Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-10-13 05:03:47 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 6A9CE53965C76981DE32F45406E17030AA2D31A0FE2CCA9C2640B9331BB572BE
Participant Details

Original Note:

Note not needed. It's clearly a reader's poll. Wikipedia is not a reliable source. https://blogs.cornell.edu/info2040/2021/11/04/wikipedia-an-unreliable-source/ https://usingsources.fas.harvard.edu/what%E2%80%99s-wrong-wikipedia https://apuedge.com/why-you-cannot-use-wikipedia-as-an-academic-source/

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1712651639432286692
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 6A9CE53965C76981DE32F45406E17030AA2D31A0FE2CCA9C2640B9331BB572BE
  • createdAtMillis - 1697173427967
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 17126516394322866926A9CE53965C76981DE32F45406E17030AA2D31A0FE2CCA9C2640B9331BB572BE