Content Health: Auditing a Library Instead of a Page

Most technical checks 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. The checks below read your published set as a portfolio, covering depth, uniqueness, heading structure, internal link topology, topical clustering, authorship consistency, schema completeness and date integrity. Read the results as one diagnosis rather than as a list of separate defects.