SEO/GEO editor (EN+PL): edit WordPress drafts — not write from scratch

Role: SEO/GEO Content Editor (English + Polish, WordPress) 1. What problem will this person solve? We prepare blog drafts in English and Polish for a WordPress Maintenance & Support offer. The drafts are too long (~20 minutes to read) and not ready to publish: too much text, not enough certainty about what is actually useful for businesses and what will help visibility in Google and in AI search (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews). Nobody owns content quality. We need someone who takes our draft, cuts and edits it to SEO/GEO practice, keeps only useful information — and gives clear, specific feedback on what was wrong in that draft. The edit and the feedback are equally important. A corrected text without a strong explanation is not enough: we must understand what blocked visibility, which parts were weak or unnecessary, and whether our keywords and GEO prompts were well chosen. Without that, we either publish weak, oversized posts or we stop publishing. 2. How will we know this succeeded in 3 months? We will state these criteria before we start. Paid test (this job): Two existing drafts — English and Polish — on: “How to backup a WordPress site: methods, frequency, and restores that actually work”. • Turn both ~20-minute drafts into publish-ready posts: concise, useful for businesses (about 7–10 minutes to read), factually correct on WordPress backup/restore, stronger for SEO and GEO, and tied to our Maintenance & Support offer. Not a generic “how to back up WordPress” guide, and not light proofreading of a 20-minute text. How we measure: we can publish both without another SEO/GEO pass. • For each post: a detailed, specific feedback note. Not a changelog and not generic SEO advice. It should say, in concrete terms: what was wrong in this draft, why it hurt Google or AI-search visibility, which sections to cut or rewrite, what you changed, and whether our keywords/prompts were well chosen. How we measure: after reading the note we understand the mistakes in that post well enough to judge the next draft. If the note is vague (“improve structure”, “add keywords”), the test is not passed — even if the edited text is decent. After 3 months of ongoing work (if the test goes well): • Regular blog publishing: 9–12 accepted articles (3–4 per month). Editing our EN/PL drafts, not writing from a blank page. Each with feedback as strong as in the test. How we measure: accepted-to-publish count vs 9–12. We also reject work where the text is fine but the feedback is thin. • Review of the keywords and GEO prompts we provide with each topic — keep, change, why. How we measure: a short table per topic: phrase or question / keep or change / why. This is not new keyword research from scratch. • Later drafts need fewer edits because the feedback is specific and repeatable. How we measure: after 3–4 posts, a list of recurring issues; we check whether mistake #1 comes back. Website/service-page copy is not in these 3 months. If blog quality and visibility are good, that is a separate next stage. 3. Builder or executor? Executor. The core work is repeatable delivery: edit long drafts we already have, write a precise diagnostic note for each one, check phrases we already chose. Not building an SEO department, a content strategy, or keyword research from zero. 4. Which skills are required? (only these) • Editing existing EN and PL drafts for SEO and GEO — not writing articles from scratch • Strong diagnostic feedback: name the problem in the draft, explain why it blocks Google or AI search, say what to do. This skill is required, not a nice-to-have • Practical GEO / AI search (ChatGPT, Perplexity, AI Overviews), not Google rankings only • Enough WordPress knowledge to catch wrong or empty claims about backups, restores, and maintenance • English and Polish at editing level, not translation-only Could a process, a tool, or AI do this instead of a person? Tools can prepare drafts — that is how they are made. A tool will not reliably decide what to keep, verify WordPress facts, edit both languages, or explain in a useful way what was wrong. We need an editor who can also teach us the mistakes in the text, not someone who writes from a blank page. Keyword research and the first draft stay on our side. How we will review progress (feedback every 1–2 weeks) After you deliver, we do an internal review of both deliverables: the edited post and the note. We check: can we publish, is it concise and useful, are SEO/GEO and the Maintenance offer aligned, is the feedback specific enough to understand what was wrong, did you edit rather than rewrite from scratch. You get our feedback on what is fine and what to fix — including if the note is too generic. After the 2-draft test: we decide on ongoing work. Weak feedback fails the test. If we continue: the same review after each post. Every 1–2 weeks we look at pace vs 3–4 posts per month, whether the same mistakes return, and whether the notes stay concrete. --- This job (paid test) • 2 existing drafts (EN + PL), each ~20 minutes to read • For each: a publish-ready version (~7–10 minutes to read) + a detailed, specific feedback note • Not writing from scratch. Not proofreading only. Not an edit without explaining what was wrong. If the test goes well, the work is ongoing (3–4 posts per month). Terms to be discussed in messages. Do not apply if you mainly write blog posts from scratch, only do keyword research, or only proofread. 1–2 relevant samples of edited content (before/after or a short note on what you changed) help. Generic WordPress listicles do not.