I don’t have SEO expertise but I did dabble in it a little bit on a need to basis and listened to a few experts, etc. And the people dismissing the idea that p

I don’t have SEO expertise but I did dabble in it a little bit on a need to basis and listened to a few experts, etc. And the people dismissing the idea that pruning older pages has no SEO benefit don’t know what they’re talking about because frankly the only way to know if it does or doesn’t have an effect is to try it. Also, there seems to be a segment of people laughing at CNET because Google explicitly says this will not benefit. Well, these people know even less because Google absolutely lies. Both by making knowingly false statements but more so by making statements which are correct by the letter but not the spirit. So, for example, Google might say it does not penalize a site for having too many older pages at all. And this may be true (or it may not, but let’s assume it’s true. But it’s entirely possible that eliminating older pages does improve CNET’s SEO scores. It’s entirely possible that while Google does not penalize old pages, it penalizes websites that have a lot of pages that look similar. So, for example, CNET probably had 15 articles which sound very similar for each version of the iPhone that is released. They have a bunch of review articles for different products in the same category thst look very similar. They have articles comparing the 2021 Lenovo with the 2023 model that looks similar. And Google’s algo May start thinking it’s an SEO targeting content farm and hurt CNET’s SEO score accordingly.