Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-06-05 13:03:51 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 2D02A41E8126937FF2B2DE9D2F3C25752E9162679D483AE3E7F5C89106472EA9
Participant Details

Original Note:

The tweet accurately summarizes the cited paper. The link to the paper also contains critiques of the paper and replies from the authors as well as the editor's reasons for publishing the paper. It's all there. No context needed.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1660521759362408448
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 2D02A41E8126937FF2B2DE9D2F3C25752E9162679D483AE3E7F5C89106472EA9
  • createdAtMillis - 1685970231175
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - NOT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 0
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 16605217593624084482D02A41E8126937FF2B2DE9D2F3C25752E9162679D483AE3E7F5C89106472EA9