Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2025-05-15 09:29:27 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: D9F2002C9FD126D8925C2544F60A05FB4E23919918A7E84957294023E48C5680
Participant Details

Original Note:

The published note misunderstands the original message by conflating the Supreme Court judgment with the ECHR interim guidance. Making its statement factually incorrect.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1922770688793825446
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - D9F2002C9FD126D8925C2544F60A05FB4E23919918A7E84957294023E48C5680
  • createdAtMillis - 1747301367872
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1922770688793825446D9F2002C9FD126D8925C2544F60A05FB4E23919918A7E84957294023E48C5680