How to Create a Wikipedia Page for Your Band/Music

10411 121

Make a wikipedia page for your bandGetting a Wikipedia page approved for your music project can be tricky. It can also be great for building credibility and gaining exposure for your music.

Because of the sheer number of relatively unknown independent artists out there, Wikipedia has become very strict in its guidelines for accepting artist pages. Wikipedia editors are composed of volunteers from around the world and they all interpret Wikipedia’s guidelines a little differently, so, mileage may vary. But, if you follow the tips below and pay close attention to Wikipedia posting guidelines, you definitely have a fighting chance.

Admittedly, there’s not much sense in adding band pages for acts that are only going to be around for a few months. If your band is young and without a big news story to bolster your wiki-appeal, it might be better to hold off until you’ve put out a few albums and gained some media coverage.

On the other hand, If you are an established musician that has had some notable press, you may very well be able to score your own Wikipedia page.

Here are some basic guidelines and tips for getting a musician page approved on Wikipedia. Keep in mind that every artist’s situation is different, and individual results will vary widely.

5 Tips For Getting a Musician or Band Page Approved on Wikipedia

1. Be Balanced. It’s important to remember that Wikipedia is not meant to be a promotional vehicle and if you treat it that way, your article will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia is a reference text. You can’t say “Band X is the best folk band in Denver.” You might instead say “Band X is widely regarded as an important contributor to the Denver folk scene.”

2. Be Notable. Wikipedia is very big on this. If an article is not deemed notable or important then it will be “speedily deleted” per their Criteria for speedy deletion. Has your band ever done anything notable?’ What are you known for? What do your critics say? Make sure it’s in the article. Also see Wikipedia’s explanation of notability.

3.  Don’t Write it Yourself. This is one of the first things that will get your article axed. Wikipedia wants unbiased articles. That means if you or your bass player or your manager or record label guy writes the article, it will probably get deleted. Instead, Ask your friends and fans if they contribute to Wikipedia. A regular Wikipedia contributor will have a much better chance of publishing an article that doesn’t get taken down.

4. Be thorough. Make sure that whoever pens your entry has all the details they need. Include dates, members, lineup changes, awards, a discography, etc. Imagine you’re reading an article about your music a hundred years from now. What would still be of interest?

5. Include references. Find everything and anything that references your band online. If you’ve been written about in well-known newspapers, magazines and blogs – this will help greatly. Make sure you use these references in your article.

Wikipedia’s music page guidelines for the English Wikipedia can be found here

References:
How to get your band on Wikipedia

Have you tried submitting to Wikipedia? What was your experience? Do you have any tips? Let us know in the comments below.

Free Updates: 
Get Music Promotion Tips and Exclusive Offers Delivered to Your Inbox

 

In this article

Join the Conversation

  • I've always found the Wikipedia thing strange, what dignifies a notable artist? What level of notoriety in the public realm? A couple of local newspaper articles I'm guessing doesn't cover it. A record deal? I wonder if that's the clincher. A few 'under the radar' artists I've worked with have created Wikipages for themselves only to be slightly depressed when they get told they don't qualify for one. I wouldn't want that moderator job at wiki…

    • It is hard to define what notable is. I'm sure it's hard for the moderators as well. Especially if 1 in 4 submissions is for an artist page (like they claim).

      I would hope though, that they have an appreciation for those who make efforts to follow their guidelines. I'm sure they get tons of unedited self-promotional drivel.

      Chris B

      • Ronhjones

        “unedited self-promotional drivel” – you would not believe how much we get, Best section to follow is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Band#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles – just get at least 1 of the 12 (more is better). P.S. Always start a new page as a subpage of one’s user name – it’s less likely to get deleted early as “too short”.
        Ronhjones

        • a singer-songwriter

          I would have a question for the editors. One of my fans asked me why I wasn’t on Wikipedia. I hadn’t really considered it, but it seemed like a good thing to have. He tried to start a page for me by simply cutting and pasting my website, which is how he thought one went about it. That naturally got deleted. I myself had no idea what the requirements were, but after reading the guildelines, I tried writing a short, factual summary. That was also deleted. I guess I would have needed to include references, plus I wasn’t considered notable. So I gave up. My question is whether this harms any efforts in the future to receive a page.I personally think the guidelines are extremely strict. There are many quite reputable musicians out there who have no label, haven’t hit gold or been played in the pop charts. That is the shape of the new music industry.

          • KT

            (Slightly late reply, but…)
            In answer to your question, if a page has been deleted multiple times, it can be set to prevent any further creations. This is known as “salting” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Salt#Creation_protection). This prevents anyone but an administrator from creating a page with the specific name which has been “salted”. However, this protection can also be removed by administrators in the future if someone wants to write a valid article with that title; the unprotection process is generally fairly straightforward.

            Most deleted articles are never salted, and the page can be re-created at any time – it is usually best to begin with a semi-private draft written in user space, rather than the main encyclopaedia. This gives the creator more breathing space to get things the way they want, before moving it to the public encyclopaedia.

          • Phantomsteve

            Cutting and pasting from a website is a no-no for copyright reasons. Unless it clearly states on the website that any content can be used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License, it can’t be used. Sites with no notice are assumed to be under copyright unless it clearly states that the content can be used by anyone for any purpose whatsoever (including commercial use)

            As someone said above, the best initial step is to create an article as a sub-page in your userspace. It can’t stay there indefinitely (if it’s not worked upon, it could be deleted).

            If the article is suitable for inclusion (notability clearly met, references present, neutrally worded) then it can be moved to the main article space and previous deletions will not have an influence on it, as long as it is not substantially the same as a deleted version! If it is prevented from re-creation, see KT’s advice above.

      • Wikipedian

        As a Wikipedia editor who does deal with new pages, I can say that this article is a refreshing breath of fresh air. I've seen a fair number of "How to fool the Wikipedia editors" articles, and… well we read them too, they don't work. This article offers sound advice.

        I've never seen the 1 in 4 statistic quoted above, I don't know if it is true. In fact I think it probably isn't. As far as quickly deleted articles go, I've seen more articles that go something like "Jenny Doe is 13 and likes ponies, her brother Max eats worms and is gross!" than I have seen articles on bands that never make it past MySpace.

        One final point, tied in with the third tip… please don't ask your mother to write an article on you for you. Those can get very weird. Case in point: "[name withheld] is a drummer in the Huston area. He plays for [name withheld], an anarchist metal band. He cultivates his image though poor hygene, especially dental hygene." Yes, that was a real submission.

        • Wow. [name withheld] sounds kind of gross! THanks for sharing your perspective as a Wikipedia editor.

        • Azure Fields

          I have six gospel albums out and 6 SafeTV Purely Music TV Shows out. My last album was done in Nashville and I had well known Opry musicians play the instrumentation for my vocals. How do I get my gospel ministry on Wikipedia – would you write it up for me? My site is azurefields.com and I’m on CDBaby.

        • If you printed more submissions like that Wikipedia might actually be interesting to read.

        • Rhythmt

          Mr Wiki Editor…I spent several hours one evening sorting out my “musical history” as well as a buddy of mine who I’ve spent many an hour on the road or in the studio working with some fairly known singers, bands, other artists. Some of my history was mixed up with some one else who had a similar name…but, was different. Anyway…I finally got it sorted out and made sure all the facts were that. Facts. I went back to check it out after an old friend who now lives in Taiwan and he tracked me down through my buddie’s WIki history that I had sorted out for him….but, all my history/work had been deleted by one of your editors. I haven’t gone back. Now that I’ve been sent this Wiki/CDBaby hookup….it’s hard to get up enough desire, energy to go through the Wiki thang again. No big deal….but, it was a waste of time.

    • TyLean

      Wikipedia believes that less than 1% of musicians deserve to be there… and they are right. They only want bands that have posterity, not bands using wikipedia FOR posterity. Ideally, you should have had some sort of national press or a television spot before you reach the ranks of Wikipedia.

      I don’t have my own Wikipedia page, even though I’m mentioned on several other Wikipedia pages. It’s frustrating, but not something I care to force. When I’ve done enough to deserve one, I’ll have one. 🙂

    • Knowing what qualifies on Wikipedia in terms of music is actually pretty easy – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MUSIC

      A band or artist is bascially considered notable if they have had a record in the charts, had a gold-selling record, won a Grammy or equivalent, been played in rotation on a major radio station, had two albums out with a major label or "has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city".

      That gets the majority of it.

      As for the "moderator job": that's everyone's job! The stuff that gets deleted quickly on Wikipedia is usually deleted because it is so obscure that it is obviously unnotable – a bunch of kids crashing around in their garage, someone who thinks he's the next Jay-Z because he's got a MySpace account etc. Or it doesn't even attempt to show notability.

      The next step up is if it asserts some notability, but there isn't enough: then it isn't decided simply by the "moderator", it is decided by anyone who wants to participate in the discussion. It's like a courtroom – something goes up for deletion and there's a week where people can present arguments. At the end of the week, an uninvolved user comes in, weighs up the debate and decides whether to keep or delete it. It isn't a vote, it's a discussion.

      On the musical side, one thing that I see quite often is you'll have a popular band. Then the band will break up and the bass player or drummer or whoever will go play with an independent band, and people try and then sort of use the fact that the guy played in the popular band to justify the notability of the new band. Of course, history might teach us that sometimes that works out great – if Wikipedia were around in the early 90s, we probably would have said "oh, the drummer from Nirvana is gonna front a band? Yeah, like *that* is gonna be notable…" 😉

  • Rob

    They are also very strict about "original research" i.e. something for which there is no public record elsewhere. And they require citations. These can be from your local paper or a website, so although they are strict they don't necessarily have high standards.

  • Pingback: How to Create a Wikipedia Page for Your Band / Music | DIY Musician « Corey Stewart()

  • Jazzman

    One of the first things that make the New Page Patrollers reach for the delete button is seeing YouTube, MySpace, FaceBook, and any blogs in the list of references. The next thing is "…up and coming."

  • Phantomsteve

    Some good advice, but a couple of notes I’d add:
    – If you say “Band X is widely regarded as …”, you will need reliable, independent sources showing this
    – if friends and fans write an article, they need to make sure it is written in a neutral point of view
    – “well known newspapers, magazines and blogs”: blogs are generally not accepted as sources (although the official newspaper or magazine blog may be accepted) – as for “well known”, Wikipedia refers to “reliable sources”

    Here are some useful policies/guidelines on Wikipedia:
    * Neutral point of view:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view
    * Identifying reliable sources:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources
    * Independent sources:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Independent_sources
    * Verifiability:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability

  • Thanks for the tips!

  • Azure Fields

    I have six gospel albums out and 6 SafeTV Purely Music TV Shows out. My last album was done in Nashville and I had well known Opry musicians play the instrumentation for my vocals. How do I get my gospel ministry on Wikipedia – would you write it up for me? My site is azurefields.com and I'm on CDBaby.

  • I think if you're going to make it onto Wikipedia then it will more than likely happen without you having any action on it – hardcore fans for bands etc are more than likely to do these kind of things. Whatever you do though, take the above advise and don't try creating your own wikipedia page…it just won't work! 🙂

    Ian
    http://www.facebook.com/ianedwardsmusic

  • I think if you're going to make it onto Wikipedia then it will more than likely happen without you having any action on it – hardcore fans for bands etc are more than likely to do these kind of things. Whatever you do though, take the above advise and don't try creating your own wikipedia page…it just won't work! 🙂

    Ian
    http://www.facebook.com/ianedwardsmusic

  • I think if you're going to make it onto Wikipedia then it will more than likely happen without you having any action on it – hardcore fans for bands etc are more than likely to do these kind of things. Whatever you do though, take the above advise and don't try creating your own wikipedia page…it just won't work! 🙂

    Ian
    http://www.facebook.com/ianedwardsmusic

  • Musician

    Even with article on newspaper the page is refused. I really avoid as the PEST Wikipedia for that reasons. There is not any uniformity in the rules and their interpretation. It's just a jungle.
    Let's say one thing sure: your gruop MUST be VERY famous in order to get the approval with WikiPedia. STOP. All the remaining things are only "words to the wind".

    • You do not have to be VERY famous. Friends of mine are in bands with legitimate Wikipedia pages, and they're not famous. They've done some notable things, though, and worked with notable people. So that may be the vital criteria.

      • Nuke

        Actually, you do have to be VERY famous to be on wikipedia. I have been rejected for this very same reason and the WP editor used as an example of "famous enough" to be in wikipedia bands like Killswitch Engage, which is a VERY famous band, or at the very least, not a band who needs to put out its cds through cdbaby. Lets face it: Musicians who put out their cds through cdbaby aren´t "famous enough" to be in wikipedia thus deeming this article well intented but otherwise useless.

        • I guess it'd help to define "famous." But from my perspective, I know of many bands who have legit Wikipedia pages who are not even full-time career musicians. They're in bands that have some notable achievements, whether it be a decent song placement, or some kind of status as a regional darling, or perhaps they opened for someone higher-profile on a tour. But they've all got day jobs, AND Wikipedia pages. In my book, they're not even a little famous. Though I do think they should be.

          • Occult_eye

            Bands who just open up for higher-profile bands on tour do not end up on Wikipedia. Many bands who have done that several times have been deleted from Wikipedia. This probably because many clubs allow bands to BUY opening slots on bigger shows for a few hundred dollars, regardless of how good or “notable” they are.

          • Higi

            Then they don’t belong on Wikipedia!!

        • No you don’t. My friends a’tris have their own page… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A%27tris

        • There are famous musicians selling their material on CDBaby. Not everyone uses CDBaby because they aren’t “famous enough.” For some people, having been ripped by record companies for long enough, CDBaby is a very attractive alternative. These people may have reached a point where they aren’t shifting as many CD’s but are undeniably firmily placed in history and no-one would dream of deleting their wikipedia page. I think the article is brilliant, because i’m probably borderline for my own wiki thing. And now I know what i need to do.

        • You don't have to be VERY famous. Like Gregory Alan Isakov. He's not well known outside of Colorado, but he has an entry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_Alan_Isakov

          You just have to have something in a published source. DOn't focus so much on the Wikipedia page, focus on getting notoriety, but once you have some of that, it's a good idea to have a Wikipedia page. Usually when I'm looking for fast information on a band, Wikipedia is a great place to start. Added to the fact that Wikipedia is usually in the top 5 for Google results.

    • You do not have to be VERY famous. Friends of mine are in bands with legitimate Wikipedia pages, and they’re not famous. They’ve done some notable things, though, and worked with notable people. So that may be the vital criteria.

    • You do not have to be VERY famous. Friends of mine are in bands with legitimate Wikipedia pages, and they’re not famous. They’ve done some notable things, though, and worked with notable people. So that may be the vital criteria.

  • Robert Wendel

    Having gone through this with a Wiki editor, I can tell you what is written above is pure gold! I would place more emphasis on #%: Reference, reference, reference!!! The more you can "prove" what you say, the better, be it an outside link or especially links to other Wiki articles. Feel free to check my Wiki page to see what I mean. My self-written page has now passed all their tests thanks to the help of the Wiki editor who first flagged me for deletion, then turned out to become a very good cyber friend.

    Robert Wendel

  • Robert Wendel

    Having gone through this with a Wiki editor, I can tell you what is written above is pure gold! I would place more emphasis on #%: Reference, reference, reference!!! The more you can “prove” what you say, the better, be it an outside link or especially links to other Wiki articles. Feel free to check my Wiki page to see what I mean. My self-written page has now passed all their tests thanks to the help of the Wiki editor who first flagged me for deletion, then turned out to become a very good cyber friend.

    Robert Wendel

  • JohnyBoy

    Seriously? By the time a band has two albums out on a major label, a gold record, won a grammy… they will not be sitting around reading a DIY article on wikipedia. The record company has people who do this for them. Their management has people who do this for them. Good luck all independent artists, you just go ahead and make your wiki page. See how long it takes for your wiki to be deleted. Useless.

    • If it is done well, with proper references/citations, AND has some notability, they're not as apt to delete. Again, I have some friends in bands with Wikipedia pages and they have not won Grammy's, been signed to a major, or appeared on the cover of People magazine.

      • ry

        would you mind sharing the names of those independent bands you know of on Wiki for reference puposes??

        • Sure thing. Au- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AU_(band) and Norfolk & Western (band, not railroad)- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norfolk_%26_Western_

          • Occult_eye

            So you should put then in the article that your music has to be “praised by media centers such as Pitchfork and Stereogum”, like the Luke Wyland fellow, or else have well-known “Associated acts” such as The Decemberists to make creating/having someone create a Wikipedia page in the first place even possibly worth it. Some of us play entire styles of music that “media centers” like Pitchfork and Stereogum won’t even touch. For example, if you’re an anarcho-punk crust/grind band, you may have thousands of fans who know and love you from live gigs on tour, you may even be the first band adding some new elements to the genre, like say accordion & kazoo, but have absolutely no “press” talking about it. To me this hypothetical band may seem very notable, being groundbreaking, etc, but if the media doesn’t care, Wikipedia acts like they don’t even exist.

      • Em

        I do have some friends that were Grammy Nominated, The Blue Riddim Band, and still had their page deleted. NO JOKE.

        They’ve played with Bob Marley & The Wailers in 78, only American reggae band to play Sunsplash Jamaica in ’82. Tour extensively in the U.S. over the last 35 years. Only American reggae band to be Grammy Nominated (1986)

        They even have a NEW record out with reggae legend Big Youth, and yet, they STILL had their page deleted. It was written by someone else, and well written too.

        The Wiki folks said that they were not Note Worthy for some reason.

        Not sure what their real agenda is over there.

        • Phantomsteve

          OK, playing devil’s advocate:
          – if they had won a Grammy rather than just being nominated that would be different – the winning makes you notable, just being up for one does not
          – on Wikipedia, being associated with a notable group/person does not make you notable – generally referred to as “notability is not inherited”
          – having a new record out (no matter who with) does not automatically make you notable – if it has charted in an internationally-recognised chart (e.g. BillBoard, UK Top 40, etc) then that would meet notability criteria.

          Looking at the deleted article, there was no mention of Bob Marley. The only source given was a blog (which is sadly no longer available) – most blogs do not meet the reliability criteria, as generally there is no clear editorial control, etc. Looking at other sources, I can find minor mentions (“xyz used to play in the Blue Riddim band”, “groups playing at the event included …. and the Blue Riddim Band”).

          To be honest, for most bands, the best place to get an “article” is at last.fm, surely?

          • Em

            I understand where you’re going with your points, and would accept them if I hadn’t already seen plenty of bands on Wiki that are, for lack of a better term, even less notable.

            Also, the Blue Riddim Band is listed in the Wiki page for Grammy nominations. Should they and everyone else listed as nominees be deleted then from that page?

            Plus, I guess I thought that being the ONLY American reggae band to be nominated for a reggae Grammy would be notable.

            Or at least their performance at Reggae Sunsplash in ’82, playing for 20,000 people that you can watch here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrMZj3wlCVg on YouTube.

            This performance is the reason that Jamaica’s legendary ska band The Skatelites reunited the next year, at Reggae Sunsplash ’83 according to Lester Sterling (of the Skatelites).

            It’s just so difficult to convince people of things being notable or not I suppose, if people are not familiar with the context of the information.

            I understand that. These requirements though are pretty tough to get by, and I feel sad when great information is excluded on music history when I see only what is new and hot included.

            I will try to find someone to write them a new page, and hopefully be included in Wikipedia.

            Thanks for the information and tips.

    • Been there…done that…My group had someone post a wiki article for us and it was deleted in 2 days. Too many rules…

  • JohnyBoy

    Seriously? By the time a band has two albums out on a major label, a gold record, won a grammy… they will not be sitting around reading a DIY article on wikipedia. The record company has people who do this for them. Their management has people who do this for them. Good luck all independent artists, you just go ahead and make your wiki page. See how long it takes for your wiki to be deleted. Useless.

    • If it is done well, with proper references/citations, AND has some notability, they’re not as apt to delete. Again, I have some friends in bands with Wikipedia pages and they have not won Grammy’s, been signed to a major, or appeared on the cover of People magazine.

    • If it is done well, with proper references/citations, AND has some notability, they’re not as apt to delete. Again, I have some friends in bands with Wikipedia pages and they have not won Grammy’s, been signed to a major, or appeared on the cover of People magazine.

  • JohnyBoy

    Seriously? By the time a band has two albums out on a major label, a gold record, won a grammy… they will not be sitting around reading a DIY article on wikipedia. The record company has people who do this for them. Their management has people who do this for them. Good luck all independent artists, you just go ahead and make your wiki page. See how long it takes for your wiki to be deleted. Useless.

  • Jimmy Crackcorn

    “Be notable”.

    I’ll get right on that!

  • Klangart11

    And how do you get it off again , in case you don’t want exposure anymore??

    • Phantomsteve

      If you are notable, and the article is accurate and sourced, then you are unlikely to get it taken off.

      If you don’t meet the notability criteria, or the article is not sourced, then there is a deletion process – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_policy

  • Pete

    Most bands on CDBaby should NOT be on Wikipedia. If you think they should, then why shouldn’t every greengrocers and dry cleaners also have there own Wikipedia page?

  • I would say this is all great information. Being an unsigned band, we were fortunate enough to have our wikipedia page get approved. We didn’t have this cdbaby article when we first created our page, but we did follow the wikipedia guidelines (which are listed wonderfully in this article).

    Great advise!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radagun

  • One could just as easily ask "why shouldn't they?" But I get your point. Endless information can appear unmanageable.

    • jason500million

      The web is nothing but endless information, it’s not unrealistic to expect users to parse this information to find what they care about. This notion of “notable” is rediculous. It’s very subjective and I feel like Wikipedia would be much better served by policing their ideas of “neutral”, “unbiased” and “factual” rather than “notable”.

      • Phantomsteve

        It’s interesting that no one here is saying “well, Encyclopedia Britannia” should have an article on all these bands too – and the reason isn’t anything to do with printing hard copy books, as EB is online too.

        At the end of the day, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia – and you’ll find that they have more articles on bands than other big-name encyclopedias.

        If you want a wiki that can have any band you like, why don’t you start one? Wikia is a good place – just go to http://www.wikia.com/Special:CreateNewWiki to start one!

        Then go out and get everyone knowing about your Wiki – and let it have a reputation as *the* place to go to find out about bands, singers, etc.

        If you did that, you’d not have to worry about Wikipedia, as bands would rather be listed in BandWiki (or whatever), as they will know that’s the place people would initially think of!

        In fact, I’ve started one… http://everyband.wikia.com/wiki/EveryBand_Wiki
        Any band is welcome to create a page there – and individual pages for their management company, their members, their albums, etc

  • miserycreek

    My band had considerable regional success, never received less than 4 star reviews for our three releases, were reviewed across the US, almost every country in Europe, and in Japan, and were signed to a notable Italian independent record label with several award winning acts on its roster. A fan in Kansas City emailed us that she had submitted a wiki for us and sent us the copy – she had her facts in order and wasn't gushing with praise or anything. I looked at it less than an hour later and it had been tagged for deletion unless someone could make a case for it remaining. The woman who wrote the wiki wrote a very reasonable defense of the wiki and our relevance. It was gone the next day.

    Good luck.

  • jason500million

    Two thoughts:
    1) I believe this is a small business opportunity for some aspiring writer or wikipedia nut. Even if your band does have notable accomplishments, navigating the rules of Wikipedia are a hassle and after having my page deleted for some wrinkle that I don’t fully understand, it’s something that I personally don’t want to deal with again. However, I’d be willing to pay someone to deal with it.

    2) Wikipedia seems to be incredibly inconsistent on this sorta thing. I get the feeling that some bands sorta slip through the cracks. The indie band I patterned our page off of had essentially never done anything, and their page had very little useful or interesting information.

    The whole process turned me off. If someone out there wants to deal with it for a couple bucks, let me know! 🙂

    • Phantomsteve

      Paid-for editing is something that is discussed from time to time on Wikipedia, and the consensus is that it’s a bad idea!

      There are three reasons:
      1. If you are getting paid to write an article, and then the article is deleted, do you have to pay the money back? If so, does that mean that you will refuse some “business” because you can see that they will not meet the notability criteria – that’ll be a good way to make sure that you lose future business as well!
      2. If you are being paid to write an article, you still have to write it in a neutral way. This means that anything negative about the band which is reliable sourced will need to go in – how many clients would be willing to have that? Also, no one “owns” an article – once it’s up, anyone can edit it – so even if the writer ignores negative or critical comments in reliable sources, others may add them.
      3. Articles get vandalised, and although the vast majority of these are caught very quickly and reverted, some can be there for a few days or more… what happens when your band’s article is vandalised, and the paid-for editor isn’t online (or doesn’t see it)? Are you going to be happy to have paid for an article to be written, and then falsehoods to be inserted? The writer doesn’t own it, and can’t watch it all the time!

  • BylliCrayone

    I had a page up there for about 6 years until one day it just disappeared. I did not post anything on it, it was referred to me by a fan so I went to check it out. Everything was on point. Then one day I wanted to add my new album info and well… it was gone. deleted. not wasting my time with it, thats for sure

  • pies11

    I don’t have a real or perceived need to be part of Wikipedia. When Wikipedia began, my artist page was on for more than a year. Then, it was deleted as “a vanity page.” Just as Wikipedia is not allowed to be used as a reference in college, I don’t think it should also be used for artists; especially when anyone can write basically anything on Wikipedia. The thrill of being in W is actually gone for me. It’s better to create your own artists web page!
    Roberto Tirado

  • Umyang

    I made a wiki for my husband (a singer) about three years ago. It was not deleted and I more or less followed your tips (without having seen them). Everyone starts somewhere.

  • Confused Confucius

    How about for Notable bands that don’t get Media Coverage. And no Internet Articles.

  • G. la Belle-Lettre

    From my very informal research, wikipedia has a far amount of indie band pages with pretty scant references. I’ve noticed these pages get flagged and stay flagged indefinitely. My friend Ohene’s wiki page has been flagged for at least 6 years, when I first noticed it. I added some references, then asked for the flag to be removed; wiki refused. Annoying, but they didn’t delete it. And as I said, just about all my favorite indie rappers’ wiki pages are flagged. So I wonder if fans even care about the flags. They must be visiting Ohene’s page, because it consistently appears at the top of every Google search.

  • Anne-Lise Larsen

    I had a wikipedia page once for an acoustic duo I had about ten years ago. I don’t know how it got up there, but there it was. It was there for a good few years, but it’s since been deleted. All very odd.

  • reggae809

    mostly independant artist pages all get deleted basically because you need some kind of “reliable source citation” which basically means: only another wikipedia article, so its a hard cycle to break you can’t get on wikipedia unless you already are and there are too many moderators one will flag you for deletion you will make you case they will accept you then another gets you deleted, by the time you are “notable” enough that all the moderators have heard of you before you’re probably at the major level where you could care less if you are or aren’t on wikipedia

    • Phantomsteve

      A couple of points:
      – on Wikipedia, they aren’t moderators! All editors can nominate articles for deletion, although only admins can delete them if they meet the criteria for deletion, or if the consensus of a deletion discussion is to delete the article
      – another Wikipedia *cannot* be used as a citation. Independent reliable coverage which is significant in nature (as discussed elsewhere in this article/comments) is required
      – I do not need an in-depth knowledge of a subject to be able to see if there are reliable independent sources which verify the information in the article. I can check the references, and I can compare the article with the notability guidelines. If it meets the criteria, it will be kept, if it doesn’t then it won’t

    • Phantomsteve

      Actually, other Wikipedia article’s *cannot* be used as reliable source citations! There can be links to other articles, but Wikipedia is not a 3rd party source, so cannot be cited within Wikipedia.

      As an administrator (we don’t call them mods!), I don’t necessarily need to have heard of a band to be able to work out if an article about them should be kept or not: if they meet the notability criteria for bands, and that is shown by the reliable sources, then it should be kept. If they do not meet the notability criteria, and if I cannot find reliable sources (many admins will look for sources before deletion), then it should be deleted.

      I have seen tons of articles nominated for deletion about subjects I’ve never heard about, and have declined the nomination, as a claim of significance is made. I can read an article and see what is said that meets the notablity criteria, and I can read the sources and judge their independence and reliability!

  • Uhjojllihougo

    A big waste of time.
    if you are Jayz u can stay on wikipedia. if you are a real musician u can not stay on it.

  • Can someone please recommend a contributor to write my article? My work qualifies.

  • Jack Mason

    Anybody with good references can make an article on wikipedia, But what about the people that vandalism articles? Where the security?

    • Phantomsteve

      If you see obvious vandalism, you can remove it yourself – just make sure that it *is* vandalism. If it is criticism, and is sourced, then that can’t be removed.

      Part of being neutral is that the good and the bad are both in articles – as long as it is adequately sourced it remains.

      BUT out and out vandalism is removed as soon as it is spotted.

  • Ochi

    I found this information very helpful. Thanks so much.

  • Hi C D baby is a grate way to get recognize and earn money for the work we do look me up under THEMIS KOUTRAS (IN C D baby web) see my sights also at http://songcastmusic.com/profiles/themistoklis http://www.youtube.com/user/themistokliification http://www.artofthecross.com

  • Thanks, we have been around since 1999 and still going strong. We do need to take it to the next step. I was just looking into this. I will put this advice to the test. Thanks again!

  • Also, I read JohnyBoy's comments and I sort of agree for bands who have managers etc. But we have been around for a long time and we are on the precipice and could use a little shot in the arm. We have done everything ourselves and whatever direction or idea is given, I will always try. As it is, if you google fontainsmuse you will get pages of stuff. Seeing it all on a world credible community page makes it a little more substantial than a random collection of articles that the viewer could chose to click on or get lost looking at solar water fountains or even the other band with the name MUSE could be very distracting. I also benefit from the similar names, it works both ways in my case we have had our name since 1998 and it is my legal name, that is another issue. As for the "already famous" Suppose you have some tracks on an independent film, you probably are not famous, but this qualifies as notable. Write a jingle or two, it may open up some doors to notable yet not famous.

    For us hopefully, this will lead to fontainsmuse getting wiki-leaked that is my real goal! ;-).

    • That'll be the next article: "How to get your band wiki-leaked"

  • I think that 'notable' implies at least "some" media coverage.

    • Phantomsteve

      To be notable, there have to be reliable independent sources – nowhere does it say they have to be online!

      If there is a book which has significant coverage of the band (e.g. a chapter) then that would be adequate, as long as it was publically available (even if only via a library in the city/country of publication) – as long as it was not written or published by the band or their management (remember, it needs to be independent)

      If there was a newspaper article, but it is not available online, then that can be used (a newspaper can be found in the local library’s archive, so it can be verified that the newspaper does indeed have significant coverage, and is independent (i.e. not a press release)

      That’s just some examples!

  • Astroboy

    Actually this article is correct and informative and people who are saying you have to be really famous to be on Wikipedia are self-defeating and naive. 🙂 My band page lasted 2 days before it was deleted but my vocalist has been on there for years now. Its how you write it with references. I know quite a few unknown musicians who are on Wikipedia. Its the notable links that do it. Personally I couldn’t be bothered at the time to do the proper research, to set up all the online links, but a lot of egomaniac musicians can and will do. haha. There’s a strategy to it. If you really care about it that much. I’m too understated probably.. 😉

  • Our band page was just deleted from Wiki. I wasn’t sure why and then read the “notable” requirements and conflict of interest (COI) concerns and I thought, okay I understand. Wiki cannot list every single indie band. After allow much server space do they have for how many mentions of how many bands. No problem. I had added it years ago not really knowing what I was doing anyway.

    BUT then I read the commentary by the “editors” left on the “talk page” regarding our page deletion. The comments were full of snark and derision. I mean really snarky. Nasty snarky.

    I responded reminding them that Wiki asks contributors to act courteously and assume good faith. Oooh that really brought out the snark. Wow. These are not people I’d want to hang out with. Immature, self-congratulatory and ungracious.

    If you are curious to see an example of their dissing us see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bwilkins#Please_be_civil_when_choosing_to_delete

    My point:
    Last I looked, Wiki hadn’t hired us for a gig, nor has significant traffic been driven to our site from the wiki page. Plug our name in Google and you get plenty of info on us. Don’t waste your time at Wiki.

  • RedEyeC

    Hmmm… From reading these posts, sounds like a lot of politics and bureaucracy is involved in Wikipedia. Something best avoided, no matter how “popular” or not one is.

  • Thanks for sharing the info.

  • If the dry cleaner is notable for something, they deserve a page.

  • Pingback: How to Create a Wikipedia Page for Your Band/Music — Echoes - Insight for Independent Artists()

  • Cool. Thanks for sharing this.

  • Vic Stathopoulos

    I would like someone to create a wikipedia on my music and web mastering one day, but how can 2 separate topics be done? I have been web mastering since late 90's and I have been doing music too. Both are very different. It is only know where I have started to combine music and video and use it as extra bonus material for my websites.

  • Em

    Upon checking into what makes a band notable, I found this page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability… very interesting.

    Plus, it seems that my friends the Blue Riddim Band, were, according to this Wikipedia notability requirements page, notable and unjustly deleted.

    I wish there was some way to get their page back up at least to get it corrected to standards….

    Oh, well….

  • Songwriterbooking

    Here is my experience with Wikipedia.. .a few years ago I put my own name in search engine to see what came up. surprisingly someone had written a Wiki article on me and my musical endeavors, it was nice to see this and they had the info correct, it was up for a year or two and then suddenly vanished. .when I went to investigate why it vanished. . . it said that my article was deleted because they couldn’t find any of my albums for sale anywhere. . which is TOTAL nonsense. .In fact at the time I had two albums which were distributed by CD Baby and you guys do an excellent job of this. .so when my name is put in a search engine multiple outlets which carry my releases come up in the search. .what I came to figure is that Wikipedia’s “anyone can edit a page” format lends itself to competitors and other folks who may not be amicable to you having the ability to “report” your page for whatever reason they choose..and also obvious that Wikipedia deletes a page without trying to see if they are dealing with a false claim. .I really think it’s like everything else in the music business, it has little to do with facts, accomplishments, product available or talent for that matter. . it only has to do with money and popularity among teenagers. When a company can put several hundred thousand dollars into an artist who cannot sing on key and has to rely on studio magic to “tune” their vocals, stealing or buying songs from an actual songwriter, and hyping it with irrelevant bells and whistle advertising, there is an uphill struggle for any independent artist who is not independently wealthy to compete.
    I am not convinced Wikipedia is all that relevant, but as you have pointed out, any such articles do lend themselves to an artists credibility, It would be nice to see Wiki improve their standards of credibility by not allowing pages to be deleted simply because someone “reports” them.. at least not without due research. Any editor who does this should be sanctioned by losing his editor access for a time.

  • Truth

    The comments and arguments below pretty much sum up the experience of trying to get something published on Wikipedia. Quite simply put: everyone is a hater. Wiki nerds love shooting down anything that is published, just like the idiots below are thriving on trashing this article (even though it’s 100% accurate) and arguing every valid point made. I hate nerds and these comments remind me how much I hate music industry idiots (especially musicians).

  • JVMFan

    I can’t belive I finally understand Wiki now. Thank you!! Also, a great resource: I got this list of 35,000 U.S. emails, phone numbers, addresses for radio stations. I imported the info right into my gmail and now I have 35,000 contacts in radio I can email updates and new stuff. Finally some good news for musicians. Awesome.

    Thought I would share it with the group! List is at http://www.mohrpublicity.com/
    It’s 29.00–and they guarantee it.

  • Clankenstein

    Sorry but I think trying to get yourself a Wikipedia page in this way is conniving, disgustingly desperate, and crass. Play good music, if people like it, someone else will write a page on Wikipedia. Use your own website for your personal promotion.

  • Pingback: How to create wikipedia page()

  • fd

    READ THESE COMMENTS BEFORE YOU DO ANYTHING!…I wish I had. Having been the subject of a feature profile piece in The Washington Post (Style Pg1) years ago, i figured this would be easy. Especially since the WashPost already meticulously fact checked everything i told them about myself and the reporter spent 6WEEKS following me around.. No sweat right? Wrong. After 2 days I still have nothing to show for my effort other than an incredably hollow feeling in my gut. What a waste.

  • korewa

    You have to be notable in your own country to be on Wikipedia in fact. I assume most of the commentators here live in the USA, but if (like most musicians in the world) you’re not American, you’ll have a much better chance of not getting deleted. But don’t write it yourself, get a frequent contributor to do it.

  • Jib

    One serious problem with Wikipedia not allowing just any artist: there are online music services using it for their reference material! You cannot get a biography on Spotify, for example, without a Wikipedia page. This means that independent artists get a nice blank profile and look totally unprofessional. This isn’t WP’s fault, but we cannot escape that they are being relied on for this purpose, and it sucks.

  • Guest

    Really?? The Blue Riddim Band got deleted? I've seen them in concert a number of times! I'd definitely call them "noteworthy"!

  • According to Spotify's site (http://www.spotify.com/us/work-with-us/labels-and-artists/), they also get biographical info from AMG (the place that provides artist and album information to iTunes). To find out how to get your music and bio in the All Music Guide, check out http://diymusician.cdbaby.com/2011/06/submitting-

  • steven clark

    hey that was lovely,,, I was trying to create a page for my website http://www.genericpharmacyrx.net but thanks for letting me know the nature of Wikipedia so i think twice before posting it.

  • Pingback: The DIY Musician’s Top 10 Blog Posts of 2011 | DIY Musician()

  • Seansocco

    If yr a crust/grind band "of note" you should be able to cite interviews in zines like Profane Existence. If you don't have print zines to reference, you should at least have some interview in e-zines to cite. Wikipedia doesn't like citing blogs, but the line between a blog and and zine is pretty fine sometimes. If you don't have any of these things, that's where you should be putting your efforts, not into wikipedia.

  • My wikipedia page was deleted. wtf

  • Mytarun

    can u create a page for about my website (legalserviceindia.com) that won’t be deleted, if yes do lte me know the cost etc

  • axlq

    “Be notable” is the most important piece of advice. I am a Wikipedia administrator. I delete articles about non-notable bands on a weekly basis. So many bands don’t seem to understand that Wikipedia IS NOT a vehicle to give the band more exposure. You can’t be up-and-coming. You must have already arrived. Only then can you have an article.

    Fortunately there are a dozen ways Wikipedia considers a band to have “arrived”, and those ways are defined at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BAND#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles – you only need to meet one of those criteria.

  • Latoya

    it is good informtion

  • Wikipedia is a waste of time. The only bands that are on Wikipedia and the ones that don't need the advertising aspect of it anyway.

  • I'm glad I've come across this article again, I read it aroud 6 months ago. Some of the comments on here are simply wikipedia editors scaring people away from uploading articles, in a way this is probably a good thing.

    As CD Baby mentions, with proper references you can upload an article. However the rules and regulations for musician articles on Wikipedia is OTT. We decided to go with a company called http://www.wizardsofwiki.com, they seem to have it nailed what can and can't be uploaded in relation to musicians. This saved us so much time. A friends band who we toured with, spent days researching and attempting to upload an article. Would really recommend contacting these guys for help for any notable musician.

  • Radha Kizhakkematom MalayalamW

    GUESS,IF YOU ARE A WRITER,HOW YOU ADD DETAILS TO WIKIPEDIA?

  • yes I think its easy but you must now about copyright
    http://www.mybloggingmoney.com

  • What about photographers? Who decides? How are these deciders located?

  • almark

    Notable my arse, most of us are indie, not stuck in Pitchfork. Give us something more than notable: what about socially popular organizations that help artists? Yet Wiki deletes before it goes up. They are like a group of elitists that only allow people who scratch their ears.

  • Andy Firth

    wiki-who?

  • Travis Moore

    You can use https://www.everipedia.com/about/ as an alternative. It has less bureaucracy and you can create a page for anything without fear of it being deleted. It is also easier to make quotations and refer to other pages.

    Disclosure: I am a co-founder of Everipedia.

  • Sounds like they just don’t feel you’ve created enough of a following or had enough influence/impact on your music scene to warrant an article. Maybe forget about Wiki for a while and just keep trying to build your fanbase and putting out more music, videos, touring, or whatever else gets your art into the world.

    Follow me on Twitter: @ChrisRobley