39-Page Dental Rebuild with a 113-Redirect Surface
A 39-page dental rebuild with 113 redirect entries — nested URLs collapsed to flat paths line by line, shipped in 14 days on 46 hours by 5 specialists.
Screenshots captured by automated tooling — some elements may not have loaded fully or may layer on top of each other. For the most accurate view, visit the live site →
Rebuild the site on a new stack. Implement the spec. Don't improvise. Hand it back ready for cutover.
Client (end user): Brilliant Dental Care — general and cosmetic dental practice
Engagement: White-label development for a US marketing agency specialising in local-business websites
Delivered: June 2025 · 14 days · 46 hours · on schedule, no overrun
The Craft of a Rebuild
A 39-page dental practice rebuild landed with a 113-entry redirect surface — three times the page count — because the previous site had generated a nested URL hierarchy the agency was now flattening to flat paths. We rebuilt every content page and implemented every redirect to the agency’s sitemap line by line, shipping in 14 days on 46 hours with no overrun.
This is a record of how the agency’s specification handled that surface, and how we implemented it line by line.
Snapshot
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| End-client industry | Healthcare — General and Cosmetic Dentistry |
| End-client | Brilliant Dental Care (general and cosmetic dental practice) |
| Engagement | White-label WordPress build for a US marketing agency specialising in local-business websites |
| Project Type | WordPress rebuild on Kinsta (same-CMS) |
| Scope | Full site rebuild — 39 content URLs migrated to clean flat architecture, 113 redirect entries implemented |
| Timeline | 14 days (2 Jun – 16 Jun 2025), on schedule |
| Effort | 46 hours against a 46-hour estimate — no overrun |
| Team | 5 specialists (Evgeniy Karpov — developer; Nikita Tumasevic — lead QA; Pavel Sazhin — QA and fixes; Anton Hersun — project lead) |
| Tech Stack | WordPress · Elementor Pro · Gravity Forms · Kinsta · Yoast · Screaming Frog · Site Checker (xaverPRO QA plugin) |
| Content parity check | Original-vs-rebuild content diff cleared before handoff — no missing copy, no broken internal links, no structural drift |
| Delivered | Spec followed line-for-line — 39 content URLs rebuilt to flat architecture, 113 redirect entries implemented as specified, 29-item SEO and CX backlog closed, 40-item launch checklist completed |
| Engagement cadence | 27 agency-raised issues · all closed by handoff (29-day active span, 2025-06-16 – 2025-07-14) |
| Review rounds | ≈3 review rounds across the 14-day calendar window |
| Per-ticket effort | 5 internal Redmine tickets · median 10h / P75 25.2h per ticket |
| Launch checklist | 39 items, signed off before cutover |
The Brief
The agency had a retained dental-practice client whose WordPress site needed a rebuild on a new Kinsta stack. The original site had accumulated architectural debt: service pages sat under /services/, doctor and office pages under /our-office/, patient information under /patient-resource/, and technology pages under /technology/. The rebuild spec called for collapsing all of these into a flat URL structure — every service page at a top-level path — while preserving the existing domain.
That restructure alone generated the core redirect table. But the original platform had also produced a second layer of compound URL artefacts: paths like /implants/privacy-notice, /cerec/ada-compliance-statement, /digital-cone-beam-scan/services/cerec, where footer links and sitemap links had been appended to service slugs, creating 70+ additional paths that needed to resolve cleanly. The spec captured both layers. Our job was to implement them both, in full.
The agency also had a third-party scheduling integration (adit.com) embedded on the appointment booking page. This was not a standard Gravity Forms contact form — it was a domain-registered JavaScript widget that required the client’s live domain to be added to the platform’s allowlist before the embed would initialise. That dependency was documented in the issues backlog and resolved against the live domain post-cutover.
Risk context. When a rebuild flattens a nested URL structure, the redirect surface is proportionally larger than the content surface — on this engagement, 113 redirects for 39 content pages. The failure mode is not in the flat-structure pages themselves; it is in the long tail of compound paths generated by the previous site’s internal linking and navigation logic. A patient who bookmarked
/services/implants, a search index that crawled/our-office/meet-the-doctor, a footer link that auto-appended/privacy-noticeto any page slug — all of these paths needed a declared destination. A missed entry here is invisible in staging and surfaces as a 404 in production, after cutover, on traffic the agency had no reason to expect.
How We Did It
1. Template-first build. The agency’s sitemap listed all 39 content URLs. Rather than building pages individually, we established a single page template — “Original Template” — applied consistently across homepage, service pages, utility pages, and blog, following the reference design from the original site. The flat architecture made the template system clean: one doctor bio page, one team page, one service-page format applied across 24 dental service and technology pages.
2. Spec followed line-for-line, from the agency’s sheet. The Google Sheets workbook contained the complete URL map — 39 content rows and 113 redirect rows, each with current path, new path, and a Redirect OK verification column. We implemented every row as written. Where a redirect verified as “Redirect OK” in the workbook’s status column, we confirmed the staging-side resolution matched. Two rows flagged “wrong redirect” on the technology subdirectory paths — these were surfaced in QA, flagged back to the agency, and corrected.
The scheduling widget on /book-an-appointment/ raised a domain-registration dependency: the adit.com platform required the live domain added to its allowlist before the embed would initialise correctly. This was not a development failure — staging domains cannot be pre-registered. The issue was documented, communicated, and resolved after cutover.
3. Crawl-based verification, not “looks fine to me”. Before staging handoff, we ran Screaming Frog against both the original production site and the staging rebuild. Status codes, redirect chains, meta-tag matches, broken links — every difference reconciled against the spec. The 24-item SEO backlog and 5-item CX backlog, both opened by the agency’s QA team on 16 June, were closed before the retained engagement round in July.
4. 40-item launch checklist, closed before handoff. Five categories: Design, Functionality, Content, SEO & Analytics, Responsive, and site-specific Misc items. Every responsive viewport verified — the rebuild used relative sizing units throughout, which the QA review confirmed produced clean adaptive scaling across desktop, laptop, tablet, and mobile breakpoints. Nothing shipped until the checklist was signed off.
The redirect map came before anything else — the 113 entries had to be mapped and staged before QA could confirm a single content page resolved correctly. That ordering was the discipline. Working through the workbook row by row, with every “Redirect OK” cell reconciled against the staging crawl, meant the content build ran on a verified foundation rather than catching redirect gaps at cutover.
Results
| Metric | Outcome |
|---|---|
| Spec fidelity — content URLs rebuilt | 39 / 39 content pages delivered at flat architecture |
| Spec fidelity — redirects | 113 / 113 redirect entries implemented as specified |
| SEO issues backlog | 24 / 24 items closed |
| CX issues backlog | 5 / 5 items resolved |
| Launch checklist | 40 / 40 items signed off before handoff |
| Timeline | 14 days, delivered on schedule |
| Effort | 46h / 46h estimate — no overrun, no scope creep |
| Responsive verification | Zero layout issues across verified desktop, laptop, tablet, and mobile viewports |
| Post-launch retained | 19-day post-launch review (July–August 2025) — minor adjustments, no regressions |
| Site status, verified 2026-04 | brilliantdentalcare.com live in production |
The agency’s redirect map — spanning both the planned architectural restructure and the compound-path legacy of the previous platform — landed in production without gap.
Operational Integrity at handoff
Pre-handoff QA ran a Screaming Frog crawl comparison of the staging rebuild against the original, reconciling URL, title, and meta-description parity across all 39 content pages and 113 redirect entries — the diff caught two redirect rows on the technology subdirectory paths where the staging resolution did not match the declared destination, both corrected before the agency saw the build. Pre-handoff QA ran through Site Checker — see our QA discipline for the categories and the fail-zero gate. The agency’s own QA layer — their tools, their process — ran post-handoff and surfaced issues into the shared backlog for our fix loop until they signed off.
Process
| Phase | Duration | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Brief & estimation | 2 days | Agency spec reviewed; 46h quoted and agreed; 113-redirect surface scope-confirmed |
| Development | ~10 days | 39 content pages built to flat architecture; 113 redirect entries implemented |
| Internal QA & review | ~2 days | Crawl verification completed; 2 workbook redirect discrepancies flagged and corrected |
| Spec verification | 1 day | Meta and redirect matches reconciled; 40-item checklist closed |
| Delivery & staging handoff | 1 day | Rebuild delivered to Kinsta staging; issues backlog opened by agency on day of handoff |
| Post-launch retained | 19 days | Agency-surfaced minor adjustments resolved; scheduling widget integration confirmed on live domain |
Development and QA phases ran concurrently for the final days of the build, compressing the calendar to 14 days.
Team
Delivery team
- Nikita Tumasevic — lead QA (staging verification, crawl-based checks)
- Pavel Sazhin — QA fixes and handoff verification
- Anna Polunina — implementation support and QA across the rebuilt pages
- Evgeniy Karpov — developer (full site build, template system, redirect implementation)
- Anton Hersun, xaverPRO — project lead (estimation, agency-side communication, issues backlog coordination)
The agency remained the visible vendor throughout the engagement; we stayed invisible to the end client from staging build through post-launch retained adjustments. URL restructure decisions, redirect strategy, and scheduling-platform integration requirements were the agency’s to specify; our role was to implement the spec as delivered and flag every discrepancy back to the agency rather than resolving it unilaterally.
For agencies considering a white-label WordPress build
If your agency has a URL map with a redirect table — even one where the legacy architecture generated compound paths your sitemap never listed — send the workbook. We will walk the redirect surface, flag entries where the destination is ambiguous or missing, and return a fixed-hours quote within 24 hours. No cost. No obligation to proceed.
Don't have a spec yet? Send a one-paragraph description — we'll come back with the questions worth asking. Send a description →
Site Checker runs before the agency sees anything.
Before handoff, every staging build runs through Site Checker — the WordPress QA plugin we built and maintain. It is a fail-zero gate: nothing goes to the agency with an open failure. Warnings are reviewed and judged non-blocking; the agency gets a clean slate to run their own QA layer against, not a staging site with known issues in the queue.