How do you evaluate a reputation management firm’s Wikipedia capabilities?

Evaluating a firm’s Wikipedia capability is among the most revealing parts of diligence, because Wikipedia punishes the wrong approach and rewards the patient one, so how a firm operates there exposes its posture. The signals to examine: the methodology, which for a credible firm means disclosed conflict-of-interest editing and Talk-page engagement rather than anonymous edits – the disclosed path is slower but durable, while the undisclosed path gets reversed and draws damaging attention. Policy fluency, since Wikipedia’s notability, sourcing, and conflict rules are intricate and a firm that does not know them will make costly mistakes. Named-editor expertise, so the work is done by people who understand the community, not outsourced anonymously. Depth of community engagement, which is how legitimate changes get made on Wikipedia. And, decisively, a refusal to do undisclosed editing, since a firm willing to break Wikipedia’s rules creates risk it will not disclose. We operate exclusively through disclosed COI editing, a standing differentiator, and explain the methodology in detail.