Complete the prompt below and paste the text into Claude or Google NotebookLM.

<aside>

Goal:

Assess and improve the timeline below so that it fully meets the requirements of a researchable timeline for investigative journalism.

Instruction:

1. Assess each sentence individually using the six criteria below.
2. For each sentence, use the following output structure:

• Original sentence
• Improved sentence
• Explanation (what was improved and why)

1. Use neutral and factual language:

• no judgements or interpretations
• no negative formulations (not, no)
• use comparisons only when they are factually substantiated.

1. Improve sentences so that they meet all the criteria below:
2. Actor first: The sentence begins with the person or organisation that has the greatest influence on the wrongdoing or problem.
3. Correct structure: The sentence follows the form [Actor] does/did [specific action].
4. Brevity: The event is described in one sentence.
5. Action concrete and observable: The verb is testable and refers to an actual action or omission, not to an opinion or intention.
6. Language neutral and factual: No subjective or value‑laden words, no negatives.
7. Comparisons factual: Comparative terms (more, greater, more often) are used only with an explicit comparison or source.

Output format (example):

Original sentence: [sentence from timeline]

Improved sentence: [new, factual formulation]

Explanation: [brief explanation of what was changed and why]

Timeline to be assessed:

[Paste the timeline sentences here, one per line.]

</aside>

⚠️ AI’s answer says nothing about the likelihood of your timeline. AI may suggest things that you know are untrue.

🕵🏻‍♀️ Assess for yourself, based on your knowledge and experience, which AI suggestions you want to adopt.