide the research file and explain post-publication responsibilities;
distinguish commercial refund terms from Wikipedia community decisions.
Would you like an evidence-based answer before commissioning a full article? CTRL M starts by assessing sources and notability. If the available evidence is not strong enough, you should know before a draft is created. Book a free notability consultation
Frequently asked questions
Can anyone create a Wikipedia page?
Almost anyone can technically start a draft, but the topic and content must satisfy Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. The ability to publish does not create a right to a stand-alone article.
How many sources do I need for a Wikipedia page?
There is no fixed number. Multiple independent, reliable, secondary sources with significant coverage are generally expected. Reviewers often look for at least three sources, but three weak or connected publications do not guarantee notability.
Can I use the company's own website as a source?
A company website may support limited, routine, non-contentious facts. It is a primary, self-published source and does not establish notability. It should not be used for promotional or contentious claims.
Can I create a page for my company or for myself?
Wikipedia strongly discourages writing about a subject to which you are personally or professionally connected. If you proceed, disclose the conflict and submit the draft through Articles for Creation for independent review. Paid contributions require an additional disclosure of the employer, client, and affiliation.
How much does a Wikipedia page cost?
Wikipedia charges nothing to create or publish an article. An independent consultant may charge for research, source assessment, drafting, and process support. That fee is for professional services, not for placement on Wikipedia.
Can anyone guarantee that my page will be accepted?
No. A reviewer or the broader community decides whether the article meets Wikipedia's requirements. Guaranteed acceptance or permanent publication is a warning sign when choosing a provider.
Will I control the page after it is published?
No. Anyone may edit the article in accordance with Wikipedia's rules. The subject cannot approve the wording or remove properly sourced information simply because it is inconvenient.
Can I translate an existing Czech Wikipedia article into English?
Not automatically. English Wikipedia has its own community, policies, and submission processes. The translated topic must satisfy English Wikipedia's requirements; the translation must preserve licensing and attribution and read naturally in English. Sources do not have to be in English, but they must remain identifiable and verifiable. See Translating a Wikipedia Article into English for the complete workflow.
Recommended next articles
What Wikipedia Notability Means and How to Prove It
Which Sources Wikipedia Accepts
Why Wikipedia Deleted Your Article
Paid Wikipedia Editing: Disclosure and Transparency
Official sources and further reading
CTRL M is not affiliated with the Wikimedia Foundation. This guide is provided for general information. Wikimedia policies and community processes can change, so always check the current official guidance before contributing.
Comments