Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-10-23 16:51:59 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 297BE4991B9D3896B6143E84A8943E46425953F8D68CF3F3E849BBA4E5EA20F1
Participant Details

Original Note:

NNN. If this was an obviously falsified story, as claimed by noter, surely evidence - such as proof from the area - could be provided. Instead, the proposed note claims this breaking story is "not widely reported enough" - which is merely conjecture.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1849124071784538170
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 297BE4991B9D3896B6143E84A8943E46425953F8D68CF3F3E849BBA4E5EA20F1
  • createdAtMillis - 1729702319980
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1849124071784538170297BE4991B9D3896B6143E84A8943E46425953F8D68CF3F3E849BBA4E5EA20F1