8 years later, I learned something. Solid. Very solid. Thank you for sharing the knowledge, Dan!

8 years however is an eternity in the world of SEO. Are there any updates on your stance re. this problem in particular?

Following your guide and generating reports to put them in the "Nay"-bag, I want to delete them. I'm going to remove them from index first by nofollowing the tags taxonomy, and removing from XML sitemap.

So, the big "What if" ... What if I simply delete all of them after doing so?

I stumbled across something new when doing a site audit in SEMRUSH today ---> Modals.

The case: Several pages could not be crawled because of (modal:) in the URL.

What I know: "A modal is a dialog box/popup window that is displayed on top of the current page" based on CSS and JS.

What I don't know: How to prevent crawlers from finding them.

am I correct to assume that:

• a) Social, "nofollow"-links have no tangible value in terms of directly affecting rankings
• b) All social links indirectly affects rankings (time on page, increase in traffic, more direct traffic, and so forth ...)

Thank you for both your time and effort in response to my thread, Joseph.

The reason I do not want to use WordPress and its Tags-function, is that it is a WP-function, and not something beneficial to SEO at all. On the contrary, tags create new URLs, duplicate content, and thin content as well.

Continuing on your stating that "relevant content to the keywords", does this mean I can skip the "provider-name" in the url?

I've seen competitors that includes the provider in URL, and they outrank others that do not. I recognize the fact that the URL is not the only signal / factor here, but I'm seeing a trend, hence my question.

Hi.

I've spent the last day fiddling with the setup of a new URL structure for a site, and I can't "pull the trigger" on it.

• Example: - domain.com/games/type-of-game/provider-name/name-of-game/
• Specific example: - arcade.com/games/pinball/deckerballs/starshooter2k/

The example is a good description of the content that I have to organize. The aim is to a) define url structure, b) facilitate good ux, **c) **create a good starting point for content marketing and SEO, avoiding multiple / stuffing keywords in urls'.

The problem? Not all providers have the same type of game. Meaning, that once I get past the /type-of-game/, I must write a new category / page / content for /provider-name/.

No matter how I switch the different "sub-levels" around in the url, at one point, the provider-name doesn't fit as its in need of new content, multiple times.

The solution? I can skip "provider-name". The caveat though is that I lose out on ranking for provider keywords as I don't have a cornerstone content page for them.

Question: Using the URL structure as outlined above in WordPress, would you A) go with "Pages", or B) use "Posts"