Jamie
Took the money, missed the deadline, went silent
Paid $1,700 for a guaranteed Wikipedia page. Four months later: no page, no refund, no replies. We contracted Wiki Advisers (contracting entity on the agreement: Evrima Chicago LLC) earlier this year for their Startup Package, $1,700, to create a Wikipedia page for our company. The written agreement promised approval within 4 to 6 weeks. It also stated that the provider "not only guarantees getting the page up live but also guarantees that it would stay up," backed by a 100% money-back guarantee. What actually happened: 1. The page was never submitted for review, let alone published. 2. Of the eight items listed in the package, we received two: initial research, and a project manager. 3. The two "notability articles" written and placed on our behalf went to dutable.com and theinscribermag.com. We were given no say in the choice of outlet. Neither site is usable as a Wikipedia source. theinscribermag.com appears in Wikipedia's own spam link reports, and dutable.com sells guest posts for around $5 through backlink marketplaces. These placements had no realistic prospect of supporting a notability case. 4. When those articles predictably failed to support the draft, we were told we needed to buy additional articles. Supplying that coverage was what the package was sold to us for in the first place. 5. We invoked the contractual refund on 14 May 2026 and repeated the request five times over the following two weeks. Each time we were offered further purchases or a phone call instead of the refund. 6. Since May 2026 we have received no reply of any kind. Our view, based on the above: the work delivered could not have produced the outcome that was sold, and the money-back guarantee written into the contract was not honoured. One thing we did not know at the outset, and wish we had. Wikipedia's own published guidance states that no editor can guarantee that a draft will be accepted or that a page will stay up. Any firm selling that guarantee is promising something it has no ability to deliver. That single clause should have been our warning. We hold the full contract and the complete email thread and are happy to provide them.