Updating existing content with AI: from evidence to publication checks
Decide which sections to keep, correct or remove. Work through an evidence pack, an example prompt and a publication checklist.
Last checked:
The business computer buying guide you published last year has models no longer on sale, changed warranty terms and missing specifications. Having AI rewrite the whole text can hide these problems: the old error becomes a smoother sentence and new unverified claims slip in. Start with the facts to update before the words to rewrite.
This method works on an existing article or category description. The output is an edit proposal that makes every change and its reason visible. Review by someone who knows the products and a final check on the live page are part of the work. The aim is to prevent decisions based on outdated or unclear information.
1. State the reason for the refresh in one sentence
“The article is old” isn't a sufficient job description on its own. Pick a verifiable problem such as “two of the three recommended models are no longer sold” or “readers can't find the warranty options”. If you see a traffic drop, check separately which pages and queries it affects; don't tie the drop directly to the article's age.
Set an editing boundary: for example, refreshing the product table and completing the warranty options section. Don't change usage-scenario explanations that are still accurate just to make them look different. Keeping separate notes for the part to keep, the fact to fix and the gap to research makes the scope clear.
| Current state | Decision | Evidence needed to publish |
|---|---|---|
| Product discontinued | Replace or remove the recommendation | Current product catalog |
| Dimensions missing | Ask the product owner | Verified technical measurement |
| Usage-scenario explanations are still accurate | Keep the section | Current manufacturer description |
| Broad superiority claim | Replace with a specific distinction | Comparable product feature |
2. Prepare a small evidence pack before requesting a draft
Give the model the existing text, the page's purpose and the sources you allow together. For a business computer guide, current product specifications, the manufacturer's spec sheet, the warranty policy and question examples from the sales team without personal data may be enough. Add a short name and a check date to each source.
If sources conflict, resolve the conflict first. If the product card says 600 millilitres and the manufacturer’s document says 800, don’t ask AI to guess which is right. Send the question to the product owner. Until you get an answer, mark the capacity as pending; don’t put it in the draft as if it were fact.
Put only the information this job needs into the package. A customer's name, phone number and delivery address aren't needed to explain the question “will this model's battery last a working day?”. Preparing examples that can be shared within the team also makes it easier to repeat the same check later.
3. Request proposed edits before a full rewrite
You can use the following prompt with your own documents: “Review this business computer guide using only the sources I give you. For each problem, write the current sentence, the problem, the source name and the suggested fix. Don't add any measurement, price, warranty or experience claim not in the sources. Mark uncertain information as ‘needs verification’. Keep the sections that are still accurate.”
After the first output, ask it to produce new paragraphs only from the changes you approved. For example, in a model recommendation for field staff it can explain the manufacturer's durability certificate; it can't claim to have tried the product on the user's behalf. Separate recommendation from verified experience. If no real test was done, don't say “we tested it”.
4. Check claims before polishing the language
Google's generative AI guidance emphasizes accuracy, quality and relevance. Producing many pages without adding user value may violate its spam policies. Focus on the evidence and usefulness of each important statement, rather than making the writing appear human-authored.
Example: instead of “This computer suits every job”, state the actual processor, memory and conditions of use. Explain “long battery life” with the manufacturer's measurement conditions. If the page contains health, durability or safety claims, don't make them stronger without suitable documentation to support them.
- Numbers: does every dimension, price and duration match a current source?
- Conditions: have exceptions, additional charges or model differences disappeared from the sentence?
- Experience: does the draft imply a test or interview that never happened?
- Value: which decision will the new information help the reader make?
5. Tie the update date to a substantive change
Google's people-first content guidance flags changing dates without substantial content updates as a practice to question. Do not change only the year to make an article look refreshed. If the product table or measuring instructions changed, a short update note helps readers understand what is new.
Name a reviewer only if that person actually completed the review. If explaining automation would give readers useful context, say which stage used it. Open the sources, test the links and check that image text does not still describe a removed product.
6. Check the published page and search data separately
First confirm that the live page shows the correct version: is the new table readable, are old product links gone, and are dimensions clipped on mobile? This verifies implementation. Evaluate the effect on search performance over subsequent periods.
Record the URL, changed sections, publication date and queries to monitor. If the expected effect does not appear, do not keep lengthening the same copy. Revisit the need being served, product availability and the promise made in the search result. More text alone cannot correct a wrong diagnosis.
This guide was prepared with AI assistance using official sources. Examples are not customer results and do not promise performance improvements.