Link Insertion Relevance Review Template

Link Insertion Relevance Review (fill-in)

When to use: One row per proposed insertion with the existing paragraph, destination value, natural context, disclosure, approval, owners and a completion check.

Link insertion relevance review

One row per proposed insertion. Fill it before the link goes live. Only rows marked approve get published.

Site: [domain] - Reviewer: [name] - Date: [YYYY-MM-DD]

Per-row detail (fill for every proposal)

• Existing paragraph: [paste the paragraph exactly as it reads today]
• Paragraph topic: [what this paragraph is about, in one line]
• Proposed change: [new or edited sentence, with the anchor marked]
• Destination checked: [status, noindex, signup wall, sales page] on [date]
• Destination value: [the fact, tool, data or guide the reader gets]
• Natural context: [read-aloud result and any rewrite]
• Requested by: [vendor / brand / author / editor]
• Payment, gift or swap: [none / money / product / link exchange]
• rel value: [none / sponsored / nofollow / ugc]
• Reader label: [your sponsored label, or not needed]
• Reason for decision: [one sentence]

Next action

• Reviewer: [name] - task: fill the paragraph, destination and context checks by [date]
• Approver: [name] - task: sign off disclosure and the final decision by [date]
• Editor: [name] - task: publish approved rows with the agreed rel value and re-check the live page by [date]

Completion check

• The existing paragraph is pasted as it reads today, not summarised.
• The destination was opened on the review date and is live, indexable and useful without a purchase.
• Someone read the edited paragraph aloud and it still makes sense without the link.
• Any payment, gift or swap is recorded, and that link carries rel="sponsored" or rel="nofollow".
• Each row has one approver and one decision. Rejected rows keep their reason.

Existing Paragraph Check

When to use: Decide whether the paragraph already covers the topic, before you look at the link at all.

Existing paragraph check

Start with the paragraph, not the link. If the paragraph does not already talk about the topic, no link will fit it.

Fields

• Paragraph topic: [one line]
• Reader question at this point: [what the reader wants to know next]
• Existing links in the paragraph: [count and where they go]
• Verdict: [relevant / adjacent / unrelated]

To see which pages, page types and intent rank for the paragraph's topic, run its main keyword in the SERP Analyzer.

Destination Value Check

When to use: Open the destination and confirm it gives readers something the paragraph does not.

Destination value check

The link must give the reader something the paragraph cannot. Open the destination yourself. Do not trust the pitch summary.

How to check

• Paste the destination into the Redirect Checker. It shows each hop, the status codes and the final URL.
• Run the destination domain in the Backlink Analyzer to see its strongest links and anchors. A profile full of paid-looking anchors is a warning.
• Read the page for one minute as your reader. Write down the one thing it gives them.

Destination value line: [After the click, the reader gets ... that this paragraph does not have.]

Natural Context Check

When to use: Read the edited paragraph aloud, spot forced anchors and rewrite the sentence when needed.

Natural context check

An inserted link should read like the author put it there. Many bad insertions show up here, in the sentence itself.

Read-aloud test

• Read the full paragraph aloud with the new sentence in it.
• Then read it without the link. Does the sentence still make sense?
• Does the sentence before lead into it, and the one after follow from it?
• Would the author use this anchor? Plain words beat a stuffed keyword.

Red flags

• Exact-match commercial anchor, such as "best cheap [product]".
• A new sentence that only exists to hold the link.
• A brand name dropped in with no reason the reader would care.
• The new sentence changes the article's advice or claims.
• Several proposals for the same paragraph from different requesters.

Fields

• Before: [original sentence]
• Proposed: [requested sentence + anchor]
• Your rewrite: [edited version, or no change]
• Verdict: [reads naturally / needs rewrite / forced]

After editing, check the paragraph still reads well in the Readability Checker.

Disclosure and rel Decision

When to use: Record what was offered for the link and pick sponsored, nofollow, ugc or no rel value.

Disclosure and rel decision

Record what was offered for the link. That answer decides the rel value, not the link's quality.

Disclosure fields

• Offered: [none / amount / product / swap]
• rel value set: [value] - checked on the live page on [date]
• Reader label: [your sponsored or partner label, if your policy needs one]
• Approved by: [name]

What Google says (checked 12 November 2026)

• Google spam policies define link spam as links made mainly to manipulate rankings, including buying or selling links for ranking.
• Paid links are not a violation when they carry rel="nofollow" or rel="sponsored".
• Google's page on qualifying outbound links says to mark paid placements sponsored, with nofollow still accepted.

Asking a publisher for an insertion instead? Use the Link Insertion Request Template for the email, then run this review on their reply.

Want a second opinion on a batch of proposals? Book a free consultation with Anatolii Ulitovskyi.

Spreadsheet Header (CSV)

When to use: A paste-ready header row and allowed values to run reviews in Google Sheets or Excel.

Paste-ready spreadsheet header

Paste this row into cell A1 of Google Sheets or Excel, then split text to columns by comma. One row per proposed insertion.

review_id,host_url,paragraph_text,paragraph_topic,paragraph_verdict,proposed_sentence,anchor_text,destination_url,destination_status,destination_checked_date,destination_value,context_verdict,rewrite,requested_by,exchange_type,rel_value,reader_label,decision,decision_reason,reviewer,approver,editor,published_date,live_check_date,status

Allowed values

• paragraph_verdict: relevant, adjacent, unrelated
• context_verdict: natural, needs_rewrite, forced
• exchange_type: none, money, product, swap, other
• rel_value: none, sponsored, nofollow, ugc, ugc_nofollow
• decision: approve, revise, reject, hold
• status: received, reviewed, approved, published, checked, closed

Sheet tips

• Flag rows where exchange_type is not none and rel_value is none. Those must not go live.
• Group rows by host_url to spot paragraphs with many requests.
• Keep rejected rows, so the same pitch does not get reviewed twice.

Worked Example (fictional cycling blog)

When to use: Three filled rows for an invented cycling blog: one approved after a rewrite, two rejected.

Worked example: Marrowlark commuter cycling blog

Example only. Marrowlark (a cycling blog) and Gearvane (a bike tool shop) are invented. The URLs, names, dates and proposals are made up to show a filled-in review.

Site: marrowlark.example - Reviewer: section editor - Date: 10 Nov 2026

How the rows were filled

• Row 1 paragraph: it tells readers to carry a pump but not which size fits their valve. The guide answers that.
• Row 1 rewrite: the editor changed the anchor from "best mini pump" to "mini pump size guide".
• Row 1 disclosure: Gearvane's writer confirmed in writing that nothing was offered.
• Row 2: the anchor was a keyword, the page was a shop listing and a fee was offered. Rejected, reason logged.
• Row 3: unrelated topic. Rejected without a second look at the destination.

Why this works

• The paragraph was judged first, so the unrelated pitch took one minute.
• The approved link gives readers a table the article lacked.
• The paid offer was turned down, not hidden as a plain link.