SEO / Google / Myths - Title & Keyword tags

Status
Not open for further replies.

bober

New Member
Here's one & please correct me if im incorrect in anyway :)

From my understanding a Search friendly website consists of the following Meta Data. (I know there are other factors but i just want to focus on the 2 below).

1) The Title tag > Must be unique to each page & less than 60 characters, yes / no?
*How come some of Ireland's Top (I assume top) have title tags with more than 60 characters - Is this not considered bad practice then by the professionals?

2) The keyword tag > Google does not recognise this tag & other search engines such as yahoo only take note of 2 keywords!
*Again if this is all to be true then why do I see so many online marketing companies stuffing their meta keywords with lots of keywords.

Therefore if I/you were to use a title tag with more than 60 characters this may be considered poor SEO? Also Google the largest search Engine in the Globe & with 95% search in Ireland do not recognise the Keyword, then why bother stuff your meta data with keywords like so many are doing?

Your Thoughts & Views are Welcomed.
 

mneylon

Administrator
Staff member
You've overlooked the "description" which is useful
 

MOH

New Member
You see a lot of keyword stuffed keywords tags because there's a ton of "SEO" companies who do pretty much nothing but keyword stuffing, and charge people a few hundred quid for it. Despite the fact that pretty much no major search engines use it now. They're the same people who keyword stuff the description, so even if you do end up ranking #1 for a keyword, any human searching is going to see a load of gibberish and click on the lower results, which have a proper description.

I don't think there's anything particularly wrong with having a title longer than 60-ish characters, but it's a) going to get truncated in the SERPs, and b) anything beyond that is going to carry very little, or no, weight from an SEO point of view.
 

bober

New Member
here's an interesting video I found on Youtube from Matt Cutts from Google - he mentioned 50 sec into the video 'we don't worry to much about the keyword' tag.

He also speaks about starting a blog for a site -> to create content, build links & become part of the online community :)

Coming back to the keyword issue, think I'll just use 2 keywords tags per page just to be safe - considering they don't do any damage as such, yet they don't have any relevance.
 

link8r

New Member
From my understanding a Search friendly website consists of the following Meta Data. (I know there are other factors but i just want to focus on the 2 below).

1) The Title tag > Must be unique to each page & less than 60 characters, yes / no?
*How come some of Ireland's Top (I assume top) have title tags with more than 60 characters - Is this not considered bad practice then by the professionals?

2) The keyword tag > Google does not recognise this tag & other search engines such as yahoo only take note of 2 keywords!
*Again if this is all to be true then why do I see so many online marketing companies stuffing their meta keywords with lots of keywords.

Therefore if I/you were to use a title tag with more than 60 characters this may be considered poor SEO? Also Google the largest search Engine in the Globe & with 95% search in Ireland do not recognise the Keyword, then why bother stuff your meta data with keywords like so many are doing?
SEO Myths exist because people keep looking for check-list SEO. Search engines and subsequently SEO is a system. You'll struggle until you can balance a system in your mind rather than a set of yes/no answers. Systems don't just work in On/Off - they work in balancing different inputs.

The key suggestion that Google will keep pointing to is build a page for a user. There are no Page Title lengths and different lengths will work on different pages. A page title is designed to work with a description in a set of SERP results to describe itself to a search user. The user can then determine if they are interested. Get either too long and it will get concatenated and may not work well. Sometimes the best page title is one word, sometimes it might be ten.

A good few years ago, a very good systems-style SEO was in a conversation with someone who need a "straight-line" answer and kept asking "how many words" do I need, how many H1 tags, how many xxxxxx. The SEO was trying to say, well how many words do you need, to which the enquirer said "well, I don't need any, I want to know how many Google needs." The check list reply was 250 - and from that a myth that's hung around for 9 years is that you need at least 250 words on a page (and many variations of it).

Same with page titles.

Keywords Myth: I hate giving these up because it helps us easily identify the good from the bad but ultimately Google doesn't have a filter for Keywords but it also doesn't ignore them. They are part of the indexable content. Think of what happens when you process flour - you separate the elements of the seed - the chaff, the wheat germ, the other parts. They are all then packaged separately and the flour is ground down into powder. Google deals with each element in different ways - like the Page Title and Description for the snippet (or including the DMOZ title for specific searches) and then it checks the directives (index, follow, canon, rel) and then it grabs the content by parts - text, alt text, headers etc.

The problem with Check list SEO is further compounded as it goes from On/Off to Good/Bad. Like people have developed "theories" that putting flash into a page is bad (-v- putting a page into flash which *might* be).

Another myth is that "Video" is good for SEO. Which has never really made sense as a statement. It comes, I suspect, from early-adopter advantage that was gained when people put up videos into YouTube and they "ranked" (within Youtubes special linear spot near the 4th or 8th SERP). But that to me isn't "good for SEO" - that's just a handy way to rank quickly. Early Adopter advantage is lost in many areas.

Bing allows 2 keywords per page. I doubt they've built in a penalty unless there are huge amounts of keywords or the range is quite wide.

When you think about it, keywords are really a dinosaur, library-style way of ranking. Its also very easy for people who are still thinking in straight lines to understand and share. It "makes sense". But when you take a search engines perspective, and every site has the same keywords, its not a really helpful way to determine Rank Order. So if you have 1000 sites with "Hotels in Dublin" as the title, description, keywords - how do you effectively use this data to rank them? If the site is about Hotels in Dublin - that's the page name - Google doesn't need assistance by "re-enforcing it". That's why probably less than 20 of Google's 200 signals are probably on page (about the same page, some others will be there but applied to other pages).

So if you are Hotels in Dublin but also a spa - then build a micro-site (mysite.com/dublin-spa/) and build a series of pages about spa and spa treatments. If you are at 60 words in a page title you've lost the plot...
 

SupNY

New Member
You see a lot of keyword stuffed keywords tags because there's a ton of "SEO" companies who do pretty much nothing but keyword stuffing, and charge people a few hundred quid for it. Despite the fact that pretty much no major search engines use it now. They're the same people who keyword stuff the description, so even if you do end up ranking #1 for a keyword, any human searching is going to see a load of gibberish and click on the lower results, which have a proper description.

I don't think there's anything particularly wrong with having a title longer than 60-ish characters, but it's a) going to get truncated in the SERPs, and b) anything beyond that is going to carry very little, or no, weight from an SEO point of view.
I agree with this chap, and I would like to say that first and foremost the title and description wants to be eye-catching to your targeted viewers not google bots, once attractive then satisfy yourself in its keyword importance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Award-winning Mac antivirus and Internet security software
Top