Skip to content

Analysis of the article

TEPJF rechaza impugnación de Tuss Fernández contra reparto de plurinominales de Morena

Urban · published on August 29, 2024

The most important

¿Qué pasó?

Informative news

It informs without a clear event for or against.

Lo dice Turing al leer la nota.

¿Cómo lo contó el medio?

Very good

La nota usa un lenguaje respetuoso. Tiene perspectiva de género y de derechos: habla de diversidad sexual, da voz a colectivos y activistas, respeta la presunción de inocencia.

What Can I Do?

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

Share this analysis

X Facebook Threads WhatsApp

We keep proof that it existed as we read it · Reference number CC-VKTF-K556

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
  4. ¿Es cierto lo que dice?
  5. Who speaks 1
  6. See a mistake?
  7. 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 Urbano.

Lo que hizo bien

  • Talks about sexual diversity
  • Gives a voice to collectives and activists
  • Respects the presumption of innocence
  • Gives context with data
  • Talks about affirmative action

Lo que hizo mal

Nada que corregir en su forma de nombrar.

Las frases que marcó Turing

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

Urban urbanopuebla.com.mx

TEPJF rechaza impugnación de Tuss Fernández contra reparto de plurinominales de Morena

By Jaime López ·

abc What it does well abc Inclusive language

… (TEPJF) desechó el recurso de reconsideración promovido por el activist - sexual diversity, Tuss Demian Fernández Hernández, contra el reparto de …

The activist lamentó la resolución del TEPJF, pues resaltó que es injusta para community development. diverso sexual, sin embargo,se congratuló por visibilizar su …

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

Leer en urbanopuebla.com.mx

Qué cambiar y qué hace bien

What it does well

Cómo se calculó el 100 está en Find out more.

Very good

  • With a gender perspective
  • Inclusive language
  • Respectful

La nota usa un lenguaje respetuoso. Tiene perspectiva de género y de derechos: habla de diversidad sexual, da voz a colectivos y activistas, respeta la presunción de inocencia.

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

Text by 2024 Date of publication

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 5 strengths
Inclusive language 100%
How we arrived at 100 out of 100
  1. Every article starts with100
  2. Gender and rights perspective+10
  3. Inclusive language+5
  4. Rating (between 0 and 100, with rounding and caps by category)100

Turing related it to what the site already knows

  • Tuss Fernández · Directorio de organizaciones · activista
  • Diversity · Ciudadanía organizada
  • Urban · Observatorio de Medios · 3 notas · promedio 98 de 100

Who does it listen to?

  • AuthoritiesNo
  • Family, friends and neighborsNo
  • Collectives and organizations1 time
  • ExpertsNo

What it does well

  • Talks about sexual diversity
  • Gives a voice to collectives and activists
  • Respects the presumption of innocence
  • Gives context with data
  • Talks about affirmative action

¿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…

Who speaks

Quién habla en la nota

Las personas con cargo público y las otras voces que aparecen, y si están a favor o en contra de nuestros derechos.

Quién lo publica, quién habla y a quién

Lo publica
UrbanMedia outlet
Who speaks
Tuss Demian Fernández Hernández

Turing reconoce a cada persona por su nombre, su apodo o su cuenta, aunque la nota lo escriba mal. Lo que dice queda en su perfil y el mensaje, también en el perfil de quien lo recibe.

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 100Lo 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-VKTF-K556, 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-VKTF-K556

Valid and verifiable Sealed on November 13, 2026, 22:30:29 (Central Mexico time)

Código QR del certificado CC-VKTF-K556 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, 22:30:29 (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 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 e5c5350db67f1278fa109c8a96df01e3736a9130158fe87038045d74aa8c49c2

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.

Note detailsMedium, dates, and saved versions

Data

Outlet
Urban
Byline
Jaime López
Published
August 29, 2024
Last analyzed
November 13, 2026
Turing
3.0 (the current one)
State
Online

Saved versions

  • 100Version 1 · November 13, 2026 · 248 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.