Sign in Start free

Local citation cleanup

Duplicate listings split signals and occasionally outrank the real one. Cleanup is mostly deletion and claiming rather than creation, and the correct sequence matters because aggregator data overwrites downstream fixes. This skill removes the noise in the order that makes it stay removed.

CATEGORY
Local SEO
FORMAT
local-citation-cleanup.md
STEPS
6
PRICE
Free - no account
WHEN TO REACH FOR THIS

Use when duplicate, outdated or unclaimed listings exist across directories, especially after a move, an acquisition, or years of automated submissions.

The skill file

local-citation-cleanup.md 
---
name: local-citation-cleanup
description: Use when duplicate, outdated or unclaimed listings exist across directories, especially after a move, an acquisition, or years of automated submissions.
---

# Local citation cleanup

Duplicate listings split signals and occasionally outrank the real one. Cleanup is mostly deletion and claiming rather than creation, and the correct sequence matters because aggregator data overwrites downstream fixes. This skill removes the noise in the order that makes it stay removed.

## What you need first

- All known and suspected listings including old addresses and phone numbers
- Access to the primary aggregators for the country
- The canonical NAP and the Google Business Profile

## Method

1. Search for duplicates using old phone numbers and old addresses in quotes, plus the business name with each previous suburb, since duplicates rarely use current details.
2. Check Google Maps for unclaimed or duplicate pins near the real one, including pins created by staff or by data providers, and claim before attempting removal.
3. Fix the aggregators before the directories, because directories refresh from aggregator feeds and any other order gets silently reverted.
4. Merge rather than delete where the platform allows it, so reviews and any accumulated authority move to the surviving listing instead of vanishing.
5. Deal with listings you cannot access by using the platform redressal or suggest-an-edit route, and log the submission date because these take weeks.
6. Re-audit at 60 and 120 days, since aggregator propagation is slow and resurrected duplicates are common.

## What this produces

A closed register of duplicates showing which were merged, removed or still pending, with the aggregator corrections made first.

## Where this goes wrong

- Deleting a duplicate that carried reviews instead of merging it, which destroys the reviews permanently
- Cleaning the visible directories while the aggregator still pushes the old record
- Creating a new listing to replace a bad one instead of claiming the bad one, which just adds another duplicate

---

From the QuQi skill library - https://www.quqi.io/skills/local-citation-cleanup
Free to download · no account, no email

What you need first

  • All known and suspected listings including old addresses and phone numbers
  • Access to the primary aggregators for the country
  • The canonical NAP and the Google Business Profile

Method

  1. 01 Search for duplicates using old phone numbers and old addresses in quotes, plus the business name with each previous suburb, since duplicates rarely use current details.
  2. 02 Check Google Maps for unclaimed or duplicate pins near the real one, including pins created by staff or by data providers, and claim before attempting removal.
  3. 03 Fix the aggregators before the directories, because directories refresh from aggregator feeds and any other order gets silently reverted.
  4. 04 Merge rather than delete where the platform allows it, so reviews and any accumulated authority move to the surviving listing instead of vanishing.
  5. 05 Deal with listings you cannot access by using the platform redressal or suggest-an-edit route, and log the submission date because these take weeks.
  6. 06 Re-audit at 60 and 120 days, since aggregator propagation is slow and resurrected duplicates are common.

What this produces

A closed register of duplicates showing which were merged, removed or still pending, with the aggregator corrections made first.

Where this goes wrong

  • Deleting a duplicate that carried reviews instead of merging it, which destroys the reviews permanently
  • Cleaning the visible directories while the aggregator still pushes the old record
  • Creating a new listing to replace a bad one instead of claiming the bad one, which just adds another duplicate

Use this skill in your own AI

The download is a plain markdown file with the name and trigger in its frontmatter. Where an assistant supports skills it can load itself, that frontmatter is what it reads to decide this one applies.

Claude Code Save it as ~/.claude/skills/local-citation-cleanup/SKILL.md and Claude loads it on its own when what you are doing matches the trigger line. Put it in .claude/skills inside a project instead if the whole team should have it.
Claude Upload the file in the skills section of your settings. Once it is there it applies itself in any conversation where the trigger fits, so you do not have to remember it exists.
ChatGPT There is no skills format to install into, so paste the file contents into a Project instruction or a Custom GPT instead. It then applies to every chat in that project rather than only the one you paste it into.
Anything else Paste the markdown into the chat before your question. It works in any assistant, it just has to be pasted again each time.

Questions about this skill

When is cleanup the right work rather than submitting to more directories?

When duplicates, old addresses or unclaimed pins already exist, typically after a move, an acquisition, or years of automated submissions. Adding listings on top of a split record makes the split worse. This is mostly deletion, merging and claiming, and the order matters because aggregator feeds overwrite anything you fix downstream first.

What do I need in hand before starting?

Every known and suspected listing including old phone numbers and previous addresses, access to the primary aggregators for the country, and the canonical NAP. The old strings are the search terms that find duplicates, since duplicates rarely carry current details. Without aggregator access you can only edit directories, and those revert at the next feed.

What do I end up with, and which part of it gets used?

A closed register showing which duplicates were merged, which removed, and which remain pending with a submission date. The pending column carries the work: redressal and suggest-an-edit routes take weeks, and the re-audits at 60 and 120 days are where you learn whether a removal held or a feed resurrected the record.

What ruins this most often?

Deleting a duplicate that carried reviews instead of merging it. Those reviews go permanently and no support route recovers them, so check review counts before any removal request. The other one is creating a fresh listing to replace a bad listing you cannot access, which adds a third record rather than resolving the second.

More in Local SEO

Google Business Profile optimization

Use when a business is visible on its own site but absent or weak in the map pack, and the profi...

NAP consistency audit

Use when a business has moved, rebranded, changed phone numbers, or has been listed by third par...

Local landing pages that are not doorway pages

Use when a business serves multiple towns and needs a page per location, without producing the t...

Review acquisition and response

Use when review volume is stagnant, ratings are dropping, or reviews arrive in bursts that look...