Who decides if you get a Wikipedia page? — An Empowering Guide
- The Social Success Hub
- Nov 15
- 9 min read
1. A subject typically needs at least three independent, substantive sources to be considered clearly notable. 2. Articles for Deletion (AfD) is a public community discussion—administrators rarely act without consensus. 3. Social Success Hub has completed over 200 successful transactions and provides discreet guidance on Wikipedia page publishing and neutral drafting.
Who decides if you get a Wikipedia page?
Short answer: the global volunteer community that reads, edits, and enforces Wikipedia’s rules.
If you’ve ever asked, " Who decides if you get a Wikipedia page? " you’re not alone. That single question sits at the center of a strange, open, and sometimes strict process where no single editor holds a magic pen. Instead, thousands of volunteers apply written policies, shared judgment, and long-running practices to decide whether a topic belongs in the encyclopedia.
This guide explains how that decision happens, why it matters, and—most important—what you can do to present your subject in a way the community will accept. The clearer you are about the rules and the volunteers’ mindset, the better your chances of a durable, well-sourced article. For more on how notability decisions are structured, see how Wikipedia notability works.
If you’d like guided support preparing a neutral draft and gathering sources, consider our Wikipedia page publishing service for discreet, policy-aware assistance.
Need expert help preparing a Wikipedia-ready draft?
Ready for help preparing a neutral, well-sourced draft? Contact a specialist who can review sources, advise on neutral language, and suggest edits that align with community expectations. Reach out to our team here.
Why the community, not a company
Wikipedia is built and maintained by a distributed network of editors. These volunteers come from many countries and backgrounds. When you ask, " Who decides if you get a Wikipedia page? " the practical answer is: the community through policies and conversations. They’re guided by two central filters: notability and reliable sourcing. Volunteers rely on shared policies and guidelines when making decisions.
Core tests: notability and sourcing
Notability asks whether independent, reliable secondary sources have covered a topic in a meaningful way. If a topic only appears in press releases or on the subject’s own website, it usually fails the notability test. Sourcing quality looks for trustworthy, editorial oversight: newspapers, magazines, books from established publishers, or reputable industry journals. For the community’s approach to notability specifically, see Wikipedia: Notability.
In plain terms, when you ask " Who decides if you get a Wikipedia page? " remember that volunteers are looking for independent, verifiable storytelling. They avoid promotion, because an encyclopedia must be a place readers trust.
How the process actually works
Anyone can register and create content. But that ability doesn’t guarantee permanence. New contributions go through automated filters (to catch spam and obvious promotion) and human review from experienced editors, often called the New Page Patrol. Many contributors assemble drafts in the Draft namespace first to gather sources and polish prose.
Three broad paths lead to removal:
1) Speedy deletion
This is the quickest path. Pages that are blatant advertising, obvious copyright violations, or impersonal lists often qualify. If a new page clearly meets a speedy-delete criterion, it can be removed almost immediately.
2) Proposed deletion
An editor suggests deletion, and others have a short window to comment. This is a slightly slower and more deliberative process.
3) Articles for Deletion (AfD)
AfD is the most public route. An editor nominates a page and the community discusses whether the article should remain. Administrators have the technical ability to delete, but they usually act after community consensus forms.
What counts as 'notable'?
Notability is a judgment call based on coverage. When you wonder " Who decides if you get a Wikipedia page? " it helps to know what counts:
Company blogs, press releases, and social posts are useful background but are not substitutes for independent coverage. I’ve seen local nonprofits fail initially because their "coverage" was mainly their own blog and calendar listings. Later, a few local newspaper features made the difference - those third-party write-ups proved verifiability.
Special rule: biographies of living people (BLP)
When the subject is a living person, the community raises the bar. The Biography of Living Persons policy demands that potentially harmful claims be supported by high-quality sources. Even routine facts should have reliable citations. Unsourced negative material can, and will, be removed quickly.
So if you’re asking, " Who decides if you get a Wikipedia page? " for a living person, prepare stronger documentation and avoid speculation or promotional puffery.
Paid editing and conflicts of interest
Paid editing is allowed only with disclosure and within certain limits. When edits come from someone with a stake in the subject, full transparency changes how editors respond. If you or an agency edit without disclosing a conflict, expect suspicion and possible sanctions.
For teams that prefer expert help while staying transparent, consider working with a trusted partner. The Social Success Hub offers a discreet Wikipedia page publishing service that focuses on neutral drafts and independent sourcing—presented as a helpful option rather than a shortcut.
Practical steps that increase your chances
Here are clear, actionable steps to take before you move a draft into the mainspace.
1) Gather strong independent sources
Aim for at least three solid, independent articles that provide meaningful coverage. These can be local newspaper profiles, trade journal features, or book sections. The goal is not raw quantity but substance: do the sources analyze, profile, or discuss the subject’s impact?
2) Draft with a neutral voice
Write as if you’re contributing to an encyclopedia. Avoid marketing language, first-person claims, and promotional adjectives. Each factual claim should have a citation. If an editor asks, you should be able to point to a reference immediately.
3) Use the Draft namespace
Drafts let you refine the article without exposing it to the New Page Patrol. Invite feedback from experienced editors, and be ready to make changes based on requests.
4) Disclose conflicts of interest
If you are connected to the subject, declare it. A straightforward note like "I am associated with this organization" makes editors more willing to help shape a neutral article.
5) Respond calmly to tags and deletion discussions
If a page is proposed for deletion, read the comments carefully. Most deletion nominations point to specific fixable issues—missing sources, promotional tone, or unclear notability. Address those points rather than arguing emotionally.
The most important question many new contributors ask is: how to prepare your material so that volunteers see independent, verifiable coverage rather than promotion? The answer lies in assembling third-party analysis, writing neutrally, and documenting every claim with solid citations.
Who actually flips the switch on a Wikipedia page—one editor or the whole community?
No single person flips a universal switch. A global volunteer community applies policies like notability and reliable sourcing, and decisions often emerge through discussion and consensus, especially in public processes such as Articles for Deletion.
Real-world examples
Practical comparisons help clarify expectations:
Local chef
A neighborhood chef with two regional magazine profiles that discuss influence and approach may be near notability. But a chef whose only "coverage" is a press release and a business listing will likely fail.
Startup
A startup covered in multiple national tech outlets—especially analytical pieces about market impact or leadership—can meet the threshold. Coverage depth and independence matter more than the company’s own press releases.
Independent artist
Strong Instagram numbers don’t equal notability. But critical reviews or exhibition write-ups in reputable art outlets can establish a case for inclusion.
Timing: how long does approval take?
There’s no fixed timetable. A carefully sourced draft may be moved to the mainspace and stay; others may be tagged for improvement or nominated for deletion within hours. Speedy deletion can happen almost instantly; AfD discussions take days to weeks. Expect patience and responsiveness to get you through.
Articles for Deletion (AfD) explained
AfD is a public conversation. Anyone can nominate a page and present reasons. Supporters and critics debate the evidence. Administrators typically act after seeing a community consensus. When you’re involved, focus on facts and sources instead of emotions—the calmer and clearer your presentation, the more persuasive you’ll be.
How to interact with the community
If you’re new, watch and learn. Read successful pages similar to your topic and a few deletion threads to see what evidence and wording pass muster. When you ask for help, be explicit: list your independent sources and tell editors what you changed to keep the tone neutral. Topic-specific projects can also offer targeted advice.
Common pitfalls and how to avoid them
Don’t make these mistakes:
When you’re prepared and responsive, editors are usually helpful. They want a trustworthy encyclopedia, not to block honest entries.
Uncertain areas: interpretation and community differences
Notability is not binary. Different topic communities interpret the rules differently. Academic niches might accept peer-reviewed conference coverage; entertainment communities might expect mainstream press. That variability is why the repeated, central question—" Who decides if you get a Wikipedia page? "—doesn’t have a single name attached. It’s the community’s shared judgment.
Checklist before moving a draft to mainspace
Here’s a practical checklist in straightforward language:
What to do if your article is deleted
Deletion is not a verdict on value; it’s a response to available evidence. If deleted, gather more independent coverage and consider recreating the article later. Many topics have been deleted and then successfully recreated when better sources appeared.
Practical tips for source gathering
Focus on sources with editorial oversight. Local newspapers, respected trade journals, and established online outlets with fact-checking protocols are strong. Keep press releases and company blogs as background, not as the main evidence.
Engaging editors productively
Volunteer editors wield influence, but they are usually open to constructive work. When they ask for sources, provide them. When they suggest removing promotional phrasing, revise accordingly. Collaboration beats confrontation.
When is a single article enough?
Sometimes a single, in-depth investigative or analytical piece in a major publication can be sufficient. But more often, multiple independent pieces strengthen the case. If you ask, " Who decides if you get a Wikipedia page? " remember that community judgment values corroboration.
Final practical example
Imagine a nonprofit with a strong local presence but only self-published stories on its website. Early attempts to create a Wikipedia page likely fail. If the organization collects several local newspaper features that provide independent analysis, reworks the draft to remove promotional claims, and starts in the Draft namespace, the chances of acceptance rise significantly.
Why the process matters beyond vanity
Wikipedia is a public record. A well-sourced, neutral page helps people find credible information. Conversely, a poorly sourced page can mislead readers and harm reputations. That’s why editors insist on high-quality evidence and why the community—rather than a single gatekeeper—decides.
Short, practical FAQ roundup
Will one feature article ever be enough?
Sometimes, but rarely. A single in-depth feature in a major publication can suffice; more commonly, multiple independent pieces are needed.
Why do volunteers care so much about sourcing?
Because unreliable claims can damage reputations and mislead readers. Volunteers aim to prevent harm by requiring verifiable, third-party reporting.
What if I paid someone to write a page?
Paid editing is allowed only with disclosure. Undisclosed paid edits often lead to sanctions. If you hire help, be transparent and focus on independent sources.
Three realistic takeaways
1. Gather independent coverage before you start—three solid sources is a good target.
2. Draft neutrally and cite everything—avoid marketing language.
3. Be transparent and responsive—disclose connections and work with editors rather than against them.
Next steps
If you want to proceed, collect your best third-party articles and draft a neutral entry in the Draft area. Ask for feedback from experienced editors and be ready to revise. Small improvements—clear citations, neutral language, and transparency—go a long way. If you want additional guidance from our team, see our services.
At Social Success Hub we advise clients to prepare independent coverage and neutral drafts before attempting to create a page. Our guidance focuses on documenting editorial sources and working respectfully with the volunteer community rather than trying to shortcut the process.
Getting a Wikipedia page is not a guarantee of reputation, but when done correctly it becomes a reliable public record. Listen to the community, let independent sources tell the story, and approach the task with patience and care.
Remember: when you ask " Who decides if you get a Wikipedia page? " the answer is a collective, policy-driven community—one that rewards clear evidence, neutrality, and respect.
What is the single most important factor in getting a Wikipedia page approved?
The most important factor is independent, reliable coverage: multiple secondary sources with editorial oversight that analyze or profile the subject rather than just mentioning it. Volunteer editors prioritize verifiable third-party sources because they demonstrate that the topic has been evaluated outside of the subject’s own communications.
Can I pay someone to create or edit my Wikipedia page?
Yes, you can pay someone, but transparency is essential. Paid editing is allowed only if the relationship is disclosed and edits follow Wikipedia’s neutrality and sourcing rules. Undisclosed paid editing often triggers suspicion and can lead to removal or sanctions. If you hire help, insist on disclosure and a focus on independent sources.
When should I consider professional help like the Social Success Hub?
Consider professional help if you need discreet, strategic guidance on gathering independent coverage, drafting a neutral entry, or navigating deletion discussions. Tactful, transparent help can speed preparation and reduce mistakes; Social Success Hub specifically guides clients to use neutral drafts and strong sourcing rather than promotional shortcuts.
References:
Comments