The 2026 Window Company SEO Verification Checklist

Check: project and product images load efficiently while retaining the detail a homeowner needs to evaluate the work. Evidence required: representative replacement-service templates, gallery pages, rendered image dimensions, source dimensions, formats, loading behavior, and field or lab performance evidence where available.

Pass condition: the browser receives appropriately sized assets for the display context, noncritical gallery media does not block the first useful interaction, layout space is reserved, and important project images remain clear.

Fail condition: large originals are served where smaller variants would be sufficient, galleries delay interaction, or media loading produces visible layout movement that interferes with navigation or contact actions.

Severity: high when the affected template is a core replacement, project, or quote page. Owner: web engineering or the person responsible for site performance. Corrective action: create responsive image variants, use efficient supported formats such as WebP or AVIF, reserve image dimensions, prioritize only the media needed for the initial view, and defer noncritical gallery assets.

Validation: retest representative URLs in PageSpeed Insights and browser developer tools, then manually confirm that galleries, calls to action, and forms still work as intended.

Check: mobile pages support the full replacement-research and contact journey. Evidence required: small-screen rendering, navigation behavior, tap targets, form completion, viewport behavior, representative devices, and Search Console usability evidence where available.

The source previously stated that 60-70% of homeowners begin replacement research on mobile devices, but it supplies no supporting source URL. Keep that range as historical editorial context, not as a verified market benchmark.

Pass condition: a homeowner can identify the service, inspect relevant project evidence, compare available options, find contact details, and submit or initiate a contact action without zooming, horizontal scrolling, hidden controls, or broken fields.

Fail condition: essential text is unreadable, controls overlap, content overflows, tap targets are unreliable, or the contact path cannot be completed on a representative phone. Severity: critical when the problem affects pages with meaningful mobile visibility or lead activity.

Owner: web engineering, with marketing or sales reviewing the contact path. Corrective action: repair responsive layouts, simplify unnecessary form friction, increase usable tap areas, correct viewport issues, and remove mobile-only blockers.

Validation: complete the intended contact path on representative phones and compare the same usability and performance evidence after deployment.

Check: structured data describes only visible, supported business and service information. Evidence required: rendered page content, JSON-LD, business details, service descriptions, any ratings or offer data included in markup, and structured-data validation output.

Pass condition: markup uses an appropriate eligible type, reflects content users can see, and matches business facts that can be independently confirmed from the site or operations. Fail condition: markup introduces unsupported offers, ratings, service areas, products, or other facts, conflicts with visible content, or is added mainly because someone expects an automatic ranking gain.

Severity: medium, rising when inaccurate markup materially misrepresents the business. Owner: technical SEO or engineering with review by the business-data owner. Corrective action: remove unsupported properties, align markup with visible information, and keep entity details consistent with the rest of the site.

Validation: validate syntax, compare every marked fact with the rendered page and approved business information, and review Search Console for relevant errors or warnings.

Check: Core Web Vitals problems are traced to the affected template, element, or resource instead of being treated as a single score. Evidence required: field data where available, lab traces, affected URLs, template patterns, and the specific elements or resources associated with slow loading, delayed interaction, or layout shifts.

Pass condition: the team can identify the practical cause on important pages and has either corrected it or documented why the remaining issue is accepted. Fail condition: the site relies on an aggregate score without locating the element, script, asset, or template creating the user-facing problem.

Severity: high when the issue affects core service, project, or lead-generation pages. Owner: engineering. Corrective action: prioritize the principal visible content appropriately, reserve dimensions for dynamic assets, reduce avoidable blocking work, and remove or defer resources that do not need to delay the initial experience.

Validation: compare the same field and lab evidence after deployment and confirm that the corrected template remains functional.

Check: each window-style or replacement-service page has a distinct reason to exist. Evidence required: the service catalog, the live URL inventory, Search Console queries, sales questions, installation constraints, and confirmation of the styles and services the company actually offers.

Pass condition: a dedicated page exists only when a style or service needs its own explanation, and the page helps a homeowner assess suitability, available options, installation considerations, evidence of work, and the next contact step.

Fail condition: materially different services are compressed into a generic page that cannot answer the decision, or thin pages are created only to multiply keyword targets. Severity: high when an important offered service has no useful landing page or when a thin page creates a misleading impression of coverage.

Owner: content lead with sales, product, or installation review. Corrective action: create, combine, or retire pages according to real customer decisions and verified service scope rather than a fixed URL target.

Validation: confirm that each surviving page has a distinct purpose, useful content, relevant query coverage, and an appropriate path to contact.

Check: title tags and headings state the real service and local context without mechanical place-name substitution. Evidence required: title-tag export, heading structure, page inventory, target markets, and service-area confirmation from operations.

Pass condition: titles and headings are readable, distinct, descriptive of the page, and consistent with a market the company genuinely serves. Fail condition: titles are duplicated, locations are swapped into otherwise identical pages, or a page claims a market or service that operations cannot confirm.

Severity: medium to high depending on page importance and the extent of duplication. Owner: SEO or the content owner. Corrective action: rewrite titles and headings around the page's actual service, customer question, and genuine location context.

Validation: recrawl titles and headings, review duplication, and check later Search Console query relevance after the page has been recrawled.

Check: energy-performance information is supported and useful to homeowners comparing products. Evidence required: current manufacturer documentation, NFRC information where applicable, visible product specifications, internal product knowledge, and the exact products the company offers.

The source referenced homeowner attention to energy savings in 2026; keep that statement as contextual editorial history rather than evidence of a ranking effect. Pass condition: U-Factor, SHGC, or related terminology appears only when supported by product information and is explained in plain language that helps a homeowner compare relevant choices.

Fail condition: technical values are stale, copied without decision context, or attached to products the company does not currently offer. Severity: high when inaccurate product information could materially mislead a prospective customer.

Owner: product or content owner with technical review. Corrective action: reconcile each claim with current documentation, remove unsupported values, and explain the verified meaning without inventing savings or performance outcomes.

Validation: fact-check the page line by line against the approved documentation and confirm that product availability is still accurate.

Check: internal links help a reader move to the next relevant replacement decision. Evidence required: crawl export, internal-link graph, page-intent map, navigation structure, and anchor-text samples.

Pass condition: educational pages link naturally to the replacement, material, installation, project, or genuine location page that best answers the next question. Fail condition: important service pages are orphaned, anchors are repetitive or misleading, or links are added solely to manipulate internal authority rather than help navigation.

Severity: medium. Owner: SEO and content. Corrective action: add contextual links where a reader has a clear next step, strengthen navigation to important pages, and remove redundant or misleading internal links.

Validation: recrawl the site, verify that important pages are reachable through useful paths, and manually test representative journeys from guide content to service and contact pages.

Check: Google Business Profile locations and service-area settings represent the business as it actually operates. Evidence required: operating records, customer-facing address policy, real service coverage, profile settings, website contact details, and internal confirmation of each location.

Pass condition: every profile represents an eligible real business presence or service-area business accurately, and the core contact and coverage information agrees with the website. Fail condition: duplicate, virtual, nominal, or unsupported locations are used to chase visibility, or the profile presents an address, phone number, hours, or coverage that conflicts with reality.

Severity: critical because inaccurate business information can mislead customers and create platform risk. Owner: local marketing owner with operations approval. Corrective action: remove unsupported profiles or locations, correct the applicable business details and service coverage, and align owned business information with what customers can actually use.

Validation: compare the live profile with the website and internal operating facts, then test that a customer can reach the correct business through the displayed contact details.

Check: the review-request process asks eligible customers for honest feedback consistently and without gating. Evidence required: request workflow, message templates, customer eligibility rules, incentives policy, timing rules, and the practices used on each review platform.

The source suggested aiming for at least 2-3 new reviews per week, but it supplies no supporting source URL for that cadence. Treat it as a historical operating suggestion, not as an official ranking requirement or guaranteed target.

Pass condition: eligible customers are asked on a consistent basis without incentives, pressure, discouraging negative feedback, or selecting only customers expected to leave positive ratings. Fail condition: the process uses review gating, prohibited incentives, selective suppression, or scripts that explicitly ask only for favorable ratings.

Severity: high. Owner: customer experience or marketing operations. Corrective action: use a neutral request process tied to genuine completed customer interactions and remove any rule that filters who receives the request based on expected sentiment.

Validation: inspect the active templates, sending logic, and a representative sample of recent requests to confirm the process matches the stated policy.

Check: project photos build confidence through authentic work rather than unsupported metadata theories. Evidence required: original project images, permission or usage rights, captions, project records, page context, and Google Business Profile media where appropriate.

Pass condition: published images accurately represent real work, are appropriately licensed or permissioned, and are described in a way that helps a homeowner understand the project. Fail condition: stock media is presented as company work, project context is fabricated, or image location metadata is manipulated because someone expects a ranking benefit.

Severity: medium. Owner: field operations and marketing. Corrective action: establish a permission-based project documentation workflow, connect images to verified project facts, and publish them only where they improve service or project understanding.

Validation: audit a sample of published media against the underlying project record, permission status, captions, and page claims.

Check: business listings are accurate wherever the company is legitimately represented. Evidence required: approved business name, applicable address, phone number, hours, website, and an inventory of listings that matter to customers or the company.

Pass condition: material business details are consistent enough to direct customers to the correct entity, and each listing has a legitimate reason to exist. Fail condition: stale phone numbers, old addresses, duplicates, or invented placements create confusion or imply a presence the company does not have.

Severity: medium to high depending on the customer impact of the error. Owner: local SEO or the operations data owner. Corrective action: correct inaccurate records, remove or merge unsupported duplicates where possible, and prioritize legitimate sources instead of pursuing a fixed directory count. Validation: recheck the changed listings and confirm that the visible details lead a customer to the correct business.

Check: cost guidance is tied to the company's real estimating context and clearly qualified. Evidence required: current estimating practices, offered product range, installation variables, geographic constraints, exclusions, and approved pricing language.

The source included a previously published example range of $600 to $1,200 per opening, but it provides no supporting source URL. Keep those figures only as an illustrative historical reference that still requires source reconciliation, not as verified market pricing.

Pass condition: the page explains the variables that change price, what a quoted amount includes or excludes, and when a homeowner needs a project-specific estimate, while avoiding unsupported universal pricing claims.

Fail condition: stale, generic, or borrowed figures are presented as current facts for every project or every market. Severity: critical when inaccurate pricing could materially mislead a prospective customer before contact.

Owner: sales or estimating owner with content review. Corrective action: replace unsupported market statements with company-approved ranges, decision variables, inclusions, exclusions, or a clear description of the estimating process when that information is available. Validation: compare every published pricing statement with the approved source the estimating team actually uses.

Check: comparison content covers products and materials the company can genuinely sell or install. Evidence required: current product catalog, manufacturer information, installation constraints, warranties, maintenance considerations, and recurring customer questions.

Pass condition: the comparison explains meaningful differences, limitations, and fit considerations without declaring one material universally best or promising unsupported results. Fail condition: the page repeats manufacturer marketing without context, contains stale product facts, or recommends a product the company does not offer.

Severity: high on pages that directly influence product selection. Owner: content lead with sales and installation review. Corrective action: rewrite the comparison around verified differences and the actual tradeoffs customers need to understand before requesting an estimate.

Validation: have the relevant product and installation owners approve the factual claims and confirm that the listed options remain available.

Check: local case studies document genuine projects and useful location context. Evidence required: project records, homeowner permission where needed, approved photos, service type, product details, installation notes, and the real location context that can be disclosed.

Pass condition: each case study represents an actual project and includes enough verified detail for a homeowner to judge whether the example is relevant to a similar replacement decision. Fail condition: generic text is relabeled for multiple towns, project details are invented, or a nominal location page is created without meaningful local information.

Severity: high because fabricated local proof can mislead prospective customers. Owner: marketing with operations verification. Corrective action: publish only substantiated project details, explain real constraints and decisions, and create a dedicated location page only when there is genuine location-specific information that benefits the reader.

Validation: reconcile the final page with internal project records, approved media, and any customer permissions before and after publication.

Check: Google Business Profile Q&A content is accurate and useful where the feature is available. Evidence required: live profile questions, recurring customer questions, current service information, and the approved business answer.

Pass condition: answers are current, factual, and consistent with the website and operations. Fail condition: stale, promotional, or unsupported answers misstate services, coverage, or contact details.

Severity: medium. Owner: local marketing. Corrective action: correct inaccurate answers and remove wording that implies unsupported availability or outcomes. Validation: compare the live profile with current service and contact information. Historical effort estimate from the source: 30 minutes.

Check: mobile headers make valid contact actions easy to find and use. Evidence required: representative mobile pages, displayed phone number or contact control, destination behavior, and test calls or form launches.

Pass condition: the control is visible without blocking navigation, points to the correct contact destination, and works on representative devices. Fail condition: the control is hidden, broken, mapped to the wrong number, or interferes with navigation.

Severity: critical on lead pages. Owner: web engineering. Corrective action: repair the mobile contact element and confirm that tracking or scripts do not prevent the intended action. Validation: test the same contact action on representative devices and confirm the destination is correct. Historical effort estimate from the source: 15 minutes.

Check: broken internal links are found and resolved according to the intended destination. Evidence required: a current crawl, the referring page, the broken destination, and the correct live destination or editorial decision.

Pass condition: internal links on important pages resolve to the intended live content or are intentionally removed when no destination should exist. Fail condition: users or crawlers reach dead internal destinations, redirect chains created by avoidable mistakes, or misleading replacements.

Severity: medium. Owner: SEO or web content. Corrective action: update the link, apply an appropriate redirect when a true replacement exists, or remove the link if the destination is no longer useful.

Validation: recrawl the affected paths and manually test high-value navigation. Historical effort estimate from the source: 1 hour.

• Location pages that add no local value: Evidence required: URL inventory, verified service coverage, local project or operational information, and the purpose of each location page. Pass when a page represents a genuine market and provides information that is materially useful to a homeowner in that place. Fail when the same copy is repeated with only a place name changed or when the company cannot substantiate the market. Severity: high. Owner: SEO with operations. Corrective action: consolidate thin duplicates or rebuild a page only when a distinct local purpose is justified. Validation: compare surviving pages for unique purpose, accurate coverage, and genuinely local information.
• Unsupported terminology or service targeting: Evidence required: supported product specifications, the company's actual service scope, Search Console queries, customer questions, and call reasons. Pass when technical language is explained from approved sources and pages focus on services the company can provide. Fail when unsupported energy terms are inserted for keywords, stale product facts remain live, or repair traffic is targeted even though the company cannot serve those enquiries. Severity: high when the mismatch can mislead a customer. Owner: product content, SEO, and sales as applicable. Corrective action: reconcile terminology with approved product information and remove, separate, or de-emphasize unsupported service targeting. Validation: fact-check the page and review later query relevance and lead qualification.
• Stock imagery presented as project proof: Evidence required: image inventory, licensing or permission records, captions, and project files. Pass when imagery is accurately described, appropriately licensed, and does not imply work the company did not perform. Fail when generic media is presented as a completed company project or paired with invented project details. Severity: medium. Owner: marketing. Corrective action: replace misleading media with approved real project evidence where available, or label generic illustrative imagery accurately. Validation: reconcile captions and claims with the underlying image source and project record.