DIRECT ANSWER
Keep a record of important website facts, their approved sources, where they appear and who can authorize changes. Review a page when its underlying facts change. Use a recurring review to catch omissions, but do not confuse changing a date or adding articles with maintaining accuracy.
Maintain the facts behind the pages
A service price might appear on a pricing page, service page, article and inquiry screen. Correcting one visible sentence may leave the others inconsistent. Record the approved fact once and identify the pages or systems that depend on it.
Start with information that affects a customer decision: service availability, coverage, pricing conditions, contact details, preparation instructions and operating policies. Use the business's approved records rather than an old marketing paragraph as the authority.
Use a simple content register
| Field | Why it belongs in the register |
|---|---|
| Fact or topic | Identifies what must remain accurate |
| Source and approval owner | Shows where to verify it |
| Affected pages | Identifies the correction scope |
| Last verified date | Records when the review actually happened |
| Change trigger | Names what would make the answer stale |
| Action and status | Records correction, review or retirement |
This is an SIS maintenance framework. There is no universal review interval that guarantees every business fact stays current.
What needs attention?
Resolve known inaccuracies and broken customer actions first, verify unclear sources before publishing, then run scheduled reviews and add new answers.
Correct a known problem before adding another article
If a service is no longer available, a published condition is wrong or the inquiry destination has changed, address that known issue. A routine publishing schedule should not substitute for correcting an inaccurate customer answer.
When the source itself is unclear, flag the claim for approval. Do not silently replace it with a plausible number or an AI-generated explanation.
Use the customer-question guide to identify useful additions after corrections are handled. A new article deserves a distinct customer question and supportable answer.
Use dates honestly
Keep the original publication date. Update a modification date when the content materially changes, and maintain a separate internal verification record if a review found no substantive change.
Google's helpful-content guidance cautions against changing page dates merely to appear fresh. It also rejects the premise that publishing to a preferred word count is necessary.
Test the parts connected to the answer
If an article points to a discontinued service or an old intake path, correcting the prose is only part of the work. Follow its links and test the relevant action. Use the form-delivery checklist when the inquiry path changes.
Maintain the Knowledge Catalog as connected answers. Keep a useful explanation at its existing URL when it still resolves the same question. If the purpose changes enough to merge or retire pages, use a deliberate migration plan.
Agree on responsibility after launch
Name who supplies business changes, who approves them and who publishes them. Clarify the agreed support scope and any separately priced additions. A support plan cannot verify a business change that nobody has reported or approved.
Tell us which information your website struggles to keep current. We can scope the content structure and review responsibilities around that need.
Sources and method
The register and triage order are SIS operational guidance. The Google source supports the statements about artificial freshness and word count; it does not endorse a specific maintenance schedule.
Sources verified October 10, 2026: