Clients comparing agencies often see wild price spreads. The honest drivers are boring: how many sources must be read and graded, whether a prior rejection must be unwound, how much dual review the draft needs, and whether monitoring after publication is included. What that watch looks like is covered in why Wikipedia page monitoring matters.
Source volume raises cost even when the article stays short
A heavily covered subject can cost more than a lightly covered one. Forty independent pieces must be reconciled; contradictions take time. Thin subjects are cheaper only when you stop at “not yet” instead of forcing a draft.
Prior declines add forensic work
Reading reviewer comments, auditing what failed, and deciding whether coverage has improved since is a separate labour block. Agencies that ignore the decline history tend to repeat it.
What should never be a line item
Guaranteed acceptance, guaranteed ranking, and guaranteed knowledge panels are not deliverables anyone controls. If they appear on an invoice, treat the rest of the pitch with suspicion.
Published tiers beat opaque “custom only” quotes
We publish starting points from $700 upward and fix the figure in writing after assessment. Full package detail lives on the pricing page. Creation scope is described under page creation.
