Pre-publish checklist (practical and non-technical)

A systematic approach to quality control that catches problems before they reach your audience, focusing on what content editors can check without technical expertise.

Beyond proofreading

Most content editors understand the importance of checking spelling and grammar before publishing, but effective quality control for web content goes significantly beyond traditional proofreading. The digital context introduces new types of errors and opportunities that require systematic checking - not because the stakes are higher, but because the medium creates different ways for content to succeed or fail.

A comprehensive pre-publish checklist addresses structural clarity, accessibility basics, user experience considerations, and search optimisation - all from the perspective of what content editors can realistically assess without developer tools or technical training. This isn't about becoming a technical expert; it's about developing reliable habits that catch the most common and impactful problems before they affect your audience.

The goal is creating a sustainable process that improves content quality without adding overwhelming complexity to your workflow. Effective checklists focus on high-impact checks that prevent real problems rather than comprehensive audits that might catch theoretical issues but take too long to complete consistently.

Structure and hierarchy verification

Before publishing any content, step back and assess whether the overall structure serves your users' needs and follows logical hierarchy principles. This means checking that headings accurately reflect content organisation, that the flow of information makes sense for someone encountering it for the first time, and that related ideas are grouped appropriately.

  1. Heading logic check: Read through your headings as if they were an outline. Do they tell a coherent story about your content's organisation? Can someone scanning just the headings understand what information is available and where to find specific details? Look for heading levels that skip steps (H2 followed by H4) or headings that don't accurately describe their sections.

  2. Content flow assessment: Consider whether someone with no prior knowledge could follow your information logically. Check that you've introduced concepts before referencing them, that prerequisites are covered before advanced details, and that the sequence matches how people typically process this type of information.

  3. Section completion check: Ensure each section delivers on what its heading promises. If a heading says "Eligibility requirements," the section should comprehensively cover eligibility rather than mixing in application procedures or background information that belongs elsewhere.

This structural review often reveals content that's technically accurate but poorly organised for actual use. Information might be complete but scattered across sections where users wouldn't expect to find it, or sections might contain a mixture of different information types that would work better if separated and clearly labelled.

Link checking goes beyond verifying that URLs work - though that's obviously important. Effective link quality control ensures that links integrate meaningfully into content flow, provide clear expectations about destinations, and support user goals rather than creating distractions or confusion.

  1. Descriptive link text verification: Read your link text out of context. Would someone hearing just the linked words understand where the link leads and why they might want to follow it? Replace vague phrases like "click here," "learn more," or "this page" with specific descriptions like "download the application form," "see current wait times," or "contact our intake coordinator."

  2. Link purpose alignment: Check that each link serves a clear purpose in supporting your content goals. Links should either provide essential supplementary information, offer logical next steps, or connect to closely related content. Remove or relocate links that feel tangential or interrupt the main content flow unnecessarily.

  3. Destination preview: For external links, briefly verify that they still lead to relevant, current information. For internal links, ensure they connect to content that genuinely supports the user journey rather than just happening to be topically related.

Consider the cumulative effect of your links from a user perspective. Too many links can make content feel fragmented and interrupt reading flow. Too few might leave users without clear pathways to take action or find additional information they need.

Accessibility fundamentals

Pre-publish accessibility checking focuses on elements that content editors can assess and influence directly, without requiring technical tools or code inspection. These checks address the most common accessibility barriers that stem from content decisions rather than technical implementation.

  1. Image alt text review: Check that every meaningful image has alt text that explains its purpose or content in context.

  2. List structure usage: Check that you've used proper list formatting for any series of related items, steps, or options. Screen readers can navigate lists efficiently, but only if they're marked up as actual lists rather than simulated with dashes, numbers, or spacing.

Content clarity and completeness

Effective pre-publish review includes checking content clarity from the perspective of someone who doesn't share your institutional knowledge or familiarity with your subject matter. This involves identifying assumptions, jargon, or missing context that might create barriers for your actual audience.

  1. Assumption audit: Look for places where you've assumed prior knowledge that your audience might not have. Technical terms, organisational acronyms, process references, or policy names that seem obvious to you might be completely unfamiliar to users encountering your content for the first time.

  2. Action clarity check: If your content asks users to do something - apply for services, gather documents, contact specific people - verify that you've provided enough information for them to complete those actions successfully. This includes checking that contact information is current, that referenced forms are available and correctly linked, and that any prerequisites or deadlines are clearly stated.

  3. Context sufficiency review: Ensure that each piece of content provides adequate context to be useful on its own. Users might arrive at any page through search results or direct links, so important pages shouldn't rely entirely on information from other sections to make sense.

  4. Plain language verification: Read through your content specifically looking for opportunities to use simpler, more direct language without losing precision or important detail. This isn't about reducing complexity inappropriately, but about expressing complex information as clearly as possible.

Search and findability considerations

Pre-publish review should include basic checks that help your content be found and understood by search engines, focusing on elements that content editors can control directly through their writing and structuring decisions.

  1. Title and heading descriptiveness: Check that your page title and main headings accurately describe your content and include terms that your audience is likely to search for. A page about speech therapy eligibility should probably include "speech therapy" and "eligibility" in prominent headings rather than relying on institutional program names that users might not know.

  2. Content completeness for search intent: Consider what questions or problems would lead someone to search for your content, and verify that your page actually addresses those needs comprehensively. Someone searching for "how to apply for speech therapy" should find clear application information, not just background about your services.

  3. Related content connections: Check that you've included appropriate links to related information that users might need. Application processes should link to eligibility information; service descriptions should connect to contact details and next steps.

Quality control workflow

Developing an effective pre-publish checklist requires balancing thoroughness with sustainability. The best checklist is one that actually gets used consistently, which means it needs to fit realistically into your content creation workflow without adding overwhelming complexity.

  1. Staged review approach: Rather than trying to check everything simultaneously, consider breaking your review into focused stages - structure and flow first, then links and accessibility, then clarity and completeness. This prevents important checks from being rushed or overlooked when you're trying to assess too many elements at once.

  2. Collaborative verification: For important content, consider having someone else review key elements, particularly clarity and completeness checks that benefit from a fresh perspective. A colleague who isn't intimately familiar with your content can often identify assumptions or missing context that you might overlook.

  3. Documentation and consistency: Keep notes about common issues you discover during review processes. This helps you develop more targeted checklists over time and identify patterns that might indicate process improvements or additional training needs.

The goal is developing sustainable habits that catch significant problems consistently rather than perfect processes that get abandoned because they're too time-consuming to maintain.

Check your understanding

Copy and paste this to ChatGPT when you're ready for feedback:

I've been completing some questions that have been presented to me as part of an SEO course. I'm currently answering questions for a section titled "Pre-publish checklist (practical and non-technical)". Please check my answers and let me know if I've understood the key ideas correctly. My responses are below.

1. What's the difference between traditional proofreading and effective web content quality control?

  • Web content doesn't need proofreading if it's structured well
  • Web content requires checking structure, accessibility, and user experience beyond just spelling and grammar
  • Traditional proofreading is more thorough than web content checking
  • Web content only needs technical verification

2. When checking heading logic, what should you be able to determine by reading just the headings?

3. Which link text example better supports accessibility and user understanding?

  • "Click here to learn more about our services"
  • "Read more about eligibility requirements for speech therapy services"
  • "Find out more information"
  • "See this page for details"

4. Why should you check that each section delivers on what its heading promises? Give an example of a heading and section content that would fail this test.

5. What does "assumption audit" mean in the context of pre-publish review, and why is it particularly important for web content that might be found through search engines?

Up next

Updating existing content: what to watch out for

When changing existing content, maintaining accessibility and user experience while improving information requires careful attention to how updates affect established patterns and user expectations.