- Grokipedia was born as an encyclopedia of IA and open source with about 885.000 entries.
- Access on grokipedia.com without registration; English for now and without community editing.
- Automated verification by Grok raises concerns about transparency and potential bias.
- Major differences with WikipediaCommunity openness vs. AI-powered generation and control.
Elon Musk He has put forward an ambitious project: to create an AI-powered encyclopedia capable of competing with Wikipedia. That platform is called Grokipedia and is being developed by xAI, his company. Artificial Intelligence, with the promise of being more accurate, less biased and free for everyone.
The initial version 0.1 is now available on the official website, with a volume of articles around 885.000 automatically generated entries And with a resounding declaration of intent: Musk himself claims that this first version is already better than Wikipedia and that version 1.0 will be "ten times better." The launch took place in the early hours of October 28, 2025 (peninsular time), in a debut that has been accompanied by praise, doubts, and a good dose of controversy.
What is Grokipedia and why was it created?
Grokipedia is an online encyclopedia created by xAI that seeks to reorganize knowledge using its Grok language model. According to Musk, it aspires to "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth," a motto that frames its goal of becoming an alternative to Wikipedia, which he criticizes for... alleged ideological biasesThe interface is simple and functional: a large search bar on the homepage —very much in the style of Google— allows you to go directly to the content.
At this early stage, the site shows figures close to 885.200–885.279 articlesAccording to various media outlets that tested it on launch day, the page design is reminiscent of Wikipedia, with titles, sections, references, and a sidebar index to facilitate navigation. However, for now, the content appears without images and with a minimalist, text-focused style.
The project's raison d'être is to correct what Musk considers a problem of bias and lack of objectivity on the web. To this end, xAI explains that the articles are generated and "verified" by Grok, its AI. Furthermore, Musk has emphasized that Grokipedia is open source and that anyone can use his software for free, something he has spread on his X account (formerly Twitter).
The launch of Grokipedia also aligns with Musk's broader strategy: to reduce reliance on Wikipedia as a training source. The company plans to rely primarily on content from X and other sources. databases from the network itself, which promises fast updates, but raises questions about reliability and algorithmic filters.
How to access grokipedia.com and use the encyclopedia
Getting in is as simple as typing in the official address: grokipedia.comNo registration is required to view the content; simply use the search bar and explore the results. The pages display an introduction to the topic, thematic sections, and a sidebar summarizing the article's outline, allowing you to jump to the section you're interested in.
For now, the platform is only available in English. Even so, you can read in Spanish with automatic translation from browsers like Google Chrome o Microsoft EdgeThis solution is sufficient to understand the content, while we wait for Grokipedia to incorporate more languages natively.
If you want to save your history and access your searches more quickly, you can create an account or log in with your email address, X, Google or Apple. For now, that's the main advantage of signing up: save your searches to return to them with one click. There are no community editing features, nor a visible change history like on Wikipedia.
Anyone who has used Wikipedia will recognize the approach: Grokipedia cites several sources at the end of each article and organizes the content in an orderly fashion. The difference is that here everything is written and maintained by an AI. In fact, each entry can display recent "verification" notes from Grok, a detail that suggests a automated update mechanism in background.
There are two more details to consider: some media outlets that have tested it indicate that, initially, No Pictures in the articles; and on the main page, a "color mode" can be adjusted to customize the appearance, completing the functional and unpretentious approach that dominates version 0.1.
How content is generated and “verified”
Grokipedia's key promise is its internal fact-checking: Grok, xAI's language model, not only writes but also verifies what it publishes. This raises the first big question: does an LLM work with statistical text patternsnot with “truth” in the strict sense, so automated verification requires clear criteria, sources, and methods.
When a page indicates that it has been “verified by Grok” a few hours ago, what corpus is it compared against? The platform hasn't precisely detailed this process. We do know, however, that xAI wants to rely less on Wikipedia and more on content from X and its own repositories, which implies faster updates but also a risk of reinforcement of biases from the environment from which it drinks.
Furthermore, as numerous cases with generative models show, the AI hallucinations They are a real phenomenon: plausible but incorrect phrases that the machine “invents.” Hence, editors and experts warn of the need for transparency to understand how it is decided what is true, which source prevails, and under what conditions errors are corrected.
On the positive side, Grokipedia offers a regular update schedule that can be useful for dynamic topics, and each article includes external references. This anchoring to sources is essential for auditing published content, especially if the goal is to combat [unclear/unclear]. perceived bias and gain public trust.
Key differences with Wikipedia
Wikipedia is a community-run, multilingual encyclopedia where thousands of volunteers write, edit, and review content transparently. Its traceability is exceptional: you can see who changed what, when, and why. Wikimedia emphasizes that the project is independent. sustained by donations and with public policies and debates that anyone can consult.
Grokipedia, on the other hand, relies almost entirely on AI to generate its texts. Users cannot edit entries directly, nor do they have an open version history like Wikipedia. The approach involves an automated system that aims to verify in real time, with Open source and free accessbut whose editorial decision-making is encapsulated in the model.
The Wikimedia Foundation itself, through spokespeople like Lauren Dickinson and Franziska Heine, has responded to Musk's messages defending Wikipedia's community-based approach and radical transparency. Their message is clear: even if alternatives exist, free and verifiable knowledge is essential. community and human supervision, and they have not seen conclusive evidence of a systemic left-wing bias as alleged.
There is also automation in Wikipedia, but under controls: it is estimated that around 400 bots with limited tasks and supervised by editors, a very different approach from that of an almost entirely AI-driven editorial system as proposed by Grokipedia.
Where do the texts come from? Adaptations, licenses, and the ethical debate
Another sensitive point of Boot The source of the content has been key. Numerous Grokipedia articles appear to adapt—and in some cases reproduce almost verbatim—Wikipedia pages, as noted by users with comparisons on technical topics (for example, products like MacBook Air or Lincoln Mark VIII). The Creative Commons license is acknowledged in the footer of the pages where applicable.
Legally, such reuse is permissible if the CC BY-SA 4.0 license (attribution and share alike) is respected. The controversy is not so much legal as ethical: is the legal notice sufficient if the “new” encyclopedia is limited to repackage other people's content with an algorithmic verifier? For some critics, in its version 0.1 Grokipedia is more like an automated “mirror” than an alternative with its own processes and real openness to the community.
Wikimedia has taken a jab in that direction with much-discussed phrases like "even Grokipedia needs Wikipedia to exist," a way of reminding everyone that the knowledge value chain The resources that AI consumes are based, precisely, on collaborative human work.
Bias and examples that ignite the debate
The discussion about biases is not theoretical: there are already examples highlighted in Grokipedia's debut. In its treatment of climate change, media reports indicate that the platform raises doubts about the scientific consensus and accuses entities like Greenpeace of alarmism, a narrative that contrasts with the approach of consensus described in Wikipedia.
In its coverage of social movements, the case of Black Lives Matter has been highlighted: Grokipedia emphasizes in its summary that its protests “mobilized millions” and mentions riots, insurance costs, and dozens of deaths, before citing figures from ACLED (with 93% of protests being peaceful) and questioning them for “underestimating rioters.” This selection and ordering of data fuels the criticism that the encyclopedic narrative It is ideologically shaped.
Articles by media figures like Tucker Carlson have also been analyzed, emphasizing his role in "exposing systemic biases" in journalism. One piece cites a Newsweek article that echoes this idea attributed to Carlson himself, leading editors and observers to demand more robust citation criteria and diversity of sources.
Meanwhile, voices aligned with the right have welcomed the arrival of Grokipedia. The Russian ideologue Aleksandr Dugin, for example, celebrated the fact that the article about him was “neutral and fair” on the new platform, in contrast to what he considers “defamatory” treatment on Wikipedia. These cases illustrate how the perception of neutrality It changes according to the reader's ideological perspective.
What the media and the community say
European and tech media outlets that tested the service on launch day describe an experience very similar to Wikipedia: there's a sidebar index, endnotes, and a prominent search boxEuronews highlighted the absence of images for the time being and the visual similarity to Wikipedia, while other news outlets emphasized that the number of articles was around 885.200.
From Wikimedia Germany, its director general, Franziska Heine, emphasized that Wikipedia does not belong to any company, that it is independent and relies on thousands of volunteers, with a "radically transparent" system that anyone can understand. where does knowledge come from? and what editions have been published.
In the realm of political criticism, it has also been noted that figures and prosecutors affiliated with the US Republican Party have pressured Wikipedia with investigations and inquiries regarding its status and practices, alleging "manipulation" and "propaganda." Within this context, Musk and his followers position Grokipedia as ideological counterweightHowever, the platform has not yet explained its editorial method in detail.
An interesting detail about the coverage: some third-party pieces reviewed by Grokipedia included advertising modules (for example, from an exchange of cryptocurrencies, ) and financial disclaimers unrelated to the project. It's not something typical of Grokipedia, but it's important to distinguish journalistic analysis from the actual functioning of the encyclopedia.
Advantages, limitations and recommendations for use
On the positive side, Grokipedia offers speed in creating and updating texts, a wide range of topics from the outset, and an open approach (reusable software, free access) that can encourage developers and media outlets to experiment. For the user, the search experience is straightforward: You search and read, without intermediate steps or paywalls.
Its main limitation today lies in the opacity of the editorial process and the impossibility of community editing. Without public mechanisms for deliberation and version control, trust depends on what the publisher does—or fails to do. algorithmic verifierFurthermore, reliance on sources from X's environment can introduce selection biases, noise, and current agendas.
How can you get the most out of it while minimizing risks? It's best to treat Grokipedia as a complementary source, not the sole arbiter. Cross-reference relevant data with other independent references, pay attention to the citations included in each article, and check if there have been any errors. recent updates that correct or expand the content. This way you'll gain context without subscribing to closed narratives.
Some practical tips for everyday use: verify key facts in specialized organizations or publications, use the search function to get quick overviews, and return to the entries that matter to you from time to time, as the platform updates automatically. And if you register, take advantage of your saved history to retrieve queries Instantly.
What's next: promises and challenges of version 1.0
Musk has assured that version 1.0 will be "10 times better" than 0.1, a very high bar that raises expectations for new features, additional languages, and editing or review capabilities that are not currently available. If Grokipedia wants to compete with Wikipedia, sooner or later it will have to addressing transparencyexplain their fact-checking and give the community room to intervene.
Until then, we have a fast, open-source encyclopedia with a database of hundreds of thousands of articles and an AI that writes and corrects itself. It's a far-reaching experiment in knowledge curation, but also a reminder that objectivity doesn't magically appear from an algorithm: it requires public procedures, diversity of sources and constant civic vigilance.
The race to reimagine knowledge on the internet is on: Grokipedia is accelerating thanks to AI, Wikipedia is holding strong with community and transparency, and users have more responsibility than ever to verify information, demand explanations, and get the best of both worlds. without swallowing the worst.
Passionate writer about the world of bytes and technology in general. I love sharing my knowledge through writing, and that's what I'll do on this blog, show you all the most interesting things about gadgets, software, hardware, tech trends, and more. My goal is to help you navigate the digital world in a simple and entertaining way.