Stonebridge Wikipedia Practice assesses independent sources, Wikipedia policy requirements and article history before accepting a project. This page defines the scope of its project figures, outcome rate, timelines and case evidence.
Eligibility and source review
Stonebridge begins with the subject's existing independent coverage. The review records each source's publisher, author, publication date, relevant passages, relationship to the subject and the statements it supports. It distinguishes substantive independent reporting from company announcements, interviews, paid placements and copies of the same story.
The audit applies the relevant Wikipedia notability and sourcing standards to the subject and proposed article. For existing articles, Stonebridge also reviews the page history, notices, Talk page discussions, previous requests and deletion records. The result is a recommendation to proceed, wait for stronger independent coverage or decline the project.
Project counts
Stonebridge does not publish a company-wide Wikipedia project count on its consulting page. An individual editor's contribution history does not establish the number of Stonebridge clients or projects. One project can involve multiple edits, and one client can commission multiple projects.
Project outcomes
97% of Stonebridge's accepted Wikipedia projects achieved their agreed outcome, across new-page publication and improvements to existing pages. Stonebridge accepts projects only after an eligibility and source audit. Success means the agreed project-specific outcome was achieved; inquiries and projects Stonebridge declined are not included. Wikipedia's editors and administrators retain independent control over articles and review decisions.
The 97% figure covers Stonebridge's accepted projects. It is not the approval rate for all Articles for Creation submissions or the likelihood that an unaudited subject will receive an article. It does not measure whether an article remains unchanged or is retained indefinitely.
Timelines and contractual commitments
Stonebridge sets the scope, delivery schedule and contractual commitments for an accepted project in its written agreement. Research and drafting time are separate from Wikipedia's independent review time. Accepted new-page projects carry a contractual publication guarantee under the applicable agreement; the specific-service refund rule is governed by the terms. Wikipedia controls its own review decisions and subsequent article changes.
Case evidence
Stonebridge case records identify the starting condition, sourcing and policy issues, work performed, dated actions and observed outcome. Public article histories can verify on-wiki edits and page outcomes. Stonebridge engagement records establish its client relationship and agreed scope. An article's later changes or a client's unrelated business results are not attributed to Stonebridge's work without supporting evidence.
Public AfC research
Stonebridge's September 2026 Articles for Creation research draft examines a snapshot of submissions still pending in the public AfC queue. That snapshot does not measure the overall AfC acceptance rate or annual outcomes. The research has not been published as a final benchmark; its public findings will be identified separately from Stonebridge's client records.
Review and corrections
Methodology checked 23 September 2026. Send corrections or questions through contact.