Turn a content concern into a verified update

Gather the observation, route it to the accountable owner, and record the evidence.

Capture the page title or location, the specific passage or link, the audience affected, and why the issue matters. Include a source that could verify the information if one is available. Route the concern to the owner role in the register. If no owner is listed, ask the governance coordinator to assign the issue before treating the content as verified.

For disputed or specialist claims, keep the proposed change pending until the appropriate subject-matter role checks the source. The owner coordinates the decision; the assigned editor applies approved changes through the local publishing process.

Review workflow

The owner role coordinates the review; the editor applies the change.

  1. 1

    Record the observed issue

    Note the page, specific problem, affected audience, and why the information matters.

  2. 2

    Route to an accountable role

    Use the ownership register; ask the governance coordinator to resolve an unassigned item.

  3. 3

    Verify the source

    Check an appropriate source and ask a subject-matter reviewer to resolve disputed or specialist details.

  4. 4

    Make a reader-focused change

    Correct the issue without creating a competing copy of an authoritative policy, form, or procedure.

  5. 5

    Check the result

    Test destinations and access for the intended audience; review headings, link text, and informative-image alternative text.

  6. 6

    Publish and record

    Use the local publishing process; record the decision, evidence, owner role, and next review point when the content remains active.

Worked review handoff

Fictional example; the evidence is something a reviewer can observe.

Issue Owner and reviewer roles Decision Completion evidence
A Service Desk how-to links to a retired request route. IT Knowledge owner; IT service management subject-matter reviewer Repair the route and retain the article. The current destination opens for the intended audience; the retired link is removed and the review outcome is recorded.

Workflow questions

What if reviewers disagree about accuracy?

Keep the disputed change pending, record the specific open question, and route it to the role that can verify the source. Do not describe an unverified change as confirmed.

What if a review date has passed?

Route the content to its owner role for review and record the outcome. If the owner is unavailable or unassigned, ask the governance coordinator to arrange coverage. A passed date alone does not prove the content is inaccurate.

When should content be retired rather than repaired?

Retire it when it no longer serves a reader or reference need. Check incoming links and update or remove them through the local publishing process.