Grokipedia
en.wikipedia.orgRobert W. Malone sounds like an accomplished scientist in Grokipedia and a fraud in Wikipedia. For the ground truth I might start by reading both and asking an LLM for the diff.
Interesting that Grok in Fast mode says that the Wikipedia version is more neutral, but Expert mode says that about the Grokipedia version.
Now that you can cheaply insert a new ideological lens and generate a new version of Wikipedia, I expect to see lots of them. But it seems more sensible to just have the alternative LLMs generate alternative articles on demand rather than materializing the whole thing.
Or, you could start by using tertiary sources correctly and follow the citations and read the sources they depend on, rather than using a hallucination machine to build something even farther from the ground truth from the already-distant sources.
It looks like that goes both ways.
The Jimmy Wales Wikipedia page doesn’t have a section for controversies or anything.
They do have https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Wikipedia and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedia_controversie... . They're just filed under Wikipedia itself rather than the founders profile.
"Every society is built on stories; those who control the narrative control the people." – Noam Chomsky