🎯 Objective
This system provides a consistent review process for submitted cornerstone pages. Whether you work alone or in a team, this framework ensures validation, structured feedback, and quality enhancement.
🧪 Step-by-Step Approval Workflow
1. Submission Intake
-
Use a dedicated form or inbox for CP draft submissions.
-
Require: page title, category, introduction, subcategory list, and internal links.
-
Bonus: Include a required “CP Checklist” completion field (see Module 5).
2. Initial Audit (Scoring)
Apply the CP Scorecard from Module 5 and assign a quality grade:
| Score Range | Status | Action |
|---|---|---|
| 9–10 | ✅ Approved | Publish without changes |
| 7–8 | 🔧 Minor Fix | Suggest quick edits via notes |
| 5–6 | 🔄 Major Fix | Request a full revision before approval |
| <5 | ❌ Rejected | Not eligible — rewrite or restructure needed |
Tip: Use tags like “Needs CTA,” “Weak intro,” or “Missing links” for quick identification.
3. Feedback Loop
Send clear and constructive notes:
-
What is missing?
-
Why does it matter?
-
How should it be fixed?
Example:
“Your page Outdoor Play has strong visuals, but no internal links to subtopics such as sports or digital detox. Add those for approval.”
4. Resubmission Path
Allow creators to revise and resubmit easily. Encourage use of Module 4 templates and the CP Audit Checklist.
5. Final Approval & Tagging
Once approved:
-
Assign 🟢 Live status.
-
Add a category label (e.g. Kids & Teens).
-
Attach keywords for ZM indexing.
-
Store the CP in a central database or content library.
🧰 CP Reviewer Toolkit
-
✅ CP Scorecard (Module 5)
-
🧱 Template Library (Module 4)
-
🔍 Review form or submission portal
-
📄 Feedback script templates
-
🧭 Keyword tagging framework
-
🔁 Update tracking system (for evergreen refreshes)
💡 Tips for Maintaining Quality
-
Review CPs every 6–12 months for accuracy and freshness.
-
Rotate reviewers to avoid blind spots.
-
Keep a shared document of rejected cases with reasons — this helps train creators.