Find the passage
Import a public article or paste a draft. Review statistics, attribution, absolute wording, comparisons, and statements about first-hand testing.
On-page SEO · Your editorial evidence desk
Content Evidence ReviewGive your claims a closer look.
Find statements worth checking, inspect nearby source links, and keep a clear record of your editorial decisions.
Start your reviewSTART WITH YOUR CONTENT
Find claims worth a closer look
URL import reads returned HTML. Content added later by scripts may require pasted text or rendered HTML.
Content and decisions stay in this session. Export your report before leaving or reloading.
A practical claim and source review workflow
Content can read smoothly while leaving an important claim unsupported. This workspace helps you find review tasks and record what you checked.
Inspect the evidence
Open a candidate source and read the relevant section. Compare its date, scope, sample, and limitations with your claim.
Record your decision
Add a source link or note. Mark evidence recorded, request a revision, or explain why evidence is unnecessary. Export the saved decisions.
What makes evidence useful?
Start with the original source when possible. A number repeated across several articles may still trace back to one weak or outdated claim.
- Check what was measured and which audience or sample was included.
- Read the method and date before treating a result as broadly applicable.
- Distinguish correlation, opinion, and observation from a demonstrated cause.
- For your own tests, record the setup, sample, limits, and results.
- Keep qualifications that change how a reader should understand the claim.
Clear sourcing and on-page SEO
Google’s people-first content guidance asks authors to consider clear sourcing, evidence of expertise, and accurate authorship information.
Use this review to organize those editorial checks. A linked source alone does not establish trust, and a completed checklist cannot guarantee rankings.
Read Google’s helpful content guidanceFor headings, metadata, links, and other page signals, use the On-page AI SEO Analyzer.
Read each result in context
| Finding | What it means | Your next step |
|---|---|---|
| No nearby link detected | The passage has no retained link in its immediate context. | Check references, original research, or records before revising. |
| Source candidate | A link appears nearby. Its relevance has not been established. | Open the source and compare the exact claim. |
| Evidence recorded by you | You saved a source link or note for the passage. | Publish any required corrections through your website editor. |
| Needs revision | You marked the wording for further editing. | Narrow the claim, add context, or remove unsupported wording. |
Keep the report’s limits in mind
The rules detect selected English cues. They can flag harmless wording and miss important claims. Source candidates are not verified citations or authority ratings.
Imported pages may omit hidden or script-loaded content. Partial reports are labeled. Your manual decisions measure review progress rather than factual accuracy.
Use the AI Citation Readiness Checker for a separate content-structure review.
Questions about content evidence review
Does this tool tell me whether a claim is true?
No. It identifies wording worth reviewing and shows nearby link candidates. You must inspect the original evidence and decide whether it supports the claim.
What counts as a nearby source?
A candidate link appears in the same passage or an adjacent passage within the same section. A nearby link may be unrelated. Check its actual content.
Why did my article have no flagged claims?
The checks look for selected English wording and numerical cues. Claims can appear without these cues. No detected claims does not confirm accuracy.
Does recording evidence improve an E-E-A-T score?
There is no E-E-A-T score here. Saved decisions update your manual review progress. They do not establish factual accuracy, expertise, rankings, or citation chances.
Can I use my own research or a book as evidence?
Yes. Record a method, source title, page number, or research note. An evidence URL is optional when you provide a source note.
Are my website and draft changed automatically?
No. The report records review decisions. Make any content changes in your own editor, then import the updated content for another review.
What if a URL cannot be imported?
Paste your article text or page HTML. Private pages and content added after the initial page load may need this approach.
Can I keep the report?
Export CSV for an editorial task list, or JSON for detailed source context. Save review decisions first. Reloading or leaving clears the session.