.theseoINSTITUTE FOR VISIBILITY
About this choice

We only save your display preference in a preference cookie, for up to 180 days on this device. No CRM or advertising data. Your tracking consent stays unchanged. If cookies are blocked, your choice may not be saved.

Discover
Close

In short

Give others a reason.To cite your work.

A manual checklist with six weighted criteria. Not software, an automatic input field or a prediction of how many backlinks you will earn.

Gianluca, who builds the tools and plugins on this site
Existing author photo from this source, not a client result.
Six criteria, one hundred points

Review your own text

Compare your page with these six criteria and award your own points up to each maximum. This is an editorial aid, not an SEO measurement or backlink prediction.

  1. Length and depth (maximum 20)

    Editorial reference points: at least 1,500 words for a good score; 3,000 or more for the maximum. Review depth, not only word count.

  2. Structure and readability (maximum 20)

    Use H2s and H3s consistently. Keep paragraphs short, no more than three sentences.

  3. Data and evidence (maximum 20)

    Use concrete percentages and figures. Link to studies and sources.

  4. Unique angle and originality (maximum 15)

    Include your own view or position. Present original research, a framework or a model.

  5. Visual elements (maximum 10)

    Use relevant images and charts; present data in tables.

  6. Linkability and citability (maximum 15)

    Include definitions and frameworks. Add step-by-step guides or checklists.

Your own total: Complete all six criteria for a total.

Without JavaScript you can read the criteria and add your points yourself. With JavaScript this page adds them locally; text and points are not sent or stored.

Two separate source frameworks

Description: below 50 needs work; 50–75 good with room to improve; above 75 excellent. These are editorial labels, not a validated measurement scale.

Working guide: below 40 rewrite or leave as is; 40 to 70 improve first; 70 and above start outreach. This is a separate workflow, not a guarantee of links.

Improve the weakest criterion, review again, then decide whether outreach is useful.

Six criteria, one hundred points

Length and depth, structure and evidence are worth 20 points each. A unique angle adds up to 15, visual elements 10 and citability 15. You award the points to your own text.

More than adding words

The scheme uses 1,500 and 3,000 words as its own length reference points, alongside short paragraphs, clear headings, evidence, original insight and citable formats. These are editorial prompts, not Google ranking thresholds or guarantees.

Two frameworks, not one measured scale

The source has a descriptive score scale with boundaries at 50 and 75 and a separate outreach working division at 40 and 70. They are different internal aids. Do not combine them into a proven measurement or a promise that links arrive above a number.

Improve the weakest part

Put your text next to the criteria, assign points, total them and work on the lowest category. A service page can be good at selling without being a link magnet. This scheme sends no text to a server.

Outreach is still separate work

A high score does not make backlinks arrive by themselves. You still need to approach relevant websites. Existing service and cost links provide context for a conversation; this checklist does not publish placements or trigger a platform workflow.

What to know

Information from the original explanation. Check the requirements for your intended use.

Weights in criterion order
20 / 20 / 20 / 15 / 10 / 15
Maximum points
100
Descriptive scale: boundaries
50 / 75
Outreach working scale: boundaries
40 / 70
Predicts backlinks
No
Separate service price
Not stated; request a proposal first.

Your next step

Content link worth