Grokipedia. Stop the AI Slop - Exploroz, step up

Submitted: Sunday, Jan 11, 2026 at 23:47
ThreadID: 152086 Views:245 Replies:4 FollowUps:1
I have been editing a few articles on Grokipedia – edits aligned to my areas of expertise – these are articles about subjects that I consider myself an expert – have known about for decades, know what I am talking about etc….

Grokipedia is Elon Musk’s alternative to Wikipedia – despite his knockers and people who may not like him – he is here, and he has created this encyclopedic site for the enhancement of human knowledge.

Wikipedia has been around a long time but it is subject to edits from editors who may exhibit a level of bias. If a number of editors agree on a topic, and the consensus is aligned with the strict guidelines of the site, then the edits generally become accepted and so to the casual ignorant reader, the articles are factual to them and they can become reliant on this information – they may become indisputable facts to certain people.

Grokipedia selects web based sites that it believes are the authority on certain subjects. Unlike Wikipedia, people cannot edit the articles – The Grokipedia AI utilises the information from the sites it believes are written by experts and uses that information. General users can suggest edits for certain articles. But cannot make the edits themselves.

Exploroz is such a site that Grokipedia considers an authority in the subjects that it contains.

Now here is the reason for this post.

Exploroz in my opinion needs to alter some of the advice given in their articles. The advice they give sometimes seem to be authoritarian without any question to the casual reader and to AI (given that the site is whitelisted to be factual). The authors of some subjects are giving their opinion and the AI in Grokipedia is taking this as factual.

Some examples include:

A well equipped 4WD is essential for this trip.
A winch is essential for this trip.
A UHF radio is essential for this trip.
This track is one of the toughest in the country.

In my opinion none of the examples are true in all circumstances. The advice may be recommended; however they are not essential facts. For example, I have driven many thousands of untroubled kilometres without a winch. I have driven many thousands of untroubled kilometres without a UHF radio. I’m sure that others can also claim to have driven a normal sedan on “really tough” outback roads such as the Great Central Road in WA.

Exploroz and other information providers need to step up and provide actual critical facts instead of their personal opinions so that people can make actual informed decisions, instead of the readers relying on ideologies that are incorrect.

Looking for adventure.
In whatever comes our way.



Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

Back Reply Expand Un-Read 2 Moderator

Reply By: Wol2 - Monday, Jan 12, 2026 at 02:34

Monday, Jan 12, 2026 at 02:34
Assuming that you are not just trolling, I could not agree less.

Grokipedia is just another source of claimed truth parasitic on the work of others, and liable to whatever fashion is current on the subject under consideration. Whether historical, scientific or political. Whether a human mediates the information or an AI algorithm controlled by a human does this is irrelevant.

All encyclopaedias are like this. Facts get picked, or averaged.

All the articles (just like all expert advice) are the opinions of their authors. They make claims in a context with underlying assumptions that may be opaque to the reader and assumed by the author as obvious. Merely qualifying every statement with weasel words is hardly likely to add value to the article.

Above all this is just one of many sites providing advice which generally seems to be useful (true or not in any particular use case is not assumed).

If Grokipedia is having some sort of epistemological crisis because of the way the articles are written it probably needs a serious software upgrade.

regards
AnswerID: 648836

Reply By: Stephen L (Clare) SA - Monday, Jan 12, 2026 at 09:02

Monday, Jan 12, 2026 at 09:02
Well said Alan
Smile like a Crocodile

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 648837

Reply By: Member - Mark (Tamworth NSW) - Monday, Jan 12, 2026 at 10:21

Monday, Jan 12, 2026 at 10:21
Alan, you mention that Wikipedia may be susceptible to bias, it may well be. But I ask is the potential Wikipedia bias any greater than the obvious bias Elon Musk brings to his ventures?
No doubting what he and his organisations have achieved, but some of his views and edicts to companies he controls are almost extreme.
Understand your view that Exploroz should provide opinion editing, but there are numerous responses complaining about Moderator activity shutting down debate on articles, to some extent Exploroz can't win.

Perhaps the fields ExplorOz be considered as an expert be restricted to those articles listed under "Learn".
This would require any article intended to be listed under Learn be subjected to "peer review" by members who ExplorOz deem to be experts in a field. That's how scientific journals work and perhaps what you describe above in Grokipedia.
Understand where you are coming from though, I too have been shouted down in one of my contributions to a post by a loudmouth (who was wrong).
AnswerID: 648838

Follow Up By: MUZBRY- Life member(Vic) - Monday, Jan 12, 2026 at 11:16

Monday, Jan 12, 2026 at 11:16
Gday Mark
I don't contribute any more , because possibly the same loudmouth seemed to know more about my life than I did.
Muzbry
Great place to be Mt Blue Rag 27/12/2012

Lifetime Member
My Profile  Send Message

1
FollowupID: 930443

Reply By: Zippo - Monday, Jan 12, 2026 at 13:52

Monday, Jan 12, 2026 at 13:52
"Exploroz is such a site that Grokipedia considers an authority in the subjects that it contains."

Therein lies the problem. You can either (seek to) change Exploroz to BE that authority, or Musk/Grok needs to review the elevated status it has assigned to Exploroz.

I know which one I prefer.
AnswerID: 648839

Sponsored Links