Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-01-10 09:28:31 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 03AFDBC6CC1B5DF5DBF90929D89A0AF1C0290AC2418B8D4CCFA38AE1F471659C
Participant Details

Original Note:

While Perceptive Riverbank Canary is likely right that "copying any text without attribution was plagiarism", Wikipedia's ToU are irrelevant. Even if Wikipedia had allowed use without attribution (or if the use falls under "fair use"), it would still be considered plagiarism. https://www.google.com/search?q=plagiarism

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1744853490193531187
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 03AFDBC6CC1B5DF5DBF90929D89A0AF1C0290AC2418B8D4CCFA38AE1F471659C
  • createdAtMillis - 1704878911256
  • 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 - 174485349019353118703AFDBC6CC1B5DF5DBF90929D89A0AF1C0290AC2418B8D4CCFA38AE1F471659C