Eligibility is about sources, not status
Wikipedia does not ask how important you are. It asks whether reliable, independent publications have written substantially about you. That single test decides most cases before a word is drafted.
Three words carry the weight:
- Reliable — the publication has editorial oversight and a reputation for accuracy.
- Independent — the piece was not written, commissioned, paid for or supplied by you.
- Substantial — the article is about you in depth, not a passing mention or a quote.
The general standard and the subject-specific ones
Most subjects are assessed under the general notability guideline: multiple substantial, independent, reliable sources. Some categories also have their own criteria — academics can qualify on citation impact and fellowships, creative professionals on critical reception and awards, companies on a stricter version of the general test. Subject-specific criteria never lower the bar for sourcing; they describe additional routes.
How to assess yourself in ten minutes
- List every article you know of that is about you.
- Strike out anything you wrote, paid for, or that came from your press release.
- Strike out interviews where the journalist adds no independent analysis.
- Strike out listings, directories, social media and your own sites.
- Count what remains. If it is fewer than three substantial pieces from reputable outlets, Wikipedia is probably premature.
What “premature” means
It is not a permanent verdict. Coverage accumulates. Many subjects who are not eligible today qualify after a significant achievement is independently reported. The mistake is forcing a page before that point, which creates a deletion record that follows you.
Check your eligibility — free, reviewed by a researcher within one business day.