Jump to content

Community Notes: Revision history


For any version listed below, click on its date to view it. For more help, see Help:Page history and Help:Edit summary. (cur) = difference from current version, (prev) = difference from preceding version, m = minor edit, → = section edit, ← = automatic edit summary

(newest | oldest) View (newer 50 | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

7 April 2025

6 April 2025

3 April 2025

27 March 2025

12 March 2025

11 March 2025

23 February 2025

22 February 2025

5 February 2025

3 February 2025

30 January 2025

29 January 2025

  • curprev 10:3010:30, 29 January 2025 Datenliterat talk contribs 57,361 bytes +6 Studies: Original statement was wrong. 96% and 87% refer to the interrater reliability, i.e., the degree to which raters agreed in their evaluation of the information. The result of their evaluation, however, is as follows: "Ninety-seven percent (...) of notes were entirely accurate (...). Forty-nine percent (...) of notes cited high, 44% (..) moderate, and 7% (...) low credibility." See results section of the study: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2818054 undo Tag: Visual edit

23 January 2025

14 January 2025

12 January 2025

10 January 2025

8 January 2025

7 January 2025

18 December 2024

14 December 2024

3 December 2024

(newest | oldest) View (newer 50 | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)