Six existing videos. Six different decisions.
This is an original fictional catalogue, reviewed on 18 September 2026. Every item was published before the recent reporting window: 21 August–17 September, inclusive. The counts below are illustrative views within those same 28 days.
| Video | Recent views | What the review finds | Next action |
|---|---|---|---|
| Start your first interview | 800 | Advice still current | Keep; link to the research guide |
| Our recording setup | 6,200 | Unavailable equipment and broken links | Correct the recommendations |
| Questions beyond the bio | 4,100 | Useful answer, generic promise | Investigate packaging |
| Summer workshop | 70 | Expired booking call to action | Close the sales path; assess archive value |
| Approving a cut | 2,700 | Viewers ask for a checklist | Add the missing resource |
| A guest cancels | 1,200 | Overlaps another current guide | Compare answers before consolidating |
The full review sheet also includes publication dates, lifetime counts and an action record. “Start your first interview” has the largest lifetime total. “Our recording setup” is the urgent job because people are still reaching advice that needs correction.
Choose a window that answers your question.
For maintenance, ask what the existing library is doing now. Record the same recent period for each item, then inspect the traffic sources and any unusual promotion. A new item that existed for only part of the window needs a separate comparison.
For a question about launch performance, compare equal ages after publication instead. A three-year lifetime total and a three-week total describe different opportunities to accumulate views. Keep the metric definition and export source beside the numbers, particularly when comparing platforms or formats.
Separate the repairs from the experiments.
Broken links and expired advice have a direct acceptance check: the corrected destination works and the recommendation is current. Packaging changes need a hypothesis. In the third example, first inspect impressions, click-through rate and traffic mix before deciding whether the promise is the problem. If the content itself no longer answers the question, a new title will not repair it.
Give each item one primary action and a reason. A useful video with a missing checklist needs a resource. An obsolete event page may need an archive notice. Two overlapping pieces need a comparison of their actual answers before either is removed from navigation.
Write the action so someone can finish it.
For the recording-setup video, assign a producer to verify replacement recommendations and inspect links. Record where the correction can be made, whether an on-page note is adequate, and whether the central advice needs a new recording. Check references and embeds before changing availability.
The worksheet has separate fields for the owner, exact version, approval and follow-up. Keep a record of what changed. Later traffic can inform the next review, but a before-and-after increase alone does not establish what caused it.
Questions about the method.
How often should we audit old content?
Set a review interval around how quickly the advice changes and how much the catalogue is used. Time-sensitive recommendations and expired offers need earlier checks than stable teaching material. Assign dates and owners rather than relying on an occasional cleanup.
Should we delete videos with few views?
A low count alone does not settle usefulness. Check the audience need, accuracy, incoming references and whether a small number of qualified viewers matters. Archive, unlisting and removal are separate decisions with different effects.
Can this template be used for a podcast or article library?
Yes. Keep the decision fields and use the relevant medium’s metrics, links and update options. Do not treat a download, a video view and an article visit as the same measure.
Tell us what you want to make.
Tell us about the channel or idea, the team you have and where you need help. We’ll discuss the scope on a 30-minute call.
Book a 30-minute call rishwajeet@machinehouse.media