Published September 1, 2026.
An internal link should help a reader predict what happens next. Daily anchor-text QA checks that prediction without forcing keywords into sentences or turning every paragraph into a navigation menu.
Review links in context
Read the sentence containing each new link. The anchor should describe the destination’s subject or action when read on its own. Replace vague phrases such as “click here” when the destination can be named naturally.
Confirm destination fit
Open the route and compare its primary purpose with the promise made by the anchor. A valid response code is insufficient if the page answers a different question. Prefer one strong contextual destination over several near-duplicates.
| Review | Pass condition | | --- | --- | | Meaning | Anchor predicts the destination | | Placement | Link supports the current section | | Access | Destination returns directly | | Variety | Language remains natural | | Maintenance | Link has a durable canonical route |
Record exceptions
If a relevant destination does not yet exist, log the reader need rather than adding a placeholder. Compare that need against the current inventory before approving a new route. This makes internal linking part of editorial planning rather than an afterthought.
Use the internal-link candidate workflow to select destinations and review the W3C’s link purpose guidance for accessibility context.
Frequently asked questions
Must every anchor contain a target keyword?
No. It should be clear and natural. Repetitive keyword-heavy anchors can reduce readability and misstate the destination.
Should links open in a new tab?
Usually not for ordinary internal navigation. Preserve expected browser behavior unless the interface clearly explains a special need.