Notability: Does Your Brand Qualify?
If your brand doesn’t currently have a Wikipedia article, understanding Wikipedia’s concept of Notability (WP:N) is essential before you begin. Wikipedia evaluates whether a topic deserves its own article based on the breadth and depth of coverage it has received in credible, independent publications, especially those written by professional journalists. Here’s what you need to know.
What Does “Notability” Mean on Wikipedia?
Notability is Wikipedia’s way of deciding if a topic is worthy of its own article. It’s not about fame or popularity, although famous companies and popular artists are almost always “notable”. Instead, it’s about whether your brand has been the focus of significant, independent coverage in reliable sources—in plain English, detailed articles from trustworthy publications that aren’t connected to you.
If those kinds of sources don’t exist, your brand might still appear on Wikipedia, but within a broader article on a relevant subject rather than having its own stand-alone page.
Why Wikipedia Has Notability Guidelines
Wikipedia doesn’t want to cover everything—it focuses on topics that have been well-documented in trusted sources. Without this standard, many articles would be based on unverified claims or personal experiences, weakening the encyclopedia’s credibility. Wikipedia wants to ensure that its content is verified, neutral, and encyclopedic, rather than an indiscriminate collection of information.
Maintaining notability guidelines also helps Wikipedia scale effectively. If every topic had an article, the platform would struggle to uphold quality control and editorial oversight. By setting a high bar for inclusion, Wikipedia ensures that its articles remain well-sourced, neutral, and manageable for volunteers to maintain—preserving its reputation as a trusted public resource.
Breaking Down Wikipedia’s Notability Standard
Wikipedia’s General Notability Guideline (GNG) states:
"A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject."
At first glance, this sounds straightforward—but each word in this definition carries specific meaning within Wikipedia’s rules. Let’s break it down:
“Presumed” – This word can be misleading. While it suggests that topics meeting these criteria will automatically qualify for a Wikipedia article, in reality, Wikipedia starts from the assumption that most topics are not notable. Editors don’t assume notability; they require clear, verifiable evidence before accepting that a subject deserves a standalone article.
“Significant” – A topic must be covered in depth—not just mentioned in passing. A single sentence in a news article or a brief directory listing isn’t enough. The coverage should provide meaningful discussion, analysis, or insight about the topic.
“Reliable” – Wikipedia defines reliable sources as those with editorial oversight, fact-checking, and a reputation for accuracy. Major news organizations, academic journals, and respected trade publications generally qualify. Blogs, press releases, social media posts, and paid content do not. (See also: our Practical Guide to Reliable Sources.)
“Sources” – Wikipedia requires multiple published works that discuss the topic. One great source isn’t enough—there should be a pattern of coverage across several independent, credible publications.
“Independent” – The sources must be entirely separate from the subject. Articles written by employees, promotional materials, or company-published reports do not count toward establishing notability. Coverage must come from unaffiliated, third-party sources to ensure neutrality. (See also: our Practical Guide to Independent Sources.)
The key takeaway: notability isn’t automatic, and meeting these standards is harder than it may seem. Wikipedia’s goal isn’t to document every company, person, or event—it’s to cover subjects that have received genuine, independent recognition over time.
Why Newer Brands Have a Harder Time
Newly-established brands sometimes have a harder time demonstrating notability, and for good reason: they haven’t been around long enough to garner the kinds of coverage Wikipedia is looking for. But it’s also the case that a startup with coverage about a successful fundraising effort won’t make the cut, either. The same can also be true for a previously unknown brand that goes viral on social media. Now there is coverage—isn’t it enough?
Not always.
Wikipedia determines notability based on sustained coverage in independent, reliable sources—not just a brief moment of attention. Just as economic indicators reflect past trends, Wikipedia is a lagging indicator of notability, meaning a topic is considered notable only after the outside world has already taken significant notice of it—and it has demonstrated continuing public interest.
This means:
✅ A topic with consistent, long-term coverage is more likely to be considered notable.
❌ A topic that receives a short burst of media attention may not meet Wikipedia’s standards for notability.
Once a topic is deemed notable, that status is not temporary—but notability must be based on substantial, independent reporting over time. For example, a new company or an upcoming event may receive press coverage, but unless that coverage is significant and sustained, it may not justify a standalone article. Wikipedia does not exist to promote new topics.
Additionally, if a person is only covered in connection to a single event and remains a low-profile individual, they generally do not qualify for a biographical article. Wikipedia prioritizes broad, independent coverage over time—not fleeting moments of media attention.
A Note on Usage, Part 1:
Notability vs. Eligibility
At Beutler Ink, we often prefer the term “eligible” over “notable” when discussing Wikipedia topics. One reason is that “eligible” sounds less judgmental—we’re not here to tell anyone, “you're not important.” In many cases, a subject could qualify for notability if it had the necessary media coverage.
Additionally, using “eligible” reinforces the idea that notability is not fixed—any topic may meet Wikipedia’s standards if it receives sufficient third-party coverage in reliable sources. This perspective helps frame Wikipedia eligibility as a matter of verifiable documentation rather than inherent worth.
A Note on Usage, Part 2:
Notability vs. Significance
The term “notability” is sometimes misapplied when discussing Wikipedia content. While it correctly refers to whether a subject meets Wikipedia’s inclusion criteria, some use it to describe whether specific content within an article is important enough to include. However, notability applies to topics, not individual details.
Wikipedia doesn’t have a specific term for assessing the importance of content within an article, but at Beutler Ink, we prefer the word “significant.” This distinction helps keep discussions clear—a topic may be notable, but not every detail about it is necessarily significant.
Building Toward Notability
If your brand isn’t quite there yet, take steps to improve your chances of meeting notability.
Encourage independent media coverage – Engage with journalists, analysts, and industry publications to generate unbiased, third-party reporting about your brand.
Diversify your sources – Ensure coverage comes from a variety of reliable outlets, rather than relying on a single publication or author.
Avoid self-promotion – Press releases, company blogs, and sponsored content do not contribute to Wikipedia notability and should not be your primary media strategy.
These actions not only help your Wikipedia prospects but also strengthen your broader reputation. That said, notability isn’t just about getting media coverage—it’s about being different enough to get that kind of coverage. If your company is indistinguishable from competitors, it’s unlikely to attract the kind of independent coverage that establishes lasting notability.
To position your brand for recognition:
Define what makes you notable – What is your unique value proposition? Are you known for innovation, thought leadership, or a groundbreaking approach? Identifying this focus isn’t just good for Wikipedia—it’s smart business strategy.
Be proactive in shaping your public presence – Consider working with a publicist or communications professional to develop a strategy that gets your brand in front of credible, independent media.
Do things worth writing about – Earning coverage means doing something that stands out—whether that’s launching a groundbreaking product, winning prestigious awards, leading industry change, or making a major impact in your field.
At the end of the day, achieving notability on Wikipedia aligns with building a strong, well-regarded brand in general. A company that is truly making an impact—one that journalists, analysts, and the public find worthy of discussion—will naturally generate the kind of coverage that meets Wikipedia’s standards.
Want to Make Your Brand More Notable?
Building a brand that stands out—not just for marketing but for genuine industry impact—is key to earning the kind of independent recognition that meets Wikipedia’s notability standards. But knowing what matters, how to position yourself, and where to get credible coverage can be challenging.
