Key decisions
- One row’s product or variant meaning is defined.
- Identifiers and source records remain traceable.
- Buying-relevant fields match approved evidence.
- Missing details are held instead of invented.
Define the item and its variants
State whether one row represents a product, a variant or a supplier offer. A colour variant may share a name while needing a distinct identifier. Document which field links the row to its images and destination page. Keep the original feed or worksheet so later corrections can be inspected. Never treat a repeated product name as sufficient proof that two rows describe the same sellable item.
Check the fields that change a buying decision
Review titles, variant descriptions, available images and the current publication status against the source. If a field is missing or ambiguous, hold it for review rather than filling it with plausible invented detail. Google’s ecommerce URL documentation provides context for consistent product addresses; it cannot confirm the factual quality of your supplier data. That requires an actual record comparison.
Keep import corrections explicit
When receiving CSV data, confirm separators, quoted values and identifier formatting. Python’s CSV documentation is useful context for reading that format. Map a correction to a written rule, such as normalising an approved status label. Preserve the original value and record who resolved a disputed field. A cleaned row should still be traceable to the source that supports it.
Review representative published pages
Choose ordinary products and edge cases, including a long name and an item with several variants. Compare the live page with the approved record. Confirm that an image belongs to the correct product and that a variant change leads to the intended item. Reconcile held and released rows so a missing page is explained. The exercise is a publication method, not a promise that a catalogue is complete or commercially successful.
Try the exercise
Review six synthetic catalogue rows with two variants and one missing image. Mark release or hold for each, explain the decision and check an example of the final page data.
Expected output
A release list, a held-items list and a correction log that reconcile to the original six rows. No actual product availability or price is asserted.
Your evidence checklist
Mark only what you have checked. This records your own progress, not an independent audit or a predicted result. There is no automatic saving; download the note if you want to keep it.
0 / 6 checked
Questions and answers
Should every imported row become a public page?
Publish rows that can support an accurate and useful page. A missing or uncertain field may require review first. Record the reason for holding a row and the evidence needed to release it rather than adding invented detail to reach a page-count target.
Is a clean CSV enough to approve a catalogue?
It can show that the file is structured consistently. It does not prove that descriptions, images or variant relationships are correct. Compare the record with its source and inspect representative published pages before approving the release scope.
Next step
Publish product records you can explain, and keep uncertain rows in a visible review queue.