Worked example · September 2026

A local SEO audit example: our website launch

This example uses the LocalSEO.ca pre-launch review recorded on September 5, 2026. It shows the evidence behind technical priorities and how a correction should be checked. It is a website implementation example, not a claim of client traffic or revenue growth.

Vancouver-basedServing Canadian marketsClear scope and reporting

The baseline: pages worked on the wrong hostname

The audit recorded 109 distinct pages returning HTTP 200 on www.localseo.ca. Their canonical URLs pointed to localseo.ca, while ten sampled requests to the apex homepage returned HTTP 404. The sitemap also used the apex hostname. This disagreement was the highest-priority discovery issue.

The baseline: pages worked on the wrong hostname
Observation on September 5Why it matteredCorrection to verify
109 pages served on www; canonical URLs used the apexPreferred URLs needed to resolve successfullyWorking primary hostname with aligned canonicals and sitemap
Ten apex homepage samples returned HTTP 404Visitors and crawlers could reach an error pageDomain routing and certificate status, then a valid page response
Several old paths required two redirectsAdditional hops complicated URL migrationOne permanent redirect to the final relevant page

The next issue: useful pages needed clearer paths

Source review found that the related-link component limited every directory to eight links. A directory should expose its relevant child pages so visitors can browse the offering. The correction gives service, industry, resource and location directories complete links to their published child pages.

Answer quality needed page-specific attention

The crawl found two generic questions repeated on 100 pages. The revision removes that repeated block from templates and adds questions where they help explain a specific service or decision. Pricing compares the free review with separately quoted paid work; AEO guidance explains the limits of schema and AI visibility claims.

The enquiry path is part of the audit

Source review found a form handler that tried to reset an event target after an asynchronous request. That could show an error after a request had already been saved. The correction keeps a stable form reference and displays success only after the server confirms a saved request. Website addresses are normalized and validated before storage.

How to interpret this example

Technical corrections are checked through response, redirect, rendered-page and form-handling tests. Indexing, rankings, traffic and qualified enquiries require separate observations after launch. This example does not substitute implementation checks for business results.