Content Health: Auditing a Library Instead of a Page

Most technical reviews look at one page. Content health looks at the library: how much you have published, how recently, how deep it goes, how well the pieces connect to each other, and whether the metadata around them is consistent enough to be believed. It needs its own audit because library-level problems are invisible page by page. Every article can be individually decent while the set holds 3 pieces competing for the same query, 40 posts nothing links to, dates a plugin bumped without the text changing, or a publishing cadence that stopped 14 months ago. None of that shows up when you read a single URL. Decay is the pattern worth watching. Content that ranked well 2 years ago drifts down as the topic moves and the article stays where it was. The signals that predict decay are measurable well before the traffic drops: thin evidence, stale references, missing authorship, no recent internal links pointing in. Read your published set as a portfolio: how deep and how distinct each piece is, how headings and internal links tie the library together, whether topics cluster, and whether authorship, schema and dates stay consistent. Read the results as one diagnosis rather than as a list of separate defects.

SEOReport's paid diagnosis reviews this across the pages of your own site, shows the evidence behind every finding, and ranks the fixes by priority. See plans and pricing.