Wikileaf
American cannabis industry information site
Wikileaf Technologies is a Seattle business providing data services to the cannabis industry and information to consumers. The company provides price indexes and cannabis strain reviews and information.
Background
Wikileaf was founded in Seattle's South Lake Union area in 2014 by Dan Nelson, some months before adult use legalization in Washington state under Initiative 502. That Spring, it was also featured as one of Entrepreneur Magazine's Most Brilliant Business Ideas of 2014. By 2016, with seven employees, it was acquired by Nesta, a Canadian fund. The company provides an online resource for medical and recreational marijuana patients and consumers where users can compare marijuana dispensary prices and menus as well as research cannabis strains. Wikileaf displays menus and prices for recreational and medical dispensaries in eleven states. The company has been dubbed "The Priceline of Pot" although their price comparison model is a "reverse auction". Users specify how much they are going to spend on their next marijuana dispensary visit and, then, all the marijuana dispensaries within his/her radius put forth the most amount (in grams) they can at this price point.
Wikileaf was acquired by Nesta Holding Co.
“Wikileaf” enters the record as american cannabis industry information site. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Wikileaf, American and cannabis can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Wikileaf” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Wikileaf, American and cannabis provides the most credible route into that argument.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Mar 28, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q22080152. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2014 and 2016.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Wikileaf”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Wikileaf primary sources, Wikileaf archive and Wikileaf research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Wikileaf”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Wikileaf” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.