AI Wiki

Neutrality

Part of the AI Wiki policies

AI is an industry full of superlatives, rivalries, and open disputes. An encyclopedia is useful precisely because it does not take a side in them.

Describe, do not advocate

  • Articles state what a system is, what it does, what is documented about it, and what credible parties say about it. They do not recommend products, rank vendors by editorial taste, or borrow marketing language ("revolutionary", "best-in-class") as description.
  • Comparative claims ("outperforms", "largest", "first") appear only with a citation and their scope: which benchmark, which date, whose measurement.
  • Contested topics (safety debates, lawsuits, layoffs, geopolitics) are written with attributed positions: who claims what, on what evidence. Allegations are labeled allegations until adjudicated.

Independence

  • No one can pay for an article, for placement in one, or for the removal of accurate, sourced information. There are no affiliate links in article text.
  • AI Wiki may show clearly labeled promotions for companion sites owned and operated by the same team. They are included only when they provide a relevant utility for readers, and shared ownership does not influence AI Wiki's coverage or conclusions.
  • Subjects of articles are welcome to suggest corrections through the same public channels as everyone else ("Suggest edit", "Report issue"), and those suggestions are weighed against sources like any other.

Owned companion sites

Owned-site promotions are visually separated from article prose, carry an ownership disclosure beside the link, and are limited to one relevant promotion per article. They are not citations, affiliate links, or paid third-party placements. The current companion-site registry contains:

Global footer exposure is separately reviewed and capped at three direct companion links. See the public companion projects directory for the current list and linking rules.

Weight

Neutrality does not mean false balance. When the evidence on a question is lopsided, the article says so; when a minority position is notable, it is covered as a minority position with its critics cited. The goal is that a well-informed skeptic on either side of a dispute could read the article and call it fair, per the verifiability policy.