sadams101

Hi,
Check this topic:
 

Glad you have what you need there 🙂 

So that took care of my first question, thank you, I was able to move blogs from one entry category to another.
My other question was how to delete an entry category? I seem to be able to delete only the main blog that the entry category is under, but not specific entry categories which might be empty.
I found out how to do this...it is when you edit the main blog, there is a tab for the entry categories...thank you!

One thing I might suggest is turning off all 3rd party resources (applications/plugins) and creating a new default theme.  Switch to that theme, and test creating an account using a different browser not logged in.  

Unfortunately, customization support is outside our scope of support. I would advise going through all modified templates on each upgrade and in this particular case, any that deal with login and registration.

Contact @DawPi

I did some research on having both the meta noindex AND the robots.txt, and if it is not disallowed in robots.txt then Google WILL access the page, meaning they will follow those links, which I don't want to happen. I found this here:
https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2007/03/using-robots-meta-tag
"If you allow a page with robots.txt but block it from being indexed using a meta tag, Googlebot will access the page, read the meta tag, and subsequently not index it." The proper meta tag to stop google from crawling would be nofollow. It seems like the /tags should include nofollow, rather than noindex, if the goal is to stop them from being crawled by the bots.

The tags already have the "noindex" meta tag added, so if you prohibit robots.txt from indexing the page, bots will not be able to read it. Bad practice.

I am hoping to get some input on my site's Robots.txt file. Some of the items in it are likely now outdated, and some may be overkill and possibly hurting my site's crawlability, so I am hoping to start a discussion about it here. Most of it was put together long before IPB offered a standard version of the Robots.txt file. Some of what I include was borrowed from past posts here, and some of it may even been poorly or incorrectly formatted, which is why I wanted to get some input on it. 
I've changed my site a bit regarding profiles, and have a custom plugin that has a noindex for profiles without "About Us" info, but allows indexing for those who have info there.
Here is my file:
# START Default Rules for Invision Community (https://invisioncommunity.com) User-Agent: * # Block pages with no unique content Disallow: /startTopic/ Disallow: /discover/unread/ Disallow: /markallread/ #Disallow: /staff/ Disallow: /online/ Disallow: /discover/ Disallow: /leaderboard/ Disallow: /search/ Disallow: /*?advancedSearchForm= Disallow: /register/ Disallow: /lostpassword/ Disallow: /login/ # # Block faceted pages and 301 redirect pages Disallow: /*?sortby= Disallow: /*?filter= Disallow: /*?tab= Disallow: /*?do= Disallow: /*ref= Disallow: /*?forumId* # # Block profile pages as these have little unique value, consume a lot of crawl time and contain hundreds of 301 links #Disallow: /profile/ # # END Default Rules for Invision Community (https://invisioncommunity.com) # # # START CUSTOM RULES Disallow: /tags/ Disallow: /notifications/ #Disallow: /applications/ Disallow: /announcement/ Disallow: /*?*sortby= Disallow: /*?*sort= Disallow: /*?sort= Disallow: /*?*sortdirection= Disallow: /*?sortdirection= Disallow: /*?set_template=mobile* Disallow: /*&section=notifications* Disallow: /*&do=topContributors* Disallow: /*&do=askAQuestion* Disallow: /*?app=core* Disallow: /*?act=calendar* Disallow: /*?act=rssout* #Disallow: /articles/*/*/*/Page1.html/addfav #Disallow: /articles/*/*/*/Page1.html/addread #Disallow: /articles/*/*/*/Page1.html/print Disallow: /profile/*/?do=* Disallow: /profile/*/content/ Disallow: /profile/*/followers/ Disallow: /profile/*/reputation* Disallow: /profile/0-Guest/* Disallow: /blogs/*?view=grid* Disallow: /blogs/*?view=list* Disallow: /blogs/submit/* Disallow: /calendar/*/week/ Disallow: /calendar/*/submit/ Disallow: /calendar/submit/* Disallow: /clubs/*?view=grid* Disallow: /clubs/*?view=list* Disallow: /clubs/index.php?app=core* # added to stop social share links Disallow: /submit?url=* # # Custom Plugin (DP47) Bad Link Fixer for Bots Disallow: /*&do=retrieveUrl* Disallow: /*&do=retrieveUrl* Disallow: /*?app=dp47badlinksfixer* # Sitemaps Sitemap: https://www.celiac.com/sitemap.php  

We would recommend and support only the default robots.txt that is included in the software. Anything else would be something you can discuss with the community at large so I will move this to the proper forum. If you are wanting to suggest things to be added or removed from the default robots.txt, you can certainly suggest those in our Feature Suggestion forum for further evaluation.

Managing a web business does not mean solving technological problems - there are other people working on relevant cases and solving them, and that has nothing to do with this topic here.
You have not provided any solution to the site's fast loading issue.
Maybe your "IT bees" etc. are more useful for this topic than you. I'm sorry.

My current understanding is that some minor improvements will be added to the 4.x series (such as an upcoming Gallery refresh), however the new/modern CSS framework will be part of a much larger "version 5" update at some point in the future. I have no ETA's or anything beyond that at the moment. 🙂

Why are you even in this thread? You obviously don't care about your site speed scores, or optimizing your site to be faster. If pass/fail is good enough for you, fine.
How would it hurt you if IPB optimized their software and made it faster? It could only help your site, right...I mean it could not hurt it...could it?

You are only speaking with conjecture - could you support this statement of yours with an example please. Thanks.
This is not true at all and is not worth commenting on…

Why are you even in this thread? You obviously don't care about your site speed scores, or optimizing your site to be faster. If pass/fail is good enough for you, fine.
How would it hurt you if IPB optimized their software and made it faster? It could only help your site, right...I mean it could not hurt it...could it?

I happen to be running a dedicated server with all hardware that is 6 years old and no CDN, but I did spend time optimizing it as well.
Currently my site & server, which also serves a ton of ad banners throughout my content, still outperforms probably 90% of IPB sites of similar size, and even those on CDN's without any ads.
I would estimate that my current speed scores (~71 on mobile, and ~90 on desktop) are 75% the result of CSS and template changes (that unfortunately can't be done using only the custom CSS feature), and 25% the result of server optimization.
I don't believe I've gone down any rabbit hole, I've simply paid attention to Google's own posts about how they rank sites, and have done my best to conform my site to their site speed tools, which are developed to help sites improve their site speed (and this is simply another objective way for Google to measure a site's quality). Anyone can ignore Google's own posts on this topic at their own peril.
The biggest speed issue with the current IPB is clearly on the mobile side, and many of the issues as to why have already been discussed in this topic. Rather than having everyone who runs IPB software and also cares about site speed scores have to "go down a rabbit hole" to improve their site speed, I personally think IPB should just do this and then use it as a marketing bullet point.
Updating the CSS and JS won't be easy, but the upside for all IPB users could be huge, as Google will weigh site speed as a ranking factor more and more as time goes by. Focusing on good SEO, including site speed, eliminating css/html/js errors, should definitely be the focus of any good Internet application.

I happen to be running a dedicated server with all hardware that is 6 years old and no CDN, but I did spend time optimizing it as well.
Currently my site & server, which also serves a ton of ad banners throughout my content, still outperforms probably 90% of IPB sites of similar size, and even those on CDN's without any ads.
I would estimate that my current speed scores (~71 on mobile, and ~90 on desktop) are 75% the result of CSS and template changes (that unfortunately can't be done using only the custom CSS feature), and 25% the result of server optimization.
I don't believe I've gone down any rabbit hole, I've simply paid attention to Google's own posts about how they rank sites, and have done my best to conform my site to their site speed tools, which are developed to help sites improve their site speed (and this is simply another objective way for Google to measure a site's quality). Anyone can ignore Google's own posts on this topic at their own peril.
The biggest speed issue with the current IPB is clearly on the mobile side, and many of the issues as to why have already been discussed in this topic. Rather than having everyone who runs IPB software and also cares about site speed scores have to "go down a rabbit hole" to improve their site speed, I personally think IPB should just do this and then use it as a marketing bullet point.
Updating the CSS and JS won't be easy, but the upside for all IPB users could be huge, as Google will weigh site speed as a ranking factor more and more as time goes by. Focusing on good SEO, including site speed, eliminating css/html/js errors, should definitely be the focus of any good Internet application.

I can happily back up Matt's last post. We've heard your feedback and are aiming to significantly improve both the CSS and JS performance in a future update - but as you can imagine, rewriting 10 years of code is a very long process that needs to be planned carefully.

Likely this is an error of some kind. Likely with loading the data that is meant to be displayed here, whether that is internal (software/server) or external (Google), with the information provided is unknown.
First step, I would check your browser's develop tools in the console tab to see if there are any errors. If there is a 500 Internal Server Error mentioned there, you will need to obtain the Server Error log entry for that error. If there is another error, please let us know.

I think you mentioned that you'd do this at least 3 years ago...which is, again, why @Adlago and myself have had to start this process ourselves.

I think you mentioned that you'd do this at least 3 years ago...which is, again, why @Adlago and myself have had to start this process ourselves.

I think you mentioned that you'd do this at least 3 years ago...which is, again, why @Adlago and myself have had to start this process ourselves.

I think you mentioned that you'd do this at least 3 years ago...which is, again, why @Adlago and myself have had to start this process ourselves.

I will mention it then. The IPS CSS has so many redundancies it isn't even funny. This change didn't impact me, since I do use custom.css, but in maintaining that implementation since IPB 2.x, it's been clear that the CSS is very hacky with many different people having worked on it in silos over the years. This is demonstrated by the frequent use of !important in the CSS definitions to override the otherwise ridiculously convoluted selectors that even the devs don't want to touch.
Now with talk of improving the CSS implementation, it's almost a certainty that my customizations will be broken in the future ... these past few 'upgrades' have come with many major downsides (e.g., the Topic Feed uselessness ... don't even get me started).
Such is the way of SAAS software: optimize the software for the devs and the non-technical customers whilst alienating the technical/power customers ... dumbing down the world.

It's simpler than that I think? Bots view as guests and there's an option in the ACP to either show or hide signatures to guests. 
Member settings > profiles > profile settings > show signatures to guests