A link-building report should let you verify the work. The original article and recording questioned reported placements and the value they offered the client. The durable lesson is to inspect the evidence, not accept a list of URLs as proof of useful SEO.
Check that the reported link exists
Open the reported page and locate the actual link and destination. Record the check date. If the link is absent, ask whether it was removed or the report was wrong. The absence alone does not establish dishonesty.
Check the placement context and link attributes as well. A comment, a paid placement and an independent editorial reference are different things. Don’t treat them as interchangeable deliverables.
Ask how it was obtained
Was the link earned through useful information, commissioned as advertising or placed through a scheme intended to manipulate rankings? Ask for a clear explanation.
Private domain registration, overseas hosting or a site you don’t recognise is not proof of misconduct. Equally, a familiar agency brand does not replace checking the actual work. Use our backlink review checks to investigate rather than make assumptions.
Look for an audience fit
Would a relevant customer use the linking page? Could the reference genuinely help them? A useful local directory or community contribution may make sense on that basis. Posting unrelated comments to create links does not.
Don’t judge progress by comparing raw backlink totals with competitors. Inspect your own pages and existing links before commissioning more. If a clean-up is proposed, follow the evidence-led large-list review process, not a blanket disavow rule.
Bring a report you cannot reconcile to our SEO team. Ask what changed and how it helps the business, not just how many tasks were completed.