I add to Google Docs, look for grammar flags, then add to Grammarly and look for more. Then, as I read I keep my eye out for more.
Check Meta Pieces
Is the SEO keyword being used in the title?
Are variations of the keyword in the headings?
Is the SEO keyword in the meta description?
Is the SEO keyword in the url?
Does the meta description connect with the reader's desire? Does it tease the resolution of this desire? Then cut it off before it actually happens (the cliff hanger).
Keep meta under 260 characters.
Check Introduction
Does it make a clear and compelling promise for the content of the post?
Is it click-worthy?
Does it match the strategy direction for the post?
Check the Conclusion
Does it tie in the content to the CTA in a logical way?
Does it pack a punch, or does it sound like we're just trying to stop writing?
Does it champion the CTA, as in make you want to respond?
Check the Body
Are the points relevant to the strategy of the post?
Does the body connect with the intention of the title?
Some writers write an article that's only loosely associated with the title. Good clients catch this and they don't like it. If the title is "how to kill a mockingbird" the article must be about HOW TO kill a mockingbbird. The article must not be about the importance of the mockingbird or the reason you should kill the mockingbbird.
Are the points good or meh? Will readers get value or get regurgitated points?
Does it flow well? Is it easy to read and make progress or do we have long, runon sentences and never-ending paragraphs?
Final Check: Is it good?
If yes: Send to client.
If no: Send to writer (or make edits) to make it good. Give clear direction on what would make it "good." A writer doesn't need "this isn't good enough," they need "this is what's missing, this is how you should fix it."
