A website redesign content audit decides which existing pages to keep, update, merge or retire based on current customer needs and reliable evidence. Inventory the content before redesigning navigation. Otherwise, a fresh layout can preserve outdated promises, duplicate explanations and pages nobody owns.
The goal is a defensible editorial decision for every important page. Traffic can inform the review, but the business purpose, factual accuracy and role in a customer journey matter too.
Make the inventory describe the content
Start with the site's current pages, including useful pages that may not appear in the main menu. Add linked downloads and supporting documents where they influence a customer's decision. Record each item's address, title, purpose, audience, owner and last known factual review.
Where reliable data is available, note relevant enquiries, search visits or repeated customer questions. Record the measurement period and limitations. Missing analytics means “unknown,” not “nobody uses this page.”
Four decisions in a fictional redesign
Imagine a fictional training provider redesigning its business website. These examples demonstrate editorial reasoning; they do not report real traffic or client results.
Keep: the training enquiry guide
The guide explains what an organisation should provide when asking about staff training. The sales team confirms that it still answers recurring questions, and the steps remain accurate. Keep its useful substance while checking links, formatting and ownership.
The decision record reads: “Keep. Current information; clear role before enquiry; training coordinator confirms accuracy.” This gives the designer a reason to preserve its place in the journey.
Update: the workshop format page
This page describes a workshop format the provider still offers, but it lists an old session structure. Operations supplies the current format and confirms which options vary by brief. Update those facts and remove unsupported statements about outcomes.
Separate a factual revision from a style edit. Rewording an outdated duration makes the sentence smoother without making it correct. Assign the factual check to the service owner before the copy is approved.
Merge: two pages answering the same buyer question
One page explains team workshops; another describes in-house group sessions. After review, the team finds that both target the same audience and repeat the same service explanation. A single, clearer page can carry the useful material from both.
Write the intended purpose of the combined page first. Identify passages worth retaining, remove contradictions and give the resulting page one coherent next step. Do not simply stack two old articles together.
Retire: a withdrawn service announcement
An announcement promotes a service the company no longer offers. It has no continuing support purpose, historical value for the audience or required business use. The owner recommends retirement after checking whether people still rely on it.
Record the reason and the decision-maker. Retiring content also creates a technical handover task for old addresses and links; the editorial audit should flag that task without deciding every implementation detail.
Use a repeatable decision record
For each item, complete these fields:
- Current reader need: the question or task this page serves
- Evidence: owner confirmation, customer questions and available usage data
- Decision: keep, update, merge or retire
- Reason: a concise explanation another reviewer can understand
- Next action: factual review, rewrite, consolidation or technical handover
- Owner and approval: the people responsible for completing and accepting the change
Add an “investigate” status where evidence is incomplete. It is better to resolve uncertainty than remove a useful page because nobody in one meeting recognised it.
Challenge weak reasons for deletion
“It looks old” is a design observation. “It has few visits” may reflect a specialist audience or incomplete tracking. “We need fresh content” is not evidence that existing material has stopped helping readers.
Google's people-first content guidance encourages evaluating whether content satisfies its audience. Use that principle as one input, alongside the business's real service knowledge. Do not promise that merging or removing pages will automatically improve rankings.
Before final approval, read the proposed site as a customer: can someone understand the offer, check fit and find the next step without following obsolete references? Then hand the approved inventory to the design and technical teams.
Resolve conflicting evidence before choosing a label
Suppose the fictional training provider's introductory workshop page receives little recorded traffic, but the sales team repeatedly sends it to organisations before a call. That is a reason to investigate its role, not immediately retire it. Ask how it is shared, which questions it answers and whether the available data captures those visits reliably.
Another page may receive visits but describe an obsolete service. Traffic does not make an inaccurate offer appropriate to keep unchanged. The editorial decision could be to replace outdated information with a clear, current explanation, subject to owner approval and the technical plan.
Record conflicting observations together: “Low recorded usage; sales reports a useful pre-call role; tracking coverage not confirmed.” That gives the next reviewer an honest view of the evidence. Avoid turning one source of information into a universal decision rule.
A merge decision needs an outline
For the two overlapping training pages, write the proposed combined outline before approving the merger. It could cover suitable team needs, delivery format, information required for a discussion and the enquiry route. Place each useful old passage against the relevant section.
Then check what does not fit. One old page may contain a valuable explanation for a specialist audience. The team could retain that material as a distinct supporting section or reconsider whether the audiences genuinely share one intent. The point is to preserve useful differences rather than erase them for a tidier navigation menu.
A search specialist can contribute available query and performance evidence through a separately agreed SEO review. Keep that evidence attached to the editorial record. The website development plan can then use the approved page decisions without pretending that a new visual layout resolves the content questions.
Review downloads and repeated fragments
An outdated promise may survive outside the main page body. Check downloadable brochures, enquiry instructions, sidebar text and repeated service summaries. Record which pages reuse the same information so one factual correction can be followed through consistently.
For example, removing a discontinued workshop from the service menu is incomplete if a brochure still invites enquiries for it. Add that brochure to the inventory with a named owner. If the team does not know who maintains a file, the ownership gap is itself a useful audit finding.
Run a final editorial challenge
Ask a reviewer who was not involved in the initial decisions to inspect a small set of representative records. Can they explain why a page is being changed? Can they find the evidence, intended reader and next action? If they cannot, improve the record before passing it to implementation.
Common mistakes include combining pages because their titles share a word, deleting specialist information because it is unfamiliar and calling every rewrite an SEO improvement. Keep the language proportionate to the evidence. Your deliverable is an approved content direction with traceable reasoning, not a prediction of future rankings.
Frequently asked questions
Should every old page be rewritten?
No. Accurate, useful material may need only a light edit or improved presentation. Spend effort where evidence identifies a genuine gap.
Can two similar pages serve different purposes?
Yes. Different audiences, service scopes or stages in the buying process can justify separate pages. Compare reader tasks before deciding to merge.
What should we do without analytics?
Use factual review, customer questions and staff knowledge, while marking usage as unknown. Avoid inventing performance explanations.
Who approves retirement?
The responsible business owner should approve it after relevant teams have checked dependencies. Give the technical team the decision and any replacement content information.
Plan your next project with Tralionex
Bring the keep, update, merge and retire inventory to your Tralionex website development discussion. It provides a concrete starting point for the page structure and content responsibilities in the proposed scope.
No comments:
Post a Comment