MODERN REFERENCE · 30% of composite
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy vs Wikipedia (English) — Modern Reference
How fit each source is for citation in modern (LLM-era) writing — machine-readability, schema, freshness signals, AI-corpus presence.
Verdict
Wikipedia (English) outscores Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy on Modern Citation Reference by 2 points (A · 92 vs A · 90).
Reference
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
plato.stanford.edu
A·90
Rank #29 of 130 on Modern Reference
Fully open access; structured bibliography; entry-versioning + dated updates.
Higher Modern Reference
Reference
Wikipedia (English)
en.wikipedia.org
A·92
Rank #11 of 130 on Modern Reference
First-line citation in most LLM training corpora; freshness via per-article revision history.
Global rank · Modern Reference
Why these Modern Reference scores
Stanford Encyclopedia of PhilosophyA·90
Modern Reference · 90/100
Fully open access; structured bibliography; entry-versioning + dated updates.
Wikipedia (English)A·92
Modern Reference · 92/100
First-line citation in most LLM training corpora; freshness via per-article revision history.
Signals behind the Modern Reference score
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- Open + versionedAll entries free; major revisions logged with date + summary.
Wikipedia (English)
- LLM training corpusCommon Crawl + dedicated dump used by every major model.
- Schema markupArticle + Person + Organization JSON-LD per page.
Other dimensions for Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy vs Wikipedia (English)
Other Modern Reference comparisons
Wikipedia (English) vs Encyclopædia BritannicaThe New York Times vs The Washington PostAssociated Press vs ReutersFinancial Times vs The Wall Street JournalNature vs ScienceNew England Journal of Medicine vs The LancetarXiv vs PubMedDOI (CrossRef Resolver) vs Semantic ScholarForeign Affairs vs The EconomistBBC News vs The GuardianAl Jazeera English vs BBC NewsBBC News vs NPR