Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Primary keyword in that URL example from the Learn SEO section refers not to the most important keyword on your site or the most important topic on your site, but to the most important keyword on that specific page that the URL is pointing to. I believe that's where the confusion lies. Hope this helps.

While I'm not sure how sophisticated Google's algo is at picking this up, Google's people reviewers would probably note it as suspicious. Again I'd ask why? What business advantage does this give you? (Wil Reynolds has famously said that when something sounds fishy or not the best practice ask why 5 times. In the Skype example, the why is language of the users. It's not spammy because it does something clear and obvious to help the user. Whereas your URL just looks like keyword stuffing.

Nice.

I think I'd start slowly in that case. Keep the relationship aspect in mind, too. Even if all three companies know the writer/client and are aware of the relationship, sooner or later one of these articles is going to take off. If one site gets the SEO credit and the other two sites aren't ranking, there may be friction. Even if the work is spread out evenly and all high-quality, you don't control (ultimately) what content finally sticks and is successful. I just think things could get weird all-around if you send every article three places and only one gets credit.

That's my suspicion as well. Can anyone confirm with data?

My guess: It's possible, but it would be an uphill battle. The reason being Google would likely see the page as a duplicate of all the other pages on your site with a login form. Not only does Google tend to drop duplicate pages from it's index (especially if it has a duplicate title tag - more leeway is giving the more unique elements you can place on a page) but now you face a situation where you have lots of duplicate or "thin" pages, which is juicy meat for a Panda-like penalty. Generally, you want to keep this pages out of the index, so it's a catch 22.

I would prefer to use the Moz Crawler research tool. It does come with a extensive report.

We completely understand that and expect to have to do some formatting changes. To me if the only thing I have to do is minor formatting that's 100% ready. Agree about the editor though, it's being fixed as I type! It's super, super annoying.

Thanks for the feedback!  And definitely let us know if you do the cross-domain canonical.

Thanks Keri; looks awesome.

Glad I could help

I think you're right; I think I'll split things up. Thanks!

So anyone out there disagree with the consensus and think it doesn't matter or else is particularly advantageous to be forthcoming with client specifics?