Do you use Grokipedia over Wikipedia?
Been using wikipedia for 20 years now now going to change to a billionaire jew's go... i mean, toy project
>>107078242Wikipedia is superior in every way.
>>107078242they're both shit
>>107078282This.Dorkipedia has an article on the lolocaust, as if that actually happened
The whole concept of a huge Wiki of everything doesn't work anymore because shared reality is a thing of the past
>>107078331This is why I only read the 1911 Britannica, literally no mention of the Holocaust.
>>107078242Wikipedia is better here. The most important fact about floyd is that he was murdered. Or "murdered", whichever you believe. Regardless it should be the first thing that it talks about.
>>107078242Grokipedia repeatedly links sources that state the exact opposite of what they're citing it for. It's less reliable than using Grok itself, somehow.
>Wikipedia creates article for Gaza Genocide>Goylon Muskstein immediately rolls out his Great Value versionGuess the ADL finally got to him.
>>107078365Grok was banned on X for saying Israel was doing a genocide. Musk has always been zogged.
>>107078242Litmus test: who does Grokipedia say killed Mary Phagan?
>>107078242>Before replying check Elon Musks and Donald Trumps opinion about the topicvs>We will not allow edits or articles that have had no academic sourcesi love elon
>>107078682It's implying Frank was innocent lmao fuck Elon Muskhttps://grokipedia.com/page/The_Murder_of_Mary_Phagan
>>107080621>very first reference is from adl.org
>>107078331Missing one on the Gaza Genocide though.
>>107078344Based
>>107078342shared reality has never been a thing, but also you can have tabs of the same article with each version of it, even if it'd cause a massive shitstorm
>>107080626Oy vey
>>107078242Good goy, enjoy that bone.And don't forget to rely on it for everything Israel related.>>107078365Yep it has a Palestinian Genocide "Accusation" article despite every relevant body, UN, ICC and scholar associations concluding that it is a genocide.>>107078375What is more crazy is that how he folded like a total bitch despite kvetching about ADL earlier. ADL has been jannying xitter for quite a while now. Recent algo change to push more ZOGslop on everyone's throats is the cherry on top.Is he just a spineless pussy or do they have kompromat on him? That's all I wonder.
>>107078242I tried using it and in every case the article was literally copied from Wikipedia but had worse formatting.
>>107078344Exactly. And Johnson's 1755 Dictionary also, no mention of the Industrial revolution.
>>107078242Now I do yeah. It's pretty good. Better than Shittypedia at applying their own policies.
>>107078242Not really a question. Grokipedia is a joke, unless you are a mind broken culture warrior cry baby.
>>107078242This sounds insane and is clearly biased. What are the sources ([1],[2] etc)?
>>107081069>insaneYet it's old news.>sourcesThe first link is Plebbitors' favorite fact-checking website, Snopes. The second links to the Minnesota Star Tribune.
>>107078242they literally both say the same shit except grok (unnecessarily) makes sure to tell you he's a criminal in the first sentence.
>>107081096Can you give me the links?>inb4 search itI dont trust cucked results
>>107081147Too afraid to use Grokipedia yourself, anon?https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/06/12/george-floyd-criminal-record/https://www.startribune.com/george-floyd-derek-chauvin-fact-check/601346076
>lovingly written and maintained by an army of enthusiast volunteers from all over the world>some risk of bias on politically charged topicsvs>regurgitated slop produced by one private company's hallucination machine>all charged topics written from /pol/'s POVhmm
>>107081161Thanks!I thought I would have to sign up on twitter, which I dont have
>>107081192>I thought I would have to sign up on twitterNah, everything's public.
depends
>>107078242when will grok have pictures?
>>107078242What's wrong with wikipedia's article?
>>107081177Wikipedia is more biased than Grokipedia. The science says so.You wouldn't call Larry Sanger a poltard, right anon?https://larrysanger.org/2025/10/grokipedia-a-first-look/
>>107078344>This is why I only read the 1911 Britannica, literally no mention of the Holocaust.it isn't even mentioned in the editions from the 1970s.
>>107081265"""Power users""" ruin everything because they basically take ownership of articles and only allow whatever they like.It goes beyond "muh this doesn't align with my political views", everything is affected.Just look at this shit about narwhals: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0L-3FfkXfM
>>107081192No you just go on grokipedia.com and search topics
>>107081268>i asked gpt 4o to judge bias on topics i selected>an interview i did with tucker carlson>those of us disgusted by wikipedialol
>>107081390>on topics i selectedHe went for controversial topics on purpose, what's the issue?You can do the same thing with other topics if you like.>lolYou know Sanger was the co-founder of Wikipedia, right? He's pissy because he wants Wikipedia to actually respect their neutral POV policy.
>>107081432poopoopeepee
>>107081432>You know Sanger was the co-founder of Wikipedia, right? He's pissy because he wants Wikipedia to actually respect their neutral POV policy.now ask cofounders of twitter what they think of 'x the everything platform'
>>107081503They'll say "it's shit, join us on Bluesky," which from my understanding is filled to the brim with republicans so I don't see any difference.
>>107078242>>107078348Grok has a more complete description of relevant facts, it's better but only proportionally. But yeah the first sentence needs to be why he is famous and why the article exists in the first place. Even though wikipedia has a better first sentence, the last sentence is terrible and feels written by an activist for activists. Grok's last sentence is great and it summarizes the broader issues and debates at hand. And all of the major issues and debates, not just from one side. You would have no idea drugs in his system were a topic or a debate if you read only the first paragraph of wikipedia, when it arguable killed him just as much as being kneeled on.
>>107081390whats wrong with any of these
>>107081139wiki doesn't even mention his drug abuse in that moment and paints it as if police just showed up and strangled him to death as policy
>>107078242Elon Musk is a nazi.
>>107082744Explain this, tranny.
>>107080626Lmao, I remember when elon musk had to do a humiliation ritual by going in an X space with large jewish figures and basically lick their feet. He said elon is a jewish name and identified as jewish. He then went to visit the holocaust museum in israel.
>>107083001democrats are also nazissasuga amerikkkans
>>107083431Classic
>>107078242one is a well thought out article and the other sounds like the ramblings of an autistic 13 year old
>>107083890>he dindu nuffin!>shut it down!
Yes. Its actually pretty awesome, from what I've seen so far. Musk claims it will have over 100M by the end of next year. If so, then it will be a serious threat (((kikepedia's))) dominance in this area. Hopefully so.>>107081177>>some risk of bias on politically charged topics>somelel'd
>>107082744>Elon Musk is a nazi.That would be fun if true.
>>107078242>look up Gamergate:>on Grokipedia:>Gamergate was a grassroots online campaign launched in August 2014 to demand accountability and ethical reforms in video game journalism,Vs.>on wikipedia:>Gamergate or GamerGate (GG)[1] was a loosely organized misogynistic online harassment campaign motivated by a right-wing backlash against feminism, diversity, and progressivism in video game culture.Based Grokipedia is my new go-to for quick factoids now. Fuck (((wikipedia)))
>>107078242"I can't breathe" became a meme not a "rallying slogan", lmao.
>>107078242What is a "ng/mL"?
>>107078242> do you use <jewish shit> or <jewish shit>Lol
>>107081177The army are actually like two dozen people writing 90% of the articles
>>107078282this wikipedia is trash but in a different way than grok
>>107085238>do I fit in yet?
This thread was moved to >>>/pol/520445430
