Organise content reviews with accountable owners
Content stays useful when someone can verify it, correct it and explain limitations. Organise reviews around information that changes rather than automatically rewritten dates.
Identify change-sensitive information
For each page, locate contact details, availability, prices, procedures and version references. Separate these from durable explanations. Record which visitor decisions depend on accuracy.
Fictional example: a selection guide may remain useful while a training-programme link changes. Review the destination and its conditions without rewriting the whole guide merely to display a new date.
Assign a specific verification responsibility
Distinguish writing, factual verification and publication. One person can hold several roles, but ownership should be understandable. Record who handles correction reports.
Prepare a review record: URL, checked information, consulted source, conclusion and unresolved question. Link availability does not validate every claim on the destination.
Retain sources and uncertainty
Place references that help readers verify important facts. Retain contradictions and verification scope internally. Do not use a source answering a nearby question to confirm the actual claim.
If a source is missing, leave information unknown or state the limitation. Access failure does not establish closure; a new homepage does not prove migration of a specific page.
Date meaningful revisions
Give a modification date to information actually revised. Record source consultation or technical checks separately. A build is not an editorial revision.
Define review triggers: correction report, service change, new official document or journey revision. Adapt frequency to risk and observed pace of change.
Publish a traceable correction
Check the correction, translations and pages repeating the information. Preserve useful URLs and explain limitations where questions remain. Keep a recoverable version before substantial transformation.
End with an explicit outcome: confirmed within checked scope, corrected or unresolved. This avoids presenting partial verification as certification of an entire page.
A record to keep with the decision
| Item | Evidence |
|---|---|
| Information | Page, fact and affected decision. |
| Ownership | Writing, verification and publication. |
| Source | Consulted reference, date and scope. |
| Outcome | Correction, translation or remaining uncertainty. |
Download the worksheet to fill in (CSV)
Frequently asked questions
Should every check change the page date?
Record consultation separately. The editorial date should correspond to a meaningful revision.
Is an accessible link sufficient?
It establishes availability under test conditions, not accuracy, relevance or currency of all contents.
Reference material
France Num · Cahier des charges
The practical checklist is an editorial synthesis to adapt to your service. It does not constitute a certification or an audit result.