Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-06-15 22:23:32 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 08245B3F82E27D32769BEE4E4B13356A0ED2F7C7E7B805CE08ED16A1C23ACE88
Participant Details

Original Note:

NNN. The article was indeed retracted, and the journal's own description of the reason for retraction does not portray the whole story. https://www.city-journal.org/article/anatomy-of-a-scientific-scandal

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1669434890100830208
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 08245B3F82E27D32769BEE4E4B13356A0ED2F7C7E7B805CE08ED16A1C23ACE88
  • createdAtMillis - 1686867812292
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 166943489010083020808245B3F82E27D32769BEE4E4B13356A0ED2F7C7E7B805CE08ED16A1C23ACE88