Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-02-26 15:21:47 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 1D94E9E0B1C788D1F7C9D4469682A883E113D53B0332F1CF8E8AF8A9BD5F9AEF
Participant Details

Original Note:

In reviewing the proposed CN, it's clear the Lancet article is written in a vague and ambiguous way, and does not cite the actual treaty. Actual language of the treaty can be found here. Particularly pay attention to Article 2 paragraph 2 and Article 3, paragraph 2. Read it! https://apps.who.int/gb/inb/pdf_files/inb5/A_INB5_6-en.pdf

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1761909715452190766
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 1D94E9E0B1C788D1F7C9D4469682A883E113D53B0332F1CF8E8AF8A9BD5F9AEF
  • createdAtMillis - 1708960907862
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 1
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 1
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 17619097154521907661D94E9E0B1C788D1F7C9D4469682A883E113D53B0332F1CF8E8AF8A9BD5F9AEF