SEARCH AUTHORITY RESEARCH · Workflow idea
For an SEO team with an approved research purpose, review public competitor link references and organize potentially relevant sites, source pages, and anchor text for human assessment. Respect access terms, verify that links and pages still exist, avoid collecting personal contact details without a separate basis, and assess relevance and editorial quality before any outreach. A candidate list does not guarantee a link or ranking benefit.
01 / The starting point
Permitted public link information for defined business domains
“Identify relevant public references without overpromising SEO outcomes or sending unapproved outreach.”
02 / The work
Helps SEO teams organize public link references for further editorial and relevance review.
Check the sites and public data sources included in the review.
Record source dates, destination pages, and visible anchor text.
Check link status, page quality, subject fit, and editorial context.
Treat each candidate as a possibility, not a guaranteed backlink or result.
Require an SEO or editorial owner to authorize any contact or placement request.
03 / The result
A verified candidate list with referring pages, context, quality notes, and reviewer status.
Reviews & approvals · Example outcome
A verified candidate list with referring pages, context, quality notes, and reviewer status.
Link data can be incomplete or outdated, and a high count does not mean a quality opportunity. Follow source rules, verify pages and context, avoid personal contact harvesting, reject deceptive or paid-link schemes, and require a person to approve any outreach.
04 / Make it yours
A few choices shape the work around your team.
Respect source terms and limit collection to the stated purpose.
Record dates and context so a reviewer can verify each candidate.
Do not turn public link records into an unrestricted contact database.
Reject deceptive placement practices and require human approval.