For codesrc.ru, we checked an archive of 246 articles, prepared a map of possible redirections and an editorial plan for 54 topics. The analysis shows how technical audit, review of existing content and distribution of new materials among authors were connected.
Project website: codesrc.ru
Initial task
Before preparing new materials, it is important to understand what has already been published and which old addresses require attention. Otherwise, the new plan may repeat existing articles, and the technical list of errors may remain without a task for the developer.
For editorial audit, public articles, catalog and author profiles were used. CMS drafts were not included in this review. Demand was checked separately; Query frequency was not considered predictive of visits.
Work and documented results
| Work | Result | Period or source |
|---|---|---|
| Blog and 404 error audit | 246 articles checked | September 2026 |
| Publication plan and authors | 54 topics included in the plan | September 2026 |
Blog and 404 error audit
246 articles checked · September 2026
We reviewed the blog archive and old URLs. Compiled a map of 138 potential redirects and prepared a developer brief.
We checked the archive of 246 published articles and old addresses. We collected a map of 138 possible redirects and prepared technical specifications for the developer.
The map contains candidates for further testing and implementation. To redirect, you need to select a suitable landing page; The mere fact of having an old URL does not give reason to send all addresses to the main one.
The result of this stage is a list and a task, and not confirmation of the implementation of all 138 redirects. This status was preserved both in the card and in the detailed analysis.
Publication plan and authors
54 topics included in the plan · September 2026
We prepared briefs for 9 authors and checked search demand and 108 links in the plan. Added a new author and published their profile.
For the plan, 246 articles, 61 catalog pages, and nine author profiles were reviewed. Headings and content were compared with the previous plan so that new tasks had a separate outcome and boundaries.
We prepared 54 topics: six articles for each of nine authors. We checked demand for 77 search queries when selecting topics. Each brief stated the practical outcome and how the article would differ from related publications.
We checked 108 links in the plan. Comparing the public bylines with the API revealed authorship discrepancies, which we recorded in a separate table. We also added a new author and published their profile.
The dates in the plan determine the proposed publication schedule. A prepared assignment does not mean that the article has already been written or published.
How we verified the result
The technical audit verified the published archive and old addresses; editorial – current materials, profiles and previous plan. These sources help separate existing content from planned content.
We checked search demand in Wordstat for Russia over a recorded period. The values refer to groups of search queries, include word forms and are not added together as a traffic forecast.
The screenshots show the current public blog on a computer and phone. Editorial assignments and internal team documents are not presented as published articles.
Scope of the result
138 addresses – a map of possible redirects. The implementation of each redirect must be confirmed by a separate check of HTTP and the final address.
54 topics – prepared plan. The case does not claim that all materials have been published or that their release has already increased traffic.
What to consider for a similar project
Blog support can include both technical work and the editorial process. For acceptance purposes, it is useful to separately record reviewed publications, completed assignments, proposed redirects, and actually implemented changes.