Introduction to Wikipedia
Just as human history often falls into the epochs B.C. and A.D., it is not unreasonable to imagine that the history of the Internet is divided into BW and AW – the “W” standing for Wikipedia. When Wikipedia went online on January 15, 2001, it was the brainchild of two men: Jimmy Wales, an Internet entrepreneur with a libertarian streak, and Larry Sanger, a philosopher who became its first editor-in-chief. Their collaboration lasted just over a year – but the tension between their visions still shapes the project today.
The Founding Vision
From the outset, Wales envisioned Wikipedia as a radically open project: a place where “every single person on the planet” could contribute and have free access to “the sum of all human knowledge.” However, Sanger was skeptical that such openness could ever guarantee neutrality – a divergence that would influence Wikipedia’s history.
From Tomes to Clicks
Accessing knowledge used to mean navigating physical libraries and curated reference books, with experts and institutions acting as gatekeepers of “official” information. Wikipedia has reversed this hierarchy. It created a massive, collaboratively edited platform where anyone with an internet connection could write or revise an article – moving from centralized expert authority to a more decentralized, community-driven model that still cites expert-generated sources. The growth that followed is now an internet story. By 2002, the English Wikipedia had around 25,000 entries; In 2006 there were already more than a million. Today there are more than seven million.
Driven by People, Shared by Philosophy
As of January 2026, there are more than 300 active language editions of Wikipedia with contributions from thousands of volunteer editors. No one “owns” an article and all contributions must follow the basic principles of neutrality, verifiability and trust in reputable sources. Editors discuss changes on “talk pages” and reach consensus. In serious cases, conflicts are brought before the community arbitration board. This model reflects Wales’ belief that a global body of knowledge can be built together.
Neutrality and Bias
Sanger, who designed Wikipedia’s early neutrality policies, has long argued that openness alone cannot prevent bias; Those who write articles should ideally be subject matter experts. He has also argued that only those "who think a certain way" are allowed to edit Wikipedia, describing it as "global, academic, secular, progressive”. For Wales, neutrality comes from articles being based on facts: "The Hitler entry doesn’t have to be a rant against Hitler. You just write down what he did and it’s a damning indictment."
Of Gender Differences and Spirals of Decline
According to the Wikimedia Foundation, the estimated number of female Wikipedians is between 10 and 20%. Entire categories of notable women and their works remain missing, which spurred the 2015 Women in Red initiative to close this gender gap. Each Wikipedia language edition is created separately and has its own community of editors. This means that an article that exists in Hindi may never be written in English and vice versa.
Used “More Often Than We Pee”
However, Wikipedia’s quirks have long gone beyond the website itself. The catchphrase “citation needed” — once a simple call for verification — has become shorthand for dubious claims. Online games like Wikiracing turn encyclopedia into a competitive sport: players start with an article and, using only hyperlinks, race to a completely unfamiliar target page with as few clicks and as quickly as possible. Perhaps fashion designer Diane von Fürstenberg captured its ubiquity best when she once joked: “We all use Wikipedia more than we pee.”
Grokipedia: A New Challenger?
But even a platform that is integrated into everyday life is not immune to disruption. In 2025, Elon Musk’s company xAI launched Grokipedia, an AI-generated encyclopedia based on the large language model Grok. It debuted with nearly 885,000 articles and pitched itself as a "truthful and independent alternative" to Wikipedia. Sanger believes the change is significant and that Grokipedia could eventually surpass the project he helped create: “There is a very good chance that after some time Grokipedia will be a better encyclopedia than Wikipedia.” Jimmy Wales expressed his skepticism about the ability of large language models to produce encyclopedic content, saying “Whether it is an important or useful competitor remains to be seen.”
