Starting a Wikipedia page for your business means running five steps in order: check notability against WP:NCORP before you write anything, audit your independent sources, draft neutral content with disclosed conflict of interest, submit through Articles for Creation (AfC) or direct publishing, then monitor the page for 90 days after it goes live. Most companies fail at step one — not because the writing is bad, but because the independent coverage required to survive review does not exist yet. As of July 2026, a realistic end-to-end timeline runs 3–12 weeks and a professionally managed project costs €600–€2,000+ depending on language and complexity.
TL;DR
- Notability self-check first: you need multiple pieces of independent, in-depth press coverage — not your own website, interviews, or press releases. This single gate explains most rejections.
- DIY costs $0 in cash but weeks of learning curve and the highest deletion risk. A Fiverr/Upwork freelancer runs roughly $150–$800 with inconsistent compliance. A specialized agency runs from €600 to €1,930+ for an English company page, 3–4 weeks, with a defined refund policy.
- Articles for Creation (AfC) review adds 3–8 weeks on top of your own drafting time — nobody, including paid agencies, can buy priority in the volunteer review queue.
- Conflict-of-interest disclosure (WP:COI, WP:PAID) is not optional if you or an agency are being compensated to write the page — skipping it is the fastest route to deletion, not the fastest route to publication.
- Expect a 90-day post-publication monitoring window: this is when most new company pages get nominated for deletion (AfD) if sourcing was thin.
Do you qualify? The notability self-check first
Before drafting a single sentence, run the check that decides whether the rest of this process is worth doing. Wikipedia's notability standard for organizations is WP:NCORP, a stricter subset of the general notability guideline (WP:GNG). It requires multiple, independent, reliable sources that discuss your company in depth — not passing mentions, not a listing, not a press release republished by a trade outlet.
Sources that do not count toward notability: your own website, interviews where your executives supply the quotes, sponsored content, press releases (even ones picked up verbatim by news sites), Crunchbase-style directory listings, and local business awards. Sources that generally do count: independent investigative or feature journalism in outlets with editorial standards, analyst reports that discuss you substantively, and books or academic papers that cover your company as a subject rather than a source.
If you run this audit honestly and come up short, the correct move is not to draft anyway and hope — it's to build coverage first, or accept that a page is premature. Our own data mirrors this: roughly three in ten prospective projects should stop at this gate, because pushing forward without qualifying sources produces a page that gets deleted within the 90-day window, not a live one. For a deeper breakdown of what counts, see does your company qualify for Wikipedia.
How it works: the 6-step process from source audit to published page
Step 1 — Notability audit. List every independent source discussing your company, score each for depth and independence, and map the total against WP:NCORP. This can be done yourself with a spreadsheet or paid as a standalone service (professional audits typically run €490–€1,900 depending on depth, often credited toward a full project if you proceed).
Step 2 — Source verification and gap analysis. For sources that pass, confirm they're archived and stable (dead links get pages flagged). For gaps, decide whether to wait for coverage to develop or to stop here.
Step 3 — Neutral drafting. Write in Wikipedia's encyclopedic, third-person, sourced-claim style — every factual sentence needs a citation to an independent source. Promotional language (superlatives, unsourced claims of being "the leading" or "award-winning") gets stripped by reviewers or triggers rejection outright. See Wikipedia's reliable sources guide for what a citation actually needs to hold up.
Step 4 — Conflict-of-interest disclosure. If you, your employee, or a paid agency is writing the page, WP:COI and the Terms of Use both require disclosure on your user page and, where relevant, the article's talk page. This is a compliance step, not a formality — see the dedicated section below.
Step 5 — Submission via AfC or direct publishing. New, unconfirmed accounts are generally funneled into the AfC review queue; confirmed/experienced accounts can publish directly to mainspace but carry more personal risk if the page draws scrutiny. Most professionals use AfC because it front-loads reviewer feedback before the page is publicly live.
Step 6 — Post-publication monitoring. The first 90 days after publication are the highest-risk window for an Articles for Deletion (AfD) nomination. Someone needs to watch the page, respond to edits, and be ready to argue notability if it's nominated.
DIY vs freelancer vs professional agency: cost, risk, and time
| Route | Cost (2026) | Typical timeline | Deletion risk | COI compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DIY (yourself) | $0 cash, 20–40+ hrs of your time | 4–10 weeks (learning curve + review) | High — most self-written company pages read as promotional and get declined or deleted | Depends entirely on you knowing WP:COI exists |
| Freelancer (Fiverr/Upwork-type) | Roughly $150–$800 | 1–4 weeks to draft, review time on top | Medium-to-high — pricing this low rarely includes a real source audit or ongoing defense | Inconsistent; disclosure is often skipped |
| Specialized agency | From €600 for smaller-language tiers; €1,930 for an English company page | 3–4 weeks to draft and submit, plus AfC review time | Lower, if the agency runs a real notability gate and defends the page through review | Built into the process — disclosure filed as part of the project |
The honest caveat on the DIY and freelancer rows: cost isn't the only variable. A $200 freelancer draft that skips the notability audit and the COI disclosure isn't cheaper than a €1,930 managed project — it's the same money spent with the risk deferred to a deletion six weeks later. For a full cost breakdown by route and language, see what a Wikipedia page actually costs.
Getting through review: AfC vs direct publishing
Articles for Creation exists as a pre-publication review queue: you submit a draft, a volunteer reviewer checks it against notability and sourcing standards, and either accepts it (it goes live), declines it with feedback (you can revise and resubmit), or occasionally speedy-deletes it if it's clearly promotional (CSD). AfC review typically takes 3–8 weeks as of July 2026, though it can run longer — the queue is processed by unpaid volunteers in no fixed order, and no agency can pay for priority placement. Direct publishing skips this queue but exposes the page immediately to New Page Patrol, where a poorly sourced article can be tagged for PROD (proposed deletion) or nominated for AfD (Articles for Deletion) within days. For exact expected timelines by scenario, see how long a Wikipedia page actually takes.
Disclosing conflict of interest: WP:COI and WP:PAID, done right
If you're paid — as an employee, contractor, or agency — to create or edit an article, Wikipedia's Terms of Use require disclosure, enforced through the WP:PAID policy (a subset of the broader WP:COI conflict-of-interest guideline). Practically, this means: declaring the paid relationship on your user page, using the "Suggest an edit" mechanism or a clearly disclosed edit request rather than editing mainspace directly if you're closely connected to the subject, and being upfront in AfC submissions.
Skipping disclosure is not a shortcut — it's the single fastest way to get a page deleted regardless of how well-sourced it is, because undisclosed paid editing is treated as a policy violation independent of content quality, and discovery often triggers a broader audit of everything connected to that account.
What happens after publication — the 90-day risk window
Publication is not the finish line. New company pages draw the most deletion scrutiny in the 90 days immediately after going live, because that's when New Page Patrol and other editors are most likely to review them. If a page is nominated for AfD, someone needs to argue notability with sources in the discussion — silence is read as abandonment and tends to end in deletion. If a page does get deleted, REFUND (requests for undeletion) or a fresh DRV (deletion review) are the paths back, though neither is guaranteed. A managed process should include this monitoring by default rather than leaving you to notice the deletion after the fact.
FAQ
How much does it cost to start a Wikipedia page for a business in 2026?
DIY is free in cash but costly in time and risk. Freelancers typically run $150–$800 with inconsistent compliance. Specialized agencies start around €600 for smaller-language editions and run €1,930 for a fully managed English company page, with notability audits priced separately at €490–€1,900.
Can I write my own company's Wikipedia page?
You can attempt it, but Wikipedia strongly discourages directly editing mainspace about your own company due to conflict of interest, and self-written pages are disproportionately declined or deleted for promotional tone. Using the "Suggest an edit" process or AfC with clear disclosure is the compliant path.
Is it legal to pay someone to write a Wikipedia page?
Yes — paying for the work is legal. What's required is disclosure under WP:PAID; undisclosed paid editing violates Wikipedia's Terms of Use and is grounds for account blocks and page deletion, independent of the writing quality.
How long does the whole process take from start to a published page?
Realistically 3–12 weeks: your own drafting and sourcing time (1–4 weeks) plus AfC review (3–8 weeks), which runs on a volunteer queue nobody can expedite.
What if my company doesn't qualify yet?
The correct move is to build independent press coverage first rather than draft anyway. A notability audit will tell you specifically what's missing — that's cheaper than a declined draft or a deletion later.
Does a Wikipedia page help with AI search visibility?
Yes — Wikipedia is one of the most frequently cited sources by AI answer engines (ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity) when describing companies, which is why source quality and neutral framing matter beyond the page itself.
If you want a compliance-first read on whether your company qualifies before spending anything, WikiBusines runs notability and source audits from €490, credited toward the full project if you proceed — details on pricing and the full managed process are worth reviewing before you draft a word.