Skip to content

Analysis of the article

AGMER participó del Encuentro Plurinacional de mujeres, lesbianas, travestis, trans, bisexuales, intersexuales y no binaries

2025.agmer.org.ar

How is it written?

Very good writing

The article uses respectful language.

In the cross-cutting issues

Turing reads it apart from the grade: the grade measures how it is written; this shows what counts in each topic. See all issues.

Is this analysis correct?

Your answer trains Turing and improves the rating.

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

Correct Turing's analysis

Analyzed
November 10, 2026
State
Online
Leer en 2025.agmer.org.ar PDF
Share

Share this analysis

The text

Where we found it

These are the paragraphs where we find something, without reproducing the entire note. The other underlines are drafting details; the number leads to their explanation in the analysis. Tap or hover over a mark to see why we pointed at it.

2025.agmer.org.ar

AGMER participó del Encuentro Plurinacional de mujeres, lesbianas, travestis, trans, bisexuales, intersexuales y no binaries

abc What it does well

… el Encuentro y reúnen a las participantes alrededor de un tema, orientados estos temas por ejes fundamentales: violencias machistas, femicidios, travesticidios y transfemicidios, derechos sexuales y reproductivos, educación, salud, situación nacional, luchas internacionales, causas socioambientales, antirracistas y anticoloniales, deportes, …

The rating

How Turing arrived at 98

What deducts from and adds to the rating, whom the article listens to, what is worth changing and what it does well.

Very good

  • Respectful

The article uses respectful language.

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

Year unknown: we rate it with today’s language.

Analyzed with Turing v2.8 · 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 Mild · 1 pointing · subtraction 4
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 1 strength
Inclusive language Not applicable

How to read this rating

  • It has a yellowish detail, shown below. They take points off, but they are not enough to call it a “sensationalist article”: that happens when sensationalism sets the tone of the whole article. In the statistics it counts among articles “with some sensationalist detail”.
  • Why is the rating high? What the article does well, such as naming the person’s identity, giving context or echoing the demand for justice, offsets part of what takes points off. It never erases it: an article with flags does not reach 100.
How we arrived at 98 out of 100
  1. Every article starts with100
  2. Sensationalism−4
  3. Gender and rights perspective+2
  4. Rating98

What is worth changing

  1. Yellow journalism in the headline · counts double AGMER participó del Encuentro Plurinacional de mujeres, lesbianas, travestis, trans, bisexuales, intersexuales y no binaries Capitalized words in the headline seek to alarm.

What it does well

  • Names transfemicide

What it claims

What the article says, fact-checked

In analyzing the memo, Turing reviews the figures, laws, and cases he claims and what the organizations, legislators, and authorities he cites say, and compares them to Memorial, Legislative Observatory, and published verifications.

Turing is comparing what the note states with the Memorial, the Legislative Observatory and published verifications...

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-8ZVF-3QST

Valid and verifiable Sealed on November 10, 2026, 15:17:51 (Central Mexico time)

Código QR del certificado CC-8ZVF-3QST Scan to verify
  1. 1. Copy and digital fingerprint (done) We saved what Turing read and took its SHA-256 fingerprint.
  2. 2. RFC 3161 timestamp (done) An independent third party (FreeTSA) signed the fingerprint on November 10, 2026, 15:17:51 (Central Mexico time).
  3. 3. Anchored in Bitcoin (done) The fingerprint is in the OpenTimestamps calendars; it will be in a Bitcoin block within a few hours.
  4. 4. Copy at Internet Archive (in progress) It is being saved; the link appears once we confirm it exists.
  5. 5. Monitoring (in progress) We check it from time to time to know if it gets deleted.

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 5e7bdff5b1d82033efe6319184736083a50755ef85dc289920ba976a1d151741

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

Record

About the note

Data

Last analyzed
November 10, 2026
Turing
2.8 (the current one)
State
Online

Saved versions

  • 98Version 1 · November 10, 2026 · 242 words

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

Are you from the outlet?

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

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.