Wiki Republic
Guide

Biographies of Living Persons: Wikipedia's BLP Policy Explained

November 5, 2026

Biographies of Living Persons: Wikipedia's BLP Policy Explained

Biographies of Living Persons: Wikipedia’s BLP Policy Explained

Wikipedia can host a biography of a living person, but it holds those pages to its strictest standard. The biographies of living persons policy, known as WP:BLP, requires that every contentious claim rest on a reliable, published source. It also requires neutral wording and respect for the subject’s privacy. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material comes out immediately, whether it is flattering or damaging. If you are a founder, executive or public figure with a Wikipedia page, or hoping for one, this policy decides what that page can and cannot say.

Wikirepublic
wikirepublic.net
Keep Living-Person Pages Carefully Sourced
Wiki Republic creates, edits, monitors and protects Wikipedia pages, researching and sourcing content to meet notability, neutrality and verifiability guidelines.
Explore Wikipedia page support

TL;DR

  • WP:BLP applies to every Wikipedia article or section about a living person. It sits on top of the three core content policies: neutral point of view, verifiability and no original research.
  • Contentious material without a reliable source is removed at once, with no discussion required. The editor who adds or restores it carries the burden of evidence.
  • Notability comes first: a person needs significant coverage in multiple independent, reliable secondary sources before a page is appropriate.
  • Subjects who find errors should disclose their conflict of interest, then use the talk page, the BLP noticeboard or the Wikimedia volunteer response team rather than rewriting the page.
  • Pages that follow BLP closely, with independent sourcing and a dispassionate tone, are the ones that last.

Table of Contents

What the biographies of living persons policy is

Wikipedia’s policy on biographies of living persons says such material must be written with the greatest care. It must be verifiable, neutral and free of original research. It must also comply with applicable United States law. In practice, editors and administrators treat BLP as a rule that overrides ordinary editing habits. A claim that would survive on an article about a company or a film can be deleted on sight from a biography.

The reasoning is simple. A page about a living person can affect a real career, a funding round or a family. The policy states that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a tabloid, and that the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be weighed in editorial decisions.

The rule reaches beyond biographies. It also covers statements about living people in articles about companies, organizations or events. A paragraph about a CEO inside a company article is judged by the same standard as a full biography.

The Wikimedia Foundation backs the policy at the organizational level. Its resolution on biographies of living people, passed in April 2009 and amended in November 2013, urges all language editions to adopt policies that give special attention to neutrality and verifiability in these articles. It also asks the community to weigh human dignity and personal privacy.

The core requirements of WP:BLP

The policy can be reduced to a handful of working rules.

  • Inline citations for anything challengeable. All quotations, and any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, need an inline citation to a reliable, published source.
  • Immediate removal of weak contentious claims. Contentious material that is unsourced or poorly sourced is removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. The policy applies this to negative, positive, neutral or merely questionable claims alike.
  • Burden of evidence. The editor who adds or restores material must supply the sourcing.
  • Conservative writing and privacy. Pages are written conservatively and with regard for the subject’s privacy.
  • Consequences. Users who persistently or egregiously violate the policy may be blocked from editing.

The second rule matters most for brands and executives. A glowing line that cites only a press release is as vulnerable as a damaging line that cites a forum post. Both fall under the same removal standard. Promotional language does not get a pass because it is kind to the subject.

Notability: who gets a biography at all

BLP governs how a page is written. Whether a page should exist is a separate question, answered by the notability guideline for people. A person is presumed notable when they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other and independent of the subject.

That definition rules out much of what founders and executives already have:

  • Company blog posts and bios on your own site.
  • Press releases and sponsored content.
  • Interviews that only repeat what the subject says.
  • Directory listings and award pages that accept self-nomination.

Wikipedia’s essay Let the dust settle adds a further point for people in the news: being mentioned in the news does not make someone a public figure. Editors are encouraged to show restraint and to include only information relevant to the person’s notability. The same caution applies when a person is only briefly in the headlines.

Before anyone drafts a biography, the sensible first step is to check whether the sourcing clears the bar. Our guide on how to check Wikipedia notability before you draft walks through that test.

What counts as a reliable source for a living person

The policy asks editors to be very firm about high-quality, reliable sources. For living people, that has specific consequences.

Source categories and cautions for living person biographies

Independent secondary coverage is the backbone. Major newspapers, established magazines, books from reputable publishers and peer-reviewed work are the material a biography is built from. They analyze or report on the subject rather than being produced by the subject.

Primary and public records need extreme caution. The BLP policy says not to use trial transcripts, court records or other public documents to support assertions about a living person. It also says not to use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations or home and business addresses. A deed, a court filing or a government database may be accurate, and it is still the wrong kind of source for a biography.

Self-published and questionable sources are restricted. The same policy holds external links about living people to a higher standard. Questionable or self-published sources should not appear in the “Further reading” or “External links” sections of a BLP.

Subject-supplied material has limits. A subject’s own statements can be cited for uncontroversial facts about themselves in appropriate circumstances. They do not establish notability and they cannot carry contested claims.

The practical lesson: build the source base before the page. A biography with eight strong independent articles is stable. A biography with thirty weak references is a target.

Neutral point of view in a living person’s biography

Neutrality is where many well-meant drafts fail. The policy says BLPs should be written in a dispassionate tone, avoiding both understatement and overstatement. Criticism and praise can both appear when reliable secondary sources support them and when they are presented responsibly, conservatively and in a disinterested tone.

Two rules about proportion follow:

  • Editors should not give disproportionate space to particular viewpoints.
  • The views of small minorities should not be included at all.

The Manual of Style for biographies adds format guidance. Biographies of living persons are generally written in the present tense. When a controversy belongs in the lead section, the relevant material should neither be suppressed nor allowed to overwhelm the lead, with scrupulous attention to reliable sources.

In practice, that means:

Do Avoid
State what independent sources report, in plain language Adjectives such as “visionary”, “leading” or “renowned”
Give a documented controversy its proportionate weight Omitting well-sourced criticism or inflating minor criticism
Attribute opinions to those who hold them Presenting opinion as fact in Wikipedia’s own voice
Use present tense for a living subject Writing as if the career were finished

People searching for a “neutral biography on Wikipedia” are really asking for this discipline. Neutral does not mean negative or empty. It means the page reflects the balance of reliable coverage.

How Wikipedia handles disputed or defamatory claims

BLP gives editors a fast path for dangerous content. Under the policy, contentious material that is unsourced or poorly sourced is removed immediately. The administrators’ guidance goes further: if there are remotely credible allegations that disputed material is libelous, defamatory, poorly sourced, invasive of privacy or written to bring its subject into disrepute, it should be removed immediately and the page protected if necessary.

A few related points show how seriously the community treats this:

  • The handling original research policy says unsourced contentious material in a BLP must be removed immediately. For other material, if a tag is added and no sources appear for seven days, it may be removed. Material that is clearly false, ridiculous or offensive goes at once.
  • The guide for administrators on dealing with disputes explains that removing potentially libelous or privacy-invasive material from a BLP is not treated as being “involved” in the dispute. Administrators are protecting the subject from potentially false and unfair attacks.
  • Wikipedia’s page on reverting AI edits, updated in March 2026, says compliance with BLP takes precedence over concerns about AI-generated text. If an editor argues in good faith that a passage about a living person is poorly sourced or unsourced, others should not revert and reintroduce it.

For anyone managing a reputation, the implication is that BLP is the strongest lever on Wikipedia, and it works in both directions. It removes unsupported attacks, and it also removes unsupported praise. Our overview of what works in Wikipedia reputation management explains how to use that lever within the rules.

If you are the subject: how to correct a page about yourself

Wikipedia’s FAQ for article subjects sets out the sequence. Before doing anything else, disclose your conflict of interest. People are asked to refrain from editing articles about themselves. It is generally considered acceptable in limited cases:

  • Correcting minor hard-fact errors.
  • Fixing spelling or grammar.
  • Removing spam or vandalism.
  • Removing private information.
  • Removing clearly derogatory content with no or questionable sources.

For anything beyond that, the FAQ lists these routes:

  1. Post a correction request on the article’s talk page.
  2. Ask for help at the biographies of living persons noticeboard.
  3. Place an adminhelp request on your user talk page.
  4. Contact the Wikimedia Foundation’s volunteer response team at info-en-q@wikimedia.org.

For serious legal issues, including libel, the FAQ directs you to email info-en-q@wikimedia.org. If personal information or a potentially libelous statement appears in the article, contact the oversight team so it can evaluate removal from the page history.

Two mistakes make things worse. The first is a direct rewrite of a section you dislike. The second is a flurry of reverts that invites an edit war. Both put your conflict of interest on display. Our guides on conflict of interest rules and paid editing explain how disclosure works when a professional is involved. If your page is about an elected official or candidate, read how to edit a politician’s Wikipedia page as well.

Wikipedia’s biography is not your own bio

Most founders and executives already maintain a profile on their company site, and those profiles are written to persuade. Guidance on writing an attorney bio shows how professional bios are normally framed around the client’s needs and the person’s strengths. That is the right instinct for a website you control. Wikipedia reverses it. The page serves the reader of an encyclopedia, speaks in a flat third-person voice and leans on what others have published about the person.

Treat the two as different assets. Your own bio can state your mission and ambitions. Your Wikipedia biography can only record what independent sources have already reported.

Our perspective

We read WP:BLP as a quality standard more than a restriction. Pages that follow it are the ones that stay live, stay accurate and get cited by journalists, investors and AI answer engines.

Every page we draft is researched and sourced to meet Wikipedia’s notability, neutrality and verifiability guidelines. That is why we begin with an eligibility review: if the independent coverage is not there yet, no amount of skilled drafting will hold. When it is there, a page built strictly on that coverage is hard to challenge, because every claim already carries its reference.

Our focus is Wikipedia and Wikidata alone, and we work within the conflict of interest and paid editing rules. Trust is the currency of modern business, and a neutral, well-sourced Wikipedia biography is the digital equivalent of a third-party endorsement that never sleeps. After publication, monitoring matters as much as the draft, since a BLP is edited by anyone, at any hour.

Amaury

How Wiki Republic can help

If you need a biography built on BLP’s standards, we handle the work from eligibility to monitoring. A Notability & Eligibility Audit is $700 and tells you whether your coverage supports a page. Wikipedia Page Creation starts from $2,000. If a page already exists and contains errors or promotional language, Content Editing & Optimization starts from $700.

Wikirepublic

Once a page is live, our 24/7 Page Monitoring & Protection watches for edits that could breach BLP, and Reputation Management addresses inaccurate or negative content within Wikipedia’s rules. To discuss your situation, start at wikirepublic.net.

FAQ

Can Wikipedia have a biography of a living person?

Yes. Wikipedia has millions of such pages, but each must meet the notability guideline and the BLP policy. The person needs significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent secondary sources, and every contentious claim needs an inline citation.

What does WP:BLP require?

It requires inline citations to reliable, published sources for quotations and challengeable material. It requires immediate removal of unsourced or poorly sourced contentious claims, and a conservative, privacy-conscious tone. The editor adding or restoring material carries the burden of evidence.

Can I edit my own Wikipedia biography?

You are asked to avoid it, and you should disclose your conflict of interest first. Limited fixes such as spelling errors, vandalism, private information or clearly derogatory unsourced content are generally accepted. For anything else, use the talk page or the BLP noticeboard.

What should I do about a libelous statement in my page?

For serious legal issues, including libel, email the Wikimedia volunteer response team at info-en-q@wikimedia.org. If the statement contains personal information or may be libelous, ask the oversight team to evaluate removing it from the page history. Consult a licensed attorney for legal advice about your own situation.

Sources

Biographies of Living Persons: Wikipedia's BLP Policy Explained | Wiki Republic