What exactly this criterion covers
This criterion often makes the difference in audits. D7 — Engaging Introduction (Chapter 4 - Content): Hook within the first 100 words, main keyword included, value promise.
D7 — Chapter 4 - Content
Criterion D7: Engaging Introduction — guide + checklist
This criterion often makes the difference in audits. Criterion D7 — Engaging Introduction is part of our SEO checklist (335 criteria). Here, you have a practical method to check and fix it — with a concrete example.
Why it matters (SEO + UX)
Why it matters: it is a signal of understanding for the engine. When poorly applied, we often observe: ambiguity (wrong associated query), duplication between pages, or performance loss on rankings. On volume-generated sites, this criterion also serves as a safeguard: a stable rule prevents 1,000 errors at once.
How to check (step by step)
- Open the source code and locate the concerned element (tag/structure).
- Check hierarchy and consistency with H1 + intro.
- Run a crawl to detect pages violating the criterion. Tip: first isolate 10 representative URLs (top pages + generated pages) before scaling the correction.
How to fix properly
Strategy: fix + add a safeguard for mass import. - Rewrite the plan: clear H1, H2 = sub-questions, H3 = details. - Add a differentiating element (scope, method, example) to avoid duplication. - Check consistency with intent (info / comparison / action). Then: re-crawl 50–200 URLs, then monitor Search Console for 7–14 days (impressions/CTR/indexing).
Concrete example (illustrative)
Example (illustrative): - Context: category page for fashion e-commerce in Marseille - Before: generic H1 + sections without hierarchy (incoherent H2/H3). - After: intent-oriented H1 + H2 by sub-questions (case: category page — fashion e-commerce). - Note: Objective: make the plan scannable and aligned with intent.
Checklist to tick
- [ ] Matches intent
- [ ] Respects: keyword
- [ ] Unique
- [ ] Concrete examples
- [ ] Natural keywords
FAQ
Frequently asked questions — D7
What is the most common mistake on “Engaging Introduction”?
Applying an automatic pattern that is too generic (same logic on all pages) without adding a differentiating element.
Which tool is the fastest for large-scale checking?
For this type of criterion, a crawl (e.g. Screaming Frog) plus targeted verification in Your WG Analyzer is generally the fastest combo.
How to prevent this from happening on 10K generated pages?
Freeze an auto-generation rule (title/structure/schema/URLs) plus add automatic control (crawl or test) before production import.
Ready to go from theory to action?
Validate this criterion with an audit, then deepen the method in the Academy.