Call or WhatsApp us anytime
Mail Us For Support
Call or WhatsApp us anytime
Mail Us For Support
Find out in about two minutes whether a person, company, brand or creative work is likely to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Get an instant score, a source-by-source breakdown and a clear roadmap. No sign-up, no email, nothing stored. Built by the Wikipedia and Knowledge Panel team at Stay Digital Marketers.
A free tool by Stay Digital Marketers
You are likely notable enough for Wikipedia if at least three independent, reliable publications have written in-depth articles mainly about you, your company or your work. Press releases, interviews, sponsored posts and your own website do not count. Use the checker above to test your coverage.
Wikipedia editors judge every new article by its sources, not by how impressive the subject sounds. This is why many successful founders, brands and artists still get their drafts declined. Our Wikipedia notability checker applies the same four tests editors use, so you can see where you stand before you spend time or money on an article.
The source discusses the subject directly and in detail. A passing mention, a quote or a list entry is not enough.
Written by someone with no ties to the subject. Press releases, sponsored posts and your own website fail this test.
Published by an outlet with editorial oversight and a reputation for fact-checking, such as established newspapers and trade publications.
The writer analyzes or explains the subject rather than just repeating what the subject said, as in most interviews.
Most notability tools make you wait for a report or hand over your email. This one gives you a scored result on the spot and shows its reasoning.
We search your chosen language edition of Wikipedia for an existing article, an earlier deletion or a pending draft, and check Wikidata for an entity record.
Your answers map to the General Notability Guideline and the specific guideline for your category. Pasted links are rated against Wikipedia's perennial sources list.
You get a 0 to 100 notability score, a pass or fail on each of the four tests, a table of every source and a list of actions to close the gaps.
At Stay Digital Marketers, our team works on Wikipedia page creation, Google Knowledge Panels and digital PR for people and brands in more than 30 countries. The first question almost every client asks is simple: do I qualify for Wikipedia?
We built this checker to answer that question honestly before anyone spends time or money on a draft. It turns Wikipedia's published notability guidelines into a short, plain-language assessment, and it tells you what to fix when you are not there yet.
Stay Digital Marketers is not affiliated with Wikipedia or the Wikimedia Foundation. Our questions and scoring follow Wikipedia's public guidelines, including the General Notability Guideline, WP:BIO, WP:NCORP and other subject-specific guidelines. Only Wikipedia's volunteer editors decide whether an article is accepted. Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, and our source ratings draw on Wikipedia's perennial sources list (CC BY-SA).
On top of the general rule, Wikipedia has subject-specific notability guidelines. Some add alternative ways to qualify, others make the bar stricter.
| Subject | Guideline | What editors look for |
|---|---|---|
| People | WP:BIO | Significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Being known only for one event is usually not enough. |
| Companies and organizations | WP:NCORP | Multiple in-depth, independent sources. Routine news such as funding rounds, product launches, hires and partnerships is treated as trivial. At least one source should be regional, national or international. |
| Musicians and bands | WP:NMUSIC | A hit on a national music chart, a gold certification, a major music award, or albums on a major or important independent label, plus real coverage. |
| Authors and journalists | WP:AUTHOR | Work that is the subject of multiple independent reviews, is widely cited by peers, or introduced a significant new idea. |
| Academics | WP:NPROF | Substantial impact shown by citations, a highly prestigious award, an elected fellowship, a named chair or editing a major journal. This guideline can apply even without general news coverage. |
| Athletes | WP:NSPORT | Participation alone is no longer enough. Athletes also need significant coverage in independent reliable sources. |
| Actors and entertainers | WP:ENT | Significant roles in multiple notable films, shows or productions, or a large, documented fan base. |
| Films, books, albums and games | WP:NFILM, WP:NBOOK | Multiple full-length reviews by recognized critics or publications. |
Source: Wikipedia's notability guideline and its subject-specific guidelines, summarized by Stay Digital Marketers.
Three excellent sources beat twenty weak ones. Here is how editors usually treat common types of coverage, based on Wikipedia's reliable sources guideline and perennial sources list.
Drafts submitted through Articles for Creation are reviewed by volunteer editors. These are the main decline reasons reviewers use, and how each one relates to notability.
The sources do not prove significant, independent coverage. This is the decline reason this checker is built to prevent.
Promotional wording, marketing claims and sales language. Wikipedia requires a neutral point of view.
Important claims have no inline citations, or cite unreliable and self-published sources.
Paid or connected editors must disclose their relationship under Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline.
An article on the subject already exists, or the topic fits better as a section of another article.
Text taken from websites, bios or press materials. Drafts must be written in original, neutral language.
Notability is earned through coverage, so the path forward is about becoming worth writing about and getting that story in front of journalists.
Notability means a topic has received enough significant coverage in independent, reliable sources to justify a standalone article. It is not a measure of importance, success or popularity. A very successful private company can fail the test while a small historic event can pass it.
Wikipedia sets no fixed number, but it asks for multiple sources. A common rule of thumb among editors, described in the essay WP:THREE, is at least three strong sources that each provide significant, independent and reliable coverage. Several articles from the same publication usually count as a single source.
Volunteer Wikipedia editors decide. Drafts are reviewed through Articles for Creation, new articles are checked by new page patrollers, and disputed articles can go to a public deletion discussion called Articles for Deletion.
No. Followers, revenue, awards that receive no coverage, or name recognition in your industry do not establish notability on their own. Editors only count what independent reliable sources have published.
Wikipedia strongly discourages writing about yourself because of the conflict of interest. If you do, you must disclose your connection, and the recommended route is to submit a draft through Articles for Creation so an independent editor reviews it.
Yes, if it meets the stricter guideline for companies and organizations. That requires multiple in-depth, independent sources that go beyond routine announcements, with at least one regional, national or international source.
No. Funding news, product launches, executive hires, partnerships and similar routine coverage are classed as trivial under the corporate guideline. Editors want independent analysis of the company itself.
Paid editing is allowed only with full disclosure under the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use, and paid editors should submit drafts for review rather than publishing directly. Be careful of anyone who guarantees an article, as no one can guarantee that editors will accept it.
No. Press releases, wire distributions and articles that simply republish them are not independent, so they do not show notability. They can sometimes support basic facts inside an article once notability is established elsewhere.
Mostly no. In an interview the content comes from the subject, so it is not independent or secondary. Analysis and background written by the journalist around the interview may carry some weight.
No. Sponsored posts, branded content, advertorials and contributor pieces published without editorial oversight are not treated as independent coverage. Wikipedia's perennial sources list specifically flags contributor sections of sites such as Forbes as generally unreliable.
Yes. Non-English sources are fully acceptable when they are reliable, which matters a lot for subjects outside English-speaking markets. Local coverage counts too, though for companies editors expect at least one source with regional or wider reach.
The most common reasons are sources that are passing mentions, press releases, interviews, sponsored content or the subject's own website, and a draft that reads like an advertisement. Run the checker above to see which of your sources are weak.
Articles are deleted when editors decide the subject is not notable, the sourcing is too weak, the content is promotional, or the article copies material from elsewhere. Deletion usually happens through a deletion discussion or a proposed deletion.
It is a banner editors add when they doubt that a subject meets the notability guidelines. It warns that the article may be nominated for deletion unless stronger independent sources are added.
Yes, if significant new coverage has appeared since the deletion. The safest route is a new draft through Articles for Creation. Recreating the same article without new sources can be deleted quickly.
Yes. It is completely free with no sign-up or email required. The analysis runs in your browser and nothing you enter is stored. The only outside requests go to the public Wikipedia and Wikidata databases.
No. This checker was created by Stay Digital Marketers and is not affiliated with or endorsed by Wikipedia or the Wikimedia Foundation. The questions and scoring follow Wikipedia's publicly published notability guidelines, but only Wikipedia's volunteer editors can decide whether an article is accepted.
The score is a well-informed estimate based on Wikipedia's published guidelines and your answers. It cannot read the full content of each article or predict how individual editors will vote, so treat it as a guide rather than a guarantee.
No. Wikipedia is one source Google uses, but Knowledge Panels can also be built from Wikidata, official websites, authoritative profiles and consistent structured data. Many people and brands get a Knowledge Panel before they qualify for Wikipedia.
Our team helps people and brands earn the independent coverage Wikipedia expects, prepare compliant drafts, and build Knowledge Panels that make them easy to find on Google and in AI search.
Stay Digital Marketers
Need SEO, Link Building or Digital Marketing Services?
Request a Free Audit →