Grokipedia 880,000 articles online! Musk: AI has the ultimate control.

Elon Musk officially launched the Open Source online encyclopedia Grokipedia, positioned as an alternative to Wikipedia. Musk stated through X that Grokipedia “is completely open source, so anyone can use it for anything for free,” with the goal of “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” As of the time of writing, the website has over 885,000 articles.

Grok AI has final editorial control, disrupting the Wikipedia model

(Source: Grokipedia)

In terms of Grokipedia, Grok AI's X seems to play a dominant role in content on the oral and review platform, while Wikipedia relies on a combination of volunteer editors and automated tools. This is a fundamental difference between the two encyclopedia models. Wikipedia adopts a “crowdsourcing” model, where anyone can edit entries, reaching consensus through community discussions and administrator arbitration. This model has proven effective over the past 20 years but has also exposed some issues.

Edit wars on Wikipedia are a common phenomenon. When editors with differing viewpoints repeatedly modify the same entry, it often requires administrator intervention or locking of the entry. This kind of controversy is particularly severe on sensitive topics such as politics, history, and religion. Moreover, there is a demographic bias within the Wikipedia editing community, as most active editors are male from Western countries, which may lead to content presenting a specific cultural and political perspective.

The AI-driven model of Grokipedia attempts to address these issues. Musk explained on Monday that users will be able to add or request changes to content on Grokipedia, with the final decision making authority resting with artificial intelligence. Musk wrote on X: “Grok has generated about 1 million articles using a large amount of computational resources. You can request Grok to add/modify/delete articles, and it will take action, or tell you not to take action along with the reasons.”

The advantages of this model lie in efficiency and consistency. AI can process modification requests in seconds, eliminating human editorial wars or power struggles. The criteria for AI judgment can be clearly defined and publicly audited, avoiding the subjectivity and opacity of human editing. Furthermore, AI can handle millions of articles simultaneously, ensuring global consistency and logical coherence.

However, this model also raises serious concerns. Handing over final decision-making power to AI means that Musk and the X team’s training and adjustment of Grok AI will directly influence the content bias of Grokipedia. If Grok AI is trained to favor a certain political stance or suppress specific viewpoints, users will be powerless to resist. This centralized control is actually more concentrated than the community governance of Wikipedia.

Comparison of Grokipedia and Wikipedia Models:

Content Creation: Grokipedia is automatically generated by AI vs Wikipedia is edited and written by humans.

Editing Permissions: Grokipedia AI has the final decision vs Wikipedia community consensus decision

Number of Articles: Grokipedia 885,000 (several months) vs Wikipedia 60 million+ (20+ years)

Political Position: Grokipedia claims to be neutral while criticizing left-leaning vs Wikipedia claims to be neutral but is criticized for being left-leaning.

Open Source Status: Grokipedia is fully open source vs Wikipedia content open source software

Freud entry differences expose divergent positions

(Source: Grokipedia)

A user X has noticed the differences between articles regarding George Floyd, an African American who was killed during an arrest by a police officer in Minnesota. The user noted that the first paragraph of the Grokipedia article emphasizes Floyd's long criminal record, while the Wikipedia article highlights that he was killed by a “white” police officer.

This comparison clearly illustrates the narrative differences between the two platforms. The version on Wikipedia foregrounds the racial factors, emphasizing that this is a case of violence by a white police officer against a Black citizen, which aligns with the narrative of the “Black Lives Matter” movement. In contrast, the version on Grokipedia chooses to prioritize mentioning Floyd's criminal record, a framing that may be interpreted as an attempt to suggest that the victim had issues themselves, thereby downplaying the severity of police violence.

This choice is not neutral. In news writing and historical records, the type of information that appears in the opening paragraph is crucial for framing. Readers are often influenced by the information they see first, forming initial impressions. Grokipedia's choice to emphasize criminal records rather than racial factors reflects its bias on this sensitive issue.

Elon Musk has repeatedly criticized Wikipedia, claiming that it is politically and culturally biased to the left. Notably, while the Grokipedia article on “Wikipedia” does not mention Musk's direct criticisms, it does highlight research indicating that the platform has left-wing bias. The article states: “Research analyzing the language and tone of articles reveals a bias in neutrality, with right-leaning political figures and topics being described negatively more frequently compared to left-leaning political figures and topics, indicating that these policies do not fully mitigate the ideological bias caused by editor demographics and source selection.”

Wikipedia strikes back, accusing Grokipedia of extreme right-wing bias

At the same time, the Wikipedia article about Grokipedia cites concerns from critics that Grokipedia may lean towards Elon Musk's “far-right” views. “Critics have highlighted entries that promote far-right views or support Musk's perspectives. NBC News pointed out that the entries about Musk in Grokipedia do not mention the gesture he made in January 2025, which many believe to be a Nazi salute, while the Wikipedia entry does,” the Wikipedia article about Grokipedia stated.

These mutual accusations reveal a deeper issue: who defines “truth”? Musk claims that Grokipedia pursues “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,” but critics argue that this is merely Musk's version of the truth. Wikipedia claims its editing policies ensure neutrality, but critics argue that the demographic bias of its editors leads to a left-leaning perspective.

The controversy surrounding Musk's “Nazi salute” gesture is a typical case. This gesture sparked widespread debate in January 2025, with some people viewing it as an unintentional waving motion, while others considered it a deliberate Nazi salute. Grokipedia chose not to mention this controversy, which could be interpreted as an effort to protect Musk's image. Wikipedia chose to document this controversy, which could be interpreted as amplifying negative information. Whichever choice is made, it reflects the editorial stance.

From an epistemological perspective, an absolutely neutral encyclopedia may not exist at all. The selection, organization, and presentation of any information involve value judgments. Which facts are considered important? Which sources are deemed reliable? Which modes of expression are regarded as appropriate? There are no singularly correct answers to these questions. Grokipedia and Wikipedia represent two different solutions: one is AI-driven centralized decision-making, while the other is community-driven decentralized negotiation.

The contradiction between open source commitments and actual control

Musk emphasized that Grokipedia “is completely Open Source, so anyone can use it for free to do anything.” This commitment is highly appealing as it implies decentralization and community ownership. However, the definition of Open Source needs to be examined carefully. The code and content of Grokipedia are Open Source, but the training data, model weights, and decision logic of Grok AI may still be closed source.

If Grok AI itself is not Open Source, then the Open Source nature of Grokipedia is merely superficial. Users can copy the content of articles and the website code, but cannot replicate the judgment ability of the AI. This means that Musk and the X team still hold substantial control. If they modify the training of Grok AI or adjust its decision-making rules, the content bias of Grokipedia will change accordingly, and the external community will be powerless to intervene.

The service has been delayed for several days as Musk paused the release to “clear the promotion on Grokipedia.” It reportedly crashed temporarily after launch but quickly came back online. These early technical issues show that Grokipedia is still in the testing phase, and the system's stability and content quality need time to be validated.

At the time of writing this article, the website is fully functional and has over 885,000 articles to date. This number is astonishing in a short period. The English version of Wikipedia has approximately 6 million articles after more than 20 years of development. Grokipedia reached 885,000 in just a few months, demonstrating the powerful capability of AI-generated content. However, quantity does not equal quality. Wikipedia's articles have undergone years of editing and improvement by the community, and the citations are usually very detailed. Whether Grokipedia's articles achieve the same level of academic rigor remains to be seen.

In the long run, the biggest challenge facing Grokipedia is the trust issue. Wikipedia has established a relatively credible brand after more than 20 years of operation. Although there are controversies over bias, most academic institutions and media still regard it as a reliable reference source. Grokipedia needs to prove the reliability and neutrality of its content to gain a similar status. If it is widely regarded as “Musk's propaganda tool,” it will be difficult to gain recognition in academic and professional fields.

Musk added, “We will never be perfect, but we will continue to strive towards that goal.” This humble statement shows he is aware of the challenges of this endeavor. Building a truly neutral, accurate, and comprehensive encyclopedia is an extremely difficult task that requires continuous effort and community trust. Whether Grokipedia can succeed will depend on its ability to deliver on its promise of “truth” in actual operations, or whether it will become another battlefield of political struggles.