In what might be the most passive-aggressive internet rivalry of the year, Wikipedia and Grokipedia have both written official entries about each other – and they read like two very different versions of reality.
According to Wikipedia’s entry on Grokipedia, the Elon Musk-backed site is an “AI-generated online encyclopedia developed by xAI,” launched in beta on October 27, 2025. It explains that all content is created and edited by the Grok language model, though the exact process isn’t clear. It also points out that “many articles are derived from Wikipedia articles, with some copied nearly verbatim,” a polite way of saying Grokipedia started by lifting content from the very platform it claims to replace. Wikipedia’s version also doesn’t shy away from criticism, noting that early reviews described Grokipedia’s articles as “promoting right-wing perspectives and Elon Musk’s views.” It even mentions concerns over hallucinated facts and algorithmic bias – in short, a full rundown of every possible red flag about AI writing history.
Grokipedia’s own description of Wikipedia tells a very different story. On Grokipedia, Wikipedia is described as a “collaborative, multilingual online encyclopedia” that helped democratize information through volunteer editing and open licensing. It sounds respectful – until the second half. The entry spends several sentences detailing Wikipedia’s “persistent criticisms,” including “systemic ideological biases” and a “left-leaning slant” in its political coverage. It even cites computational analyses linking right-leaning figures to more negative sentiment and quotes co-founder Larry Sanger’s claim that Wikipedia has been “captured by ideologically driven editors.” The subtext is clear: Grokipedia thinks Wikipedia has turned into a liberal echo chamber.
Together, the two entries read like dueling press releases from rival news outlets. Wikipedia frames Grokipedia as a half-baked Musk vanity project built on borrowed content and political bias. Grokipedia paints Wikipedia as a bloated, agenda-driven relic run by partisan volunteers. Both accuse the other of being biased – and both sound slightly defensive while doing it.
The irony is that neither can exist without the other. Grokipedia’s launch relied heavily on Wikipedia’s database for its initial articles, while Wikipedia’s entry on Grokipedia immediately catalogued the newcomer’s controversies. One calls the other propaganda; the other calls it derivative. Both are technically correct, and both seem to enjoy the drama.
In the end, the two encyclopedias don’t just document facts – they document their feud. Wikipedia champions human consensus, Grokipedia champions algorithmic purity, and somewhere between them lies the modern internet’s favorite pastime: arguing about who’s more objective.