صفحة Wikipedia،
وفق القواعد، وبناءً على الدوام.

There is no fee to Wikipedia itself, which is free and volunteer-run. A compliant agency charges for the work: notability assessment, source research, neutral drafting, and disclosed AfC submission. Essentras charges a flat $4,000. Be wary of anyone who promises a "guaranteed" page for a price, because no one can buy a Wikipedia article or control its volunteer review.

Yes, paid editing is allowed, but only if it is disclosed. Wikipedia's Terms of Use require anyone paid to contribute to disclose their employer and client. What you cannot do is pay to guarantee a page exists or survives, because unpaid volunteers make that call against notability rules. Essentras does the compliant work and discloses on every contribution.

Wikipedia notability means significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of you. In plain terms: several substantial articles where journalists or authors chose to write about you, not press releases, your own site, or routine announcements. If that coverage does not exist yet, no agency can ethically create a lasting page. We assess this honestly first.

Many do not yet, and that is the honest truth most agencies will not tell you. Companies need significant independent coverage beyond funding announcements, product launches, and trade press. Essentras runs a free notability pre-assessment and tells you upfront whether you qualify, before you spend anything.

No, and anyone who guarantees a Wikipedia page is misleading you. Volunteers, not the agency, decide whether an article meets the rules, and pages can be deleted later if notability is challenged. What we can promise is honest assessment, properly sourced neutral content, full disclosure, and a full money-back guarantee: if we do not get your page published and live on Wikipedia, you get every dollar back.

It is allowed under Wikipedia's rules when the paid relationship is disclosed (WP:PAID) and the article is submitted through Articles for Creation. Undisclosed paid editing violates the Terms of Use and gets editors blocked, and it exposes the client to public embarrassment. Essentras only does disclosed, COI-compliant editing.

After a well-sourced draft is submitted through Articles for Creation, volunteer review can take anywhere from days to a few months, depending on the backlog. No one can pay to expedite the volunteer queue. A strong, properly sourced draft is reviewed faster than a weak one.

The top reasons are lack of notability (no independent secondary sources), promotional tone, sources that are press releases or company pages, and undisclosed paid editing. A page can also be deleted years later if someone challenges its notability. Building on genuine independent coverage from the start is the only durable approach.

We can propose corrections to an existing page the compliant way: by disclosing the conflict of interest, posting requested edits on the article's talk page, and letting independent editors implement them. We never edit a page about our own client directly without disclosure.