Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-02-26 07:56:00 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 77F3621FF8FA173FA4ACD668DF010C276EAE695AC375074FD5F7766FA71A337C
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 - 77F3621FF8FA173FA4ACD668DF010C276EAE695AC375074FD5F7766FA71A337C
  • createdAtMillis - 1708934160731
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 176190971545219076677F3621FF8FA173FA4ACD668DF010C276EAE695AC375074FD5F7766FA71A337C