> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.snowdoughnut.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

# Article update checklist

> The short pass to run on an article that has come due for review: check what decayed, decide what it needs, make a substantive change or record that none was needed, and set the next date.

Run this on each article pulled from the register during the [maintenance cycle](/article-maintenance-process). It is deliberately shorter than the [pre-publish checklist](/article-pre-publish-checklist), because a review that takes as long as writing the article will not happen on schedule.

## Check what decayed

* The "what will go out of date first" note from the original brief still holds, or has already happened.
* Every statistic, price, spec, and screenshot is still accurate.
* Product and feature names still match what we call them now.
* Organic traffic and rankings for the article's main queries have not slipped.
* Running the article's primary question as a prompt in the AI tools our customers use still returns us, not only a competitor.
* Nobody has published a more current or more complete answer since the last review.
* People are still asking this question, and asking it the same way.
* Outbound links still work. Inbound links from the brief still exist.

## Decide

One of four, and record which:

| Decision    | When                                                         |
| :---------- | :----------------------------------------------------------- |
| Update      | The question is still right, the article has aged            |
| Consolidate | Another article now overlaps it                              |
| Retire      | Nobody asks this any more, or it is no longer ours to answer |
| Leave       | Still accurate, still performing                             |

Leaving an article alone is a decision, not a skipped step. Record it so the next reviewer knows it was checked.

## If updating

* The change is substantive: new data, a new section, a removed section, corrected facts, or a rewritten opening. Not a date bump.
* New statistics carry their source and year.
* Sources for existing statistics still say what the article claims they say.
* The opening still answers the primary question directly.
* Internal links added to articles published since the last review.
* Any new section follows the same structure rules: answers its heading first, then expands.
* Heading structure is still sound after the edits, with one H1 and no skipped levels.
* Meta description still describes what the article now says.

## If consolidating or retiring

* The strongest version is chosen as the survivor, and the rest merge into it.
* Anything worth keeping from the retired articles has been moved across before removal.
* A 301 redirect points each removed URL to the closest equivalent page, not the homepage.
* Internal links pointing at the removed URLs are updated.
* The register row is marked, not deleted.

<Warning>
  A removed page with no redirect loses every inbound link and citation pointing at it, including the ones nobody knew about. Redirect first, remove second.
</Warning>

## Close it out

* Last-updated date changed on the page, and it reflects a real change.
* Last-updated date changed in the register.
* Next review date set, per the cadence for the tier.
* Status updated if it changed: live, consolidated, retired, or frozen.
* One-line note in the register saying what changed, so the next review starts fast.

## Related resources

* [**Article maintenance process**](/article-maintenance-process) The cycle this checklist runs inside.
* [**Hero article register**](/hero-article-register) and [**supporting article register**](/supporting-article-register)
* [**Article standards**](/article-standards) The cadence defaults.
* [**Article process**](/article-process) For an article that needs rewriting rather than updating.