The instinct, when you find knowledge panel wrong information about yourself or your company, is to click the Feedback link and type the correct answer. That is the step most people take first, and it is often the one least likely to work on its own.
Google’s knowledge panels are not documents someone wrote about you. They are summaries Google assembles from sources it trusts, such as Wikipedia, Wikidata, your official website, reputable news coverage and structured data across the web. If one of those sources says your company was founded in 2014 and you suggest 2016 through the Feedback form, Google has to choose between an anonymous suggestion and a source it trusts. The source usually wins. The panel only stays fixed when the source is fixed.
We call this the Source-First Fix. Find where the wrong fact comes from, correct it there, then tell Google. Below are five fixes, in the order we try them, that cover almost every case of knowledge panel wrong information we see.
Fix 1: Find the source of the wrong fact
Start by working out where Google got the error. This takes detective work, but it saves weeks.
Search for the wrong fact in quotation marks along with your name, for example “founded in 2014” plus your company name. Look at which pages contain it. Check your Wikipedia article if you have one, and your Wikidata entry, which feeds a surprising amount of knowledge panel data. Check your own website, including old About pages, press releases and structured data markup. Check business directories, Crunchbase, LinkedIn and any profiles listed in the panel’s Profiles row.
Often the culprit is close to home. An old press release on your own site says the wrong date. A former employee’s LinkedIn post describes you with an outdated title. A directory listing copied a typo years ago and spread it. In other cases, the source is a namesake. Google has merged facts about you with facts about another person or company with the same name.
Write down every source you find. That list becomes your plan for Fix 2.
Save a screenshot of the panel as it looks today, with the date. You will want it later to confirm what changed.
Fix 2: Correct the sources you control, and request changes to the rest
Fix your own properties first. Update your website’s About page, team bios and press page. Correct the structured data on your site, especially Organization or Person schema, so it states the right founding date, location, leadership and official profiles. Update every social profile you own so names, titles, dates and descriptions match.
Then work on the sources you do not control. For Wikidata, anyone can edit, but changes should be backed by a reliable published source, and editors may revert unsupported edits. For Wikipedia, the rules are stricter. If you have a conflict of interest, as the subject of an article does, Wikipedia’s guidelines ask you to propose changes on the article’s talk page with sources rather than editing directly. For directories and databases, most have a correction or claim process. For news articles, contact the publication with a polite, specific correction request and evidence.
This step takes the longest, but it is the one that makes a correction stick. Every independent source that states the right fact strengthens Google’s confidence in it.
Fix 3: Claim your panel and suggest the edit
If you have not verified your knowledge panel, do it now. Verified subjects get a stronger voice in the correction process, and their suggestions carry more weight than anonymous feedback. Verification usually takes minutes if you can sign in to an official website or profile that Google already associates with you.
Once verified, use the option to suggest an edit on the specific fact that is wrong. Be precise. Name the field, give the correct value and link to the source that supports it, ideally one of the sources you corrected in Fix 2 or an independent publication. Keep the explanation short and factual.
If you cannot verify, use the Feedback link at the bottom of the panel. Select the item that is wrong, choose the reason and suggest the correction with a source. It is less powerful than a verified suggestion, but it still helps when the underlying sources agree with you.
Do not submit the same feedback over and over. Repeated identical requests do not speed anything up. Submit once, give Google time to recrawl the corrected sources and check back in a couple of weeks.
Fix 4: Separate yourself from a namesake
When the knowledge panel wrong information comes from a merged identity, the fix is to give Google clearer signals about which facts belong to whom.
Make your own entity unmistakable. Use a consistent full name, including a middle initial if it helps, across every profile. Add distinguishing details to your official bio, such as your profession, city and company. Mark up your website with Person or Organization schema that includes sameAs links to all your official profiles. If you have a Wikidata entry, make sure it lists distinguishing properties such as occupation, employer and birth year where appropriate, with sources.
Then use the Feedback link or verified suggestion to flag specific facts, images or profiles that belong to the other person. Explain in one or two sentences that the panel has merged two people with the same name and point to a source that shows the difference.
Merged identities can take longer to untangle than a single wrong fact, because Google needs to see a consistent pattern across many sources. Patience and consistency matter more than volume of requests.
Fix 5: Escalate when the issue is legal or personal
Some wrong information is not just inaccurate. It is harmful. A panel might show a private home address, a photo you have the right to remove, defamatory claims or personal information covered by privacy law.
Google has separate processes for these cases, distinct from the knowledge panel feedback flow. It offers tools to request removal of certain personal information from search results, such as contact details and identification numbers, and a legal removal request process for content that may violate the law. People in the European Union and the UK have additional rights under data protection law. If the issue is serious, keep records of what you found and when, and consider getting advice from a lawyer who handles online reputation matters.
These routes are for content that crosses a line, not for facts you wish were different. For ordinary errors, the first four fixes are faster and more reliable.
What not to do
Some responses to knowledge panel wrong information make the problem worse. Avoid these.
Do not edit your own Wikipedia article to fix the error, even if you are right. Wikipedia’s conflict of interest guidelines ask subjects to propose changes on the talk page with sources. Direct edits by the subject are often reverted, can draw attention from editors and sometimes end with the article being tagged or rewritten in a less favorable way.
Do not create new profiles, directory listings or websites just to repeat the correct fact. Thin pages with no real purpose do not carry much weight, and a burst of new profiles can look like manipulation. One well-maintained official site and a handful of established profiles do more than twenty new ones.
Do not pay anyone who promises to remove or rewrite your knowledge panel for a fee. No outside party controls Google’s panels. Legitimate reputation firms help you correct sources and file requests, the same work described above. Anyone guaranteeing a specific change on a specific date is overselling.
Do not argue with the source in public. If a news article contains the error, a polite correction request to the editor works far better than a critical social media post. Editors are much more willing to fix a mistake for someone who treats them with respect.
And do not give up after one attempt. Some corrections take two or three rounds, as Google recrawls sources and reconciles conflicts. Keep your evidence organized and your requests calm.
Keep wrong facts from coming back
A fixed panel can break again. A new article copies an old date, a directory refreshes from a stale database or a namesake gets press coverage. The way to keep corrections in place is to make the right facts easy to find and hard to contradict.
Keep a short fact sheet on your website, on a page you link from your footer or press page. List your full name or company name, founding date, headquarters, leadership, what you do in one sentence and links to every official profile. Journalists, directory editors and AI tools all use pages like this, and it gives you a single source to point to whenever you request a correction.
Send that fact sheet to reporters when you are interviewed. Many errors start in a news story where a reporter used an old bio. A clean, current source in their inbox prevents that.
Check your panel and your top AI answers once a month. Search your name and company on Google, then ask ChatGPT, Perplexity and Gemini a simple question such as “Who founded [company] and when?” Note anything wrong and trace it back with Fix 1. Catching an error within a few weeks is far easier than untangling one that has spread across dozens of pages.
Last, keep a simple log of every correction you request: what was wrong, where you found it, what you changed and when. If the same error reappears, the log tells you exactly which source to check first.
If the error sits on a site you cannot reach and no correction process exists, document it and move on to strengthening the sources that do respond. Over time, consistent facts across many reliable sources outweigh a single stale page.
Why this matters beyond Google
Knowledge panel wrong information does not stay in the panel. The same sources that feed Google’s Knowledge Graph also inform AI assistants. When someone asks ChatGPT, Perplexity or Gemini about you or your company, there is a good chance the answer draws on the same Wikipedia article, the same Wikidata entry, the same directory listing and the same news stories. Fix the sources, and you improve your panel and your AI answers together.
That is the real case for the Source-First Fix. A correction typed into a feedback form may change one panel for a while. A correction made at the source changes what the whole web says about you.