Wikipedia is not a company profile
Official websites, brochures, releases and founder interviews may support basic facts but usually cannot establish notability alone. An article needs reliable, editorially accountable and independent sources with substantial coverage. Assess source readiness before drafting.
Four high-risk problems
Rejection often reflects eligibility or evidence gaps rather than minor formatting.
- Sources are limited to owned pages, releases, promotional articles or database entries
- Coverage only mentions the company without substantial discussion
- Draft uses promotional claims such as leading, renowned or innovative
- Editors have an affiliation without transparent, cautious conflict-of-interest handling
Build a source assessment table
Record publication, date, author, publisher, independence, depth, facts supported and potential bias. Multiple copies of one press release do not become independent sources. Paid, sponsored and user-generated material should be classified accurately.
If the company is not ready
Do not manufacture sources or repeatedly submit similar drafts. Maintain accurate owned facts, research, documentation and media relations while genuine independent coverage develops. An encyclopedia article should reflect established public evidence, not manufacture recognition.
Can paid media articles support a Wikipedia article?
Evaluate editorial independence, disclosure and content type carefully. Company-controlled or commissioned material generally cannot replace reliable independent coverage.
WEPR supports Wikipedia and Chinese encyclopedia readiness reviews, source organization, neutral content planning and compliant collaboration. We do not guarantee acceptance or recommend fabricated sources, hidden affiliations or policy evasion.