A practical framework for deciding what content needs to do, what needs to change and what should exist in the first place.
I use this framework to evaluate content across SEO, editorial quality, search intent and business purpose.
It helps determine whether content should be kept, updated, consolidated, redirected, removed or replaced with something better.
When AI is involved, I also assess whether the content has received enough research, fact-checking and human editorial judgement to be worth publishing.
Core question: Is the content current, factual and safe to publish?
I check for outdated information, unsupported claims, weak sourcing, missing context, exaggerated wording and industry-specific inaccuracies.
Depending on the findings, the page may need an update, expert review or removal.
Core question: Does the page answer what the reader actually needs?
I assess whether the page matches the intended search query, covers the important customer questions, provides enough depth and gives the reader a clear next step.
A page may be visible in search but still underperform because it answers the wrong question or provides only a surface-level response.
Core question: Does the content show genuine knowledge?
I look for expert input, first-hand insight, original examples, clear explanations, credible sources and visible author or reviewer information.
Content should offer something more useful than a summary of what competing pages already say.
Core question: Does the page still deserve to exist separately?
I check whether the content is outdated, thin, duplicated or competing with another page on the same website.
The recommendation may be to update the page, combine it with another resource, redirect it or remove it entirely.
Core question: Has the content received enough human review?
I check facts, claims, sources, structure, repetition, originality, tone, product accuracy and overall usefulness.
AI can speed up production, but the final page still needs human judgement before it is published.
Core question: Is the page supporting visibility, engagement or a business goal?
I review organic performance, internal links, calls to action, conversion paths and whether the page supports education, sales, lead generation or another defined purpose.
Performance is evaluated against the page’s intended role, not rankings alone.
Finding problems isn't enough. Every review should end with a clear recommendation.
The page is accurate, useful and still performing its intended role.
The topic remains valuable, but the content, evidence, structure or search alignment needs improvement.
Multiple pages overlap and would be stronger as one complete resource.
The page should no longer exist independently, but its relevance should be transferred to another page.
The page is obsolete, inaccurate, low-value or no longer serves a meaningful purpose.
A genuine content gap exists that the current website does not adequately address.
Depending on the project:
Content inventory
Page-level recommendations
Content refresh and consolidation opportunities
New content briefs
Editorial and AI quality requirements
Priority actions
Measurement plan
Problem
The page receives impressions but attracts few clicks. It overlaps with another article and contains broad claims without enough product detail or supporting evidence.
Findings
Unclear search intent, outdated information, weak internal links and repeated sections.
Recommendation
Consolidate the overlapping pages, update product information, remove unsupported claims, improve structure and strengthen links to relevant product or category pages.
Measure
Track impressions, clicks, engagement, internal navigation and relevant conversion actions after the update.