Give every source the same clear starting facts
Entity building for AI SEO helps make your organization’s public information clear and consistent. We begin with facts your team can confirm. Then we compare how those facts appear across your website and relevant public sources.
A company name may appear with different spellings. A directory may still point to an old domain, while your site describes a product relationship differently. Those small mismatches can leave readers unsure whether each page describes the same organization. The useful first move is to identify the correct facts, not to create more profiles.
We collect your official name, alternate names, website, products and relevant locations. We also note connections to parent organizations, related products or sister businesses. Your team confirms uncertain details before we suggest changes. This gives your wider AI search visibility work a more dependable starting point. Where website structured data needs attention, we can connect the review with technical AEO and keep the entity details aligned.
Move from scattered details to a usable source list
A source review turns your existing online information into a practical list of next actions. We compare each selected profile with your approved facts and record what needs attention.
- Collect confirmed details. You share the official website, preferred names, products, locations and profiles you already know about. We mark anything that needs a supporting page or a team decision.
- Compare the sources. We check for differences in names, descriptions, domains, locations and relationships. Each item goes into one of 3 groups: consistent, needs confirmation, or not suitable for this organization.
- Agree the next actions. We record the source, the proposed correction, who can approve it and what evidence is needed. Your team can see which updates we can make and which need an account holder or source owner.
Say a product has been renamed, but a directory still uses its former name. We would note the source and ask you to confirm the current wording. Then we would include the correction in the agreed action list. For a wider picture of answer patterns, the GEO audit can sit alongside this source review.
Which records and connections belong in the plan?
The right source set is the one that can support useful facts about your organization and stay accurate. We review each candidate for relevance, available evidence and the ability to maintain its information.
Directories and company databases
We compare your official website with relevant directories and databases, including Crunchbase where it fits. A profile should describe your organization, not a similarly named product, founder or unrelated business. If a source does not suit your organization, we leave it out rather than treating it as a required listing.
Wikidata and public evidence
We assess whether Wikidata is appropriate and whether the details you want to add have suitable supporting sources. We do not treat an entry as a default task. Our Wikidata and knowledge graph work can review an existing record or help you decide what information is ready to present.
sameAs links on your website
A sameAs connection should point to a profile that represents the same entity. We check proposed links one by one, rather than adding every page that mentions your name. We can also connect this work to AI visibility monitoring, so your team has a place to review changes and open questions over time.
Keep the record useful for the people who maintain it
You receive a source-by-source record that makes the work easy to review and continue. It shows the current information, the proposed action and any evidence or approval still needed.
Picture a DeFi protocol with an active forum when a partner asks for a one-page overview. The team has useful information, but names and product relationships are described differently across its pages. We would compare those sources, confirm the approved wording and record which changes belong in the overview and public profiles.
Depending on what we agree, your team can receive:
- An inventory of relevant official and third-party profiles.
- A comparison of names, descriptions, domains and key relationships.
- A correction list with evidence needs and action owners.
- Recommended sameAs links and website structured-data updates.
- A status record separating completed work from pending review.
For example, a profile may need an account holder to make a change. The record names that next action instead of marking it complete. We can also identify related content improvements for AI answers when your approved facts need clearer presentation on your own site.
Keep the facts clear and choose a practical next step
The work is most useful when your team can confirm the facts and point us to supporting sources. We keep one row per source. That makes it easy to see what changed, what remains open and who can move it forward.
Directory owners set their own profile rules. Wikidata contributors decide whether submitted changes fit their guidelines. AI answer systems also choose their sources and wording independently. We can complete the agreed research, corrections and appropriate submissions. But we cannot promise a profile will be accepted or that an AI system will cite your organization.
If you already have a source list, we can begin there. If not, send your official website, preferred organization name, key product relationships and any profiles you want us to check. We’ll compare the material and confirm what needs your input. Then we’ll return a practical plan for approval.
How it works
- Share the facts you approveSend your official website, preferred names, products, locations and known profiles. Include supporting pages for details that have changed or may need explanation.
- Review the source footprintWe compare selected profiles with your approved information. We note contradictions, outdated details and facts that need confirmation.
- Agree what to addressTogether, we choose relevant sources, actions and owners. We also note which updates need account access or more evidence.
- Complete and record the workWe make the agreed updates or give your team clear instructions where needed. You receive a status record of completed actions and open items.
Frequently asked questions
What will you check before changing a public profile?
We compare the profile with your official website and the facts your team approves. That includes names, descriptions, domains, locations and relevant relationships. If a detail needs evidence or an internal decision, we mark it for confirmation before suggesting an update. This keeps the action list grounded in information your organization can stand behind.
Is a Wikidata entry right for every organization?
No. We first consider whether a Wikidata presence suits the organization and whether the information has appropriate supporting sources. If it is not a good fit, we can focus on an accurate existing record, relevant directories and your website instead. The review helps your team decide without treating a new entry as an automatic task.
How do you decide which directories to review?
We look at whether a directory describes your organization, can support a useful fact and can be kept current. We also check whether your team can confirm and maintain the profile. A source that belongs to a different product or has no clear use for your public record can be left out. That keeps the list focused and manageable.
What should we send before the source review?
Start with your official website, preferred organization name, known profiles and a short note about important product or company relationships. If a name or domain recently changed, share the page that confirms the current version. We can begin with those materials and ask focused questions about any remaining details.
How long does entity building usually take?
The schedule follows the number and condition of the sources, plus the time needed for your team to confirm facts or approve changes. We agree the work sequence after reviewing the source list. Your status record shows which actions are complete and which are waiting on evidence, access or an outside review.
Will this work make ChatGPT cite our organization?
No. We can align the agreed facts and document appropriate source updates, but ChatGPT decides which information to use and how to phrase its answer. For example, we can review a sample question and the current response alongside the pages your team considers authoritative. That helps shape the source review, without promising a citation.
When should sameAs point to a profile?
Use sameAs for a profile that represents the same organization or entity described on your website. A page that merely mentions your business is not enough. We check each proposed destination against the entity details, then record which connections are appropriate and which need a closer look.
Tell us about your project
Answer four quick questions and a manager will send you a plan, timing and a price range within the hour. Everything stays confidential.
Loading the form…