Why Reliable Sources Are the Currency of Wikipedia
Reliable, independent coverage is the foundation of Wikipedia eligibility. Here's what counts as a "reliable source" and why press releases aren't enough.
Marketing and public relations are critical parts of any organization's communications process. Marketing exists to help get the word out to those who don't know you, and public relations helps to manage information around you for those who do. Wikipedia's prominence makes it a potentially attractive platform to do marketing and PR work.
Except the thing is, Wikipedia knows this, and its editorial community is resistant to promotional motives. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a marketing platform. Its goal is to collect human knowledge, vet it, and make it available in an easily consumed way for its readers. If your brand belongs, reliable sources will be the deciding factor.
Why Wikipedia Doesn't Trust You
Wikipedia rules explicitly prohibit using commercial sites as sources. If Wikipedia has determined there is room to write about your products, you can't just link to the ecommerce site where they're found. Wikipedia is not about to do your advertising=. It also generally prohibits official websites about companies.
Don't take it too personally, but Wikipedia doesn't trust you to tell the story about yourself. They want independent, authoritative sources to tell it for you.
Press Releases in All Their Forms
These days, press releases come in many forms. There is the traditional post on the newswire, of course. But a blog post on your website exists for the same purpose: to get the word out about your new announcement.
Even a paid placement, advertorial, or sponsored post, even if at a big name like Forbes, will not qualify. Wikipedia editors know you think your new program or product is important. What they want to know is if anyone else does, and by "anyone" we specifically mean independent, professional, newsgathering journalists.
What Wikipedia Values in a Source
Wikipedia's rules are written from the assumption that an independent journalist's job is to uncover facts and share them with a broad audience, ideally one supported by a mix of advertising and subscriptions, as most legacy media brands are. This is why Wikipedia places such a strong trust in them:
Independence is valued because it's less likely the subject is exerting influence on the writer to tell their story their way.
Editorial oversight is valued because a team effort is more likely to catch things than a single writer on their own.
Publication matters as well—this may be obvious, but information that hasn't been made widely available through publication, whether on the web or even if just in print, cannot be used.
The Challenges of Modern Media
This reliance on media institutions is not without its own risks: the economics of these publications has become considerably worse in recent decades, so there are fewer of them all the time. They are also far from mistake-free; many get things wrong, but the best of them do fact-checking and issue corrections, providing some accountability. But they also will miss things that newer media will cover, limiting what information can be included on Wikipedia at all.
Not Just Any Source—The Right Sources
Another layer of complication comes in when we're talking about which sources can be used for creating a new Wikipedia page for a brand. In these cases, it's not just important to have a source that says something interesting about you. You will need enough sources that you can do a decent job of providing an overview of your brand or topic using only those sources.
But even that is not quite enough. You also have to have a "claim to notability"—why your brand is worthy of distinction. Simply being a SaaS platform or having an AI app is not enough. You need to be able to show that an independent outlet decided you were worth writing about to the exclusion of other ones. And the more sources you have, the more credibility you have.
The Takeaway
It's worth keeping in mind that while every reliable source is a PR win, not every PR win is a reliable source. By focusing your efforts on meaningful coverage that meets Wikipedia's rules, you can make sure your PR efforts are as effective as possible.
Good PR is worth doing for its own sake, but PR for the sake of Wikipedia eligibility requires extra care and planning. Want to learn how you can get started? Let's talk about where you're starting out and we can recommend your next step.
Let's Talk
If you need more sources to tell your story on Wikipedia, The Notability Company can help you prepare the right foundation for making it happen. Get in touch with us and let's see how we can work together to get your brand ready for Wikipedia.