Inside the research
Compare the drafts, not only the finished map
The revised account compares three versions of a topical map covering 112 URLs. Between versions 1 and 3, 63 of the 111 matched URLs changed their topic path and 43 changed top-level parent. The aggregate counts remain part of this real archive review; the site, niche, brands and identifying URLs are withheld.
A flatter structure did not resolve every overlap
The map reduced some deep paths, yet topic labels still appeared under more than one parent. Thirteen repeated topic labels and 36 URLs sharing a most-specific label were prompts for review, not automatic evidence of cannibalization. A duplicated label may need differentiation, consolidation or a documented reason to stay.
A URL inventory is not a full content plan
Every row already had a live URL, so unanswered questions without pages did not appear. A stronger planning record would add the reader’s question, query evidence, intent, planned-page status, ownership and a change log. Cross-links can connect related branches without pretending every topic has two primary homes.
What the review can establish
The workbook records changes in labels and structure. It does not record whether the remap was implemented, why every change was made, or what happened to performance. The recommendations are an approach to try on another map, not proof of a universal maximum hierarchy depth.