Skip to content

Analysis of the article

Baño Turco: exhibicionismo, romance y sensualidad .

Recorri2 · published on March 31, 2006

The most important

¿Qué pasó?

Bad news for the community

It reports a murder.

Lo dice Turing al leer la nota.

¿Cómo lo contó el medio?

Very good

The article uses respectful language. It does not name the person’s identity or the context of bias-motivated violence.

What is worth changing

  1. It says Orientation, SexualMejor: orientación sexual

El 92 es por cómo lo escribió, no porque sea buena noticia.

What Can I Do?

Qué hizo bien y qué hizo mal Leer la nota completa en recorri2.com PDF
Share

Share this analysis

X Facebook Threads WhatsApp

We keep proof that it existed as we read it · Reference number CC-YC3W-DRC4

Análisis preliminar: Turing aún no termina de revisar esta nota y la completará solo en cuanto pueda.

On this page
  1. The most important
  2. Qué hizo bien y qué hizo mal
  3. Qué cambiar y qué hace bien 1
  4. ¿Es cierto lo que dice?
  5. See a mistake?
  6. Find out more

La nota, en resumen

Qué hizo bien y qué hizo mal

Lo resume Turing con su análisis de la nota. No copiamos la nota: abajo van solo las frases que lo explican y el enlace para leerla completa en Recorri2.

Lo que hizo bien

Turing no encontró aciertos de perspectiva en la nota.

Lo que hizo mal

Nada que corregir en su forma de nombrar.

Las frases que marcó Turing

Citas breves de la nota de Recorri2, para explicar el análisis. Toca una marca para ver por qué.

¿Quieres leer la nota completa? Está en la página de Recorri2. Así también apoyas al medio que la publicó.

Leer en recorri2.com

Qué cambiar y qué hace bien

Lo que conviene cambiar y lo que hace bien

Cada señalamiento dice por qué lo marcamos y cómo decirlo mejor. Cómo se calculó el 92 está en Find out more.

Very good

  • Respectful

The article uses respectful language. It does not name the person’s identity or the context of bias-motivated violence.

News articleReports facts. We check that it tells them with respect and without morbidity.

Text by 2006 (date of publication) The terms of your era are explained, but not subtracted.

Analyzed with Turing v3.0 · What changed

AI was not involved in this article: it was rated only by Turing’s rules.

What takes points off

The bar grows with the weight of each problem in the rating. Empty means no flags.

Derogatory terms No flags
Name and gender No flags
Blames the victim No flags
Sensationalism No flags
Hostile speech No flags
Imprecise terms No flags

What adds points

What the article does well. It offsets part of what takes points off, never all of it.

Gender and rights perspective 0 strengths
Inclusive language 100%
How we arrived at 92 out of 100
  1. Every article starts with100
  2. Does not name the identity or the context−8
  3. Rating92

This article is a source for a case in the record. We check whether it names Hugo Rico with their name and gender, as stated in the record. The legal name is never shown.

Turing related it to what the site already knows

What is worth changing

  1. Términos imprecisos · term of its time · no deduction …de personas que lo único que les une es su Orientation, Sexual. · “Esta es la primera vez que formo… See it in the text Why we flag it: Article 1 of the Constitution and Supreme Court criteria prior to 2015 say “sexual preferences”; today the Supreme Court, in its 2022 Protocol, and the Inter-American Court use “sexual orientation”. In a document from years ago it was the usual term, so it does not take points off; we flag it so you know how it is said today. Use “sexual orientation”: it isn’t an option or a preference. It says Orientation, SexualBetter saysexual orientation

¿Es cierto lo que dice?

¿Es cierto lo que dice la nota?

Turing compara las cifras, leyes y casos que menciona con lo que tenemos documentado. No decimos «falso»: si algo no cuadra, te enseñamos la evidencia.

Turing está comparando lo que afirma la nota con el Memorial, la sección Congresos y gobiernos y verificaciones publicadas…

See a mistake?

Is this analysis correct?

Your answer trains Turing and improves the rating.

Yes, it's correct No, I want to correct it

To answer, you have to Sign-in: so your corrections remain in your follow-up.

Correct Turing's analysis

Un dato está mal

Una persona, una fecha, una cifra o una postura que no corresponde. Escríbenos y lo revisamos.

Avisar de un dato

Soy del medio

If you work at the outlet or wrote the article and think the analysis has an error, request a review: we give you a reference number and reply in writing within 10 business days.

Request a review

Find out more

Cómo se calculó el 92Lo que resta y lo que suma, la versión de Turing y si ayudó una IA

Se ve en «Qué cambiar y qué hace bien».

The proofCopia guardada con folio CC-YC3W-DRC4, su certificado y su valor legal

The proof

Certified copy

Proof that this article existed exactly as Turing read it, even if it is later changed or deleted.

Record of existence on the internet

Reference number CC-YC3W-DRC4

Valid and verifiable Sealed on November 13, 2026, 19:50:35 (Central Mexico time)

Código QR del certificado CC-YC3W-DRC4 Scan to verify
  1. 1. Copy and digital fingerprint We saved what Turing read and took its SHA-256 fingerprint.
  2. 2. RFC 3161 timestamp An independent third party (FreeTSA) signed the fingerprint on November 13, 2026, 19:50:35 (Central Mexico time).
  3. 3. Anchored in Bitcoin The fingerprint is in the OpenTimestamps calendars; it will be in a Bitcoin block within a few hours.
  4. 4. Copy at Internet Archive It is being saved; the link appears once we confirm it exists.
  5. 5. Monitoring It was still online on November 13, 2026. We check it from time to time.

INTERNET ARCHIVE · Wayback Machine

Being saved on archive.org

Turing has already sent it. The link to the copy appears here as soon as we confirm in the archive.org index that it really exists (it may take a few hours).

Why does this make it authentic?
  • It is an independent witness. Internet Archive is a non-profit digital library that has preserved the web since 1996. It has no ties to Memoria y Resistencia or to whoever published the content.
  • The copy is theirs, not ours. Their own system captures it, stores it on their servers and stamps it with their own date and time. Neither we nor the publisher can edit it or change its date.
  • Anyone can verify it. It is at a public web.archive.org address that contains the date. Anyone can open it without asking us and compare it with our copy and its fingerprint.
  • It is a recognized reference. Journalists, researchers and lawyers often cite it to show what a page looked like on a given date.
  • Two witnesses that match. Our timestamp and the Internet Archive copy are made separately. If anyone claimed we altered the copy, the archive.org one would disprove it.

Internet Archive and its logo are trademarks of Internet Archive. We use them only to show where the copy is; this is not an endorsement by them.

SHA-256 fingerprint of the copy 0924325e7dddbc59dce3323a43526e84e83d05e363b2c86caeab34110e519b1d

Turing read it directly from the public link, with no human involvement.

See the certificate Download as PDF Check another folio
What is it worth as evidence?

It is a technical proof of integrity and date: it shows that this exact content existed at that moment and was not modified afterwards. In Mexico, information in electronic media is recognized as evidence, and its weight depends on the reliability of the method used to create and keep it, on its remaining intact and on its being available for later consultation (Commercial Code, art. 1298-A; Federal Code of Civil Procedure, art. 210-A; National Code of Civil and Family Procedure, art. 348).

That is why each copy uses open standards that anyone can verify without trusting us: SHA-256 fingerprint, third-party RFC 3161 timestamp, OpenTimestamps on Bitcoin and the independent Internet Archive copy.

It is not a notarial certification of facts or a NOM-151 preservation certificate. If you need it for a lawsuit, the same fingerprint can be backed by them. Write to us with the folio.

En la sección Congresos y gobiernosThe initiative and the legislators that Turing linked to the note

In the Memorial

This article is connected to stories we have already documented.

Note detailsMedium, dates, and saved versions

Data

Outlet
Recorri2
Byline
adsojesus
Published
March 31, 2006
Last analyzed
November 13, 2026
Turing
3.0 (the current one)
State
Online
Place of the events
Mexico

Saved versions

  • 92Version 1 · November 13, 2026 · 643 words

Every time someone analyzes the article, we read it again. If the outlet changed it, we save a new version and compare.

Keep exploring

Preparing your PDF… We are putting together the analysis with the underlined text and the QR code.

Made by and for the community

This tool is free because someone donated before you

We receive no government funding. Your donation helps us keep reviewing how the press names LGBTTTIQANB+ people and keep the memory of each case alive.

Donate $100 once

Secure payment with Stripe through Nodo Cívico, the organization behind Memoria y Resistencia.

See all options

The analysis is automatic: it can be wrong with irony, with quotes the article criticizes or with very short texts. To protect the people in the cases, their legal name does not appear on this page. How we rate.