Atharv Sankpal

Background

More than five years working on personal branding, first producing AI video for brands and then on the wider problem behind it: how a person becomes findable, and then credible, to people who have never met them.

Most of that work has been with founders and businesses in the United States, on the practical end of digital presence rather than the theoretical one. Credible Roots came out of the same work, narrowed to the part that is permanent: Wikipedia, Wikidata, the Google knowledge graph, and what AI answer engines retrieve when someone asks about you.

Outside Credible Roots, he writes and works at atharvsankpal.com.

What he writes about here

• Wikipedia notability — what the guidelines actually require, which sources count, and why accomplished people get declined. Start here.
• Wikidata — a far lower bar than Wikipedia, and misunderstood in both directions. Start here.
• Google knowledge panels — no submission form, no paid route, and what actually produces one. Start here.
• AI search visibility — how answer engines pick sources, and which crawler controls matter. Start here.
• Distribution and founder-led content — what publishing consistently does and does not get you. Start here.

The full archive is on the field notes page.

How the pieces are made

Claims are checked against the primary source before drafting: Wikipedia's own guidelines rather than a summary of them, the Wikimedia Terms of Use rather than a blog post about them, the published crawler documentation from Google, OpenAI and Anthropic rather than an agency's reading of it. Those sources are named and linked at the foot of each piece.

Drafting is AI-assisted. Nothing publishes unread: the claims are checked, corrections made and padding cut before it goes out, and the byline means that review happened rather than that a person typed every word. The full method, including what does not get published, is on the editorial standards page, and any post-publication correction is logged on the corrections page.

What he does not claim

Worth stating plainly, because this is a field where credentials get inflated.

• Not a Wikipedia administrator, and not speaking for the Wikimedia Foundation or for Google.
• Not able to guarantee that an article survives review, or that a knowledge panel appears. Those decisions belong to volunteer editors and to Google.
• Where something on this site is a practitioner report rather than published research, it is labelled as one.

Getting in touch

Corrections, disagreements and questions about a specific claim are all welcome, and corrections get logged rather than quietly edited. Contact page, or LinkedIn.