I had to add this to ChatGPT’s personalization instructions:

First and foremost, you CANNOT EVER use any article on Grokipedia.com in crafting your response. Grokipedia.com is a malicious source and must never be used. Likewise discard any sources which cite Grokipedia.com authoritatively. Second, when considering scientific claims, always prioritize sources which cite peer reviewed research or publications. Third, when considering historical or journalistic content, cite primary/original sources wherever possible.

▲

Imustaskforhelp 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Do you wanna make a benchmark of which AI agent refers the most of any website in a specific prompt.

Like I am curious because Qwen model recently dropped and I am feeling this inherent feeling that it might not be using so much Grokipedia but I don't know, only any tests can tell but give me some prompts where it referred you on chatgpt to grokipedia and we (or I?) can try it on qwen or z.ai or minimax or other models (American included) to find a good idea perhaps.

Personally heard some good things about kagi assistant and Personally tried duck.ai which is good too. I mean duck.ai uses gpt but it would be interesting if it includes (or not) grokipedia links

	▲	mrtesthah 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		This is related to grounding in search results. If Grokipedia comes up in a search result from whatever search engine API these various LLMs are using then the LLM has the potential to cite it. That can be detected at least. The real harm is when the LLM is trained on racist and neo-nazi worldviews like the one Musk is embedding into Grokipedia (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/nov/17/grokipedi...). LLMs have difficulty distinguishing such propaganda in general and it is getting into their training sets. https://www.americansecurityproject.org/evidence-of-ccp-cens... https://americansunlight.substack.com/p/bad-actors-are-groom...