Is is it true that Google will not penalize duplicated content found in UL and LI tags?
-
I've read in a few places now that if you absolutely have to use a key term several times in a piece of copy, then it is preferable to use li and ul tags, as google will not penalise excessive density of keywords found in these tags. Does anyone know if there is any truth in this?
-
lol... thanks for that report.
Should we go back and read for the laughs?
-
I just read several more articles on that site. Overall junk. I would find a new blog to get your info from.
-
** In that case you can use “li” and “ul” tag, moreover Google doesn’t penalize for repeating words under these tags.**
ha ha... that is B.S.
The author of that does not know how Google handles
-
and
I can imagine Matt Cutts telling people ... "Its OK to stuff the
- tag guys"
-
-
Thanks for the response,
I've found it here http://www.dailytechpost.com/index.php/8-best-tips-for-css-for-seo/#comment-69311 amongst several other places. I'm not in to stuffing keywords and fully aware that writing natural prose is the way to go, it was more a reference for where there is an excessive amount of keywords coincidently, such as when using technical terms which cannot be substituted and form part of every element of a text. Or perhaps if you are talking about a concept and natural prose feels a little repetitive, such as writing about infographics.
-
Maybe they are not today. I'm not to sure about this like the others I'm asking myself who told you this.
I do recommand you do not to try fooling the big G around. Duplicate content is kind of not so valuable content in the best case. You should use your efforts building great content instead of trying to duplicate.
Because even if it was the case they are not doing it right now, they probably will one day.
From my experience, duplicate is duplicate anywhere you put it !
-
Exactly. **Content is written for the visitors, not the search engines. **
If you are familiar with the subject and are writing naturally, the content will do just fine with all of the search engines, and more importantly your visitors.
-
Where did you hear this at? That makes no sense and I have never heard anything like that.
And do not stuff keywords or even try to see if you can get away with it. Thats poor optimization and does not look well for users. Write and design for your users and you should be fine.
-
I have never heard that
-
are safe for anything.
Don't bet on the behavior of Google.
Also, I don't pay any attention to the number of times that I use a word in copy. None. I try to write naturally without regard for search engines.
-
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Hello, I've heard that the outbound links I provide in my content should have a high degree of relevancy to the topic I'm writing about or they aren't really worth including. Is this true?
Hello, I've heard that relevancy of the content between the source page and the target page of outbound links in my content matters greatly. The outbound links I provide in my content should have a high degree of relevancy to the topic I'm writing about, or they aren't really worth including. Example: Don't just link to the homepage of an organization mentioned in the article, link to a page on their site that is related to the topic you are writing about. Is this true? Would including less relevant links negatively impact SEO in any way?
On-Page Optimization | | DJBKBU0 -
Duplicate Content
Hello Moz Quick question. Can I copy and paste a paragraph of text (100 words) from my main category page into my products without hurting SEO of the category page? The content on my category page is so good I don't want to take chances as this is what I will be ranking for. Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | crocman0 -
Should I be worried about our 'Duplicate' content
Hi guys... I've just been working through some issues to give our site a little cleanup. I'm working through our duplicate content issues (we have some legitimate duplicate pages that need removing, and some of our dynamic content is problematic. Are web developers are going to sort with canonical tags this week.) However... There are some pages that are actually different products, but are very similar pages that are 'triggering' MOZ to say we have duplicate pages. Here an example... http://www.toaddiaries.co.uk/filofax-refills/filo-12-month-inserts-personal-size/fortnight-view-filofax-personal and http://www.toaddiaries.co.uk/filofax-refills/filo-12-month-inserts-personal-size/week-to-a-view-filofax-personal They are very similar refill products, it's just the diary format is different. Question: Should I be worried about this? I've never seen our rankings change in the past when 'cleaning up' duplicate content. What do you guys think? Isaac.
On-Page Optimization | | isaac6630 -
Duplicate content affects on overall rankings
Hi guys, I have a website that has 23 pages with duplicate content. These pages serve the same function, which enables customers to upload their images. There is not much content on each one but we require a different page for each of our products, here is an example page: http://www.point101.com/giclee_printing/upload#/upload I don't think it makes sense to use a canonical tag as each page is for a different product and I think its going to be difficult to differentiate each page. I was wondering: 1. If this has a negative effect on the ranking of our homepage and other main product pages or if its an issue we do not need to worry too much about. 2. If anyone has any other ideas as to how we can resolve this issue. Thanks,
On-Page Optimization | | KerryK
Kerry0 -
Adding meta description tags to Drupal 6 content
It looks as if a quick improvement to the (inherited) site that I manage would be to add meta description tags to all our pages. But I don't see a user-friendly way to modify the html headers from within Drupal. I'm debating whether to interpose CSS code between Drupal and the final html content, but I'd face a steep learning curve on CSS. Can you suggest a more excellent approach? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | marcellu
John0 -
Duplicate Content
Part of a site I am working on, features many different bags in all thicknesses colors and sizes. I'm getting an error when some pages have different content like different thicknesses. The only differences between the pages are a single digit - but in trash bags that makes it a whole different product! I can't do a canonical because it's not the same. For example: http://www.plasticplace.net/index.php?file=productdetail&iprod_id=274 and http://www.plasticplace.net/index.php?file=productdetail&iprod_id=268 Any ideas?
On-Page Optimization | | EcomLkwd0 -
How do I avoid duplicate content and page title errors when using a single CMS for a website
I am currently hosting a client site on a CMS with both a Canadian and USA version of the website. We have the .com as the primary domain and the .ca is re-directed from the registrar to the Canadian home page. The problem I am having is that my campaign produces errors for duplicate page content and duplicate page titles. Is there a way to setup the two versions on the CMS so that these errors do not get produced? My concern is getting penalized from search engines. Appreciate any help. Mark Palmer
On-Page Optimization | | kpreneur0 -
Which Canonical URL Tag tag should we remove?
Hi guys, We are in the process of optimizing the pages of our new site. We have used the 'on page' report card feature in the Seomoz Pro Campaign analyser. On several pages we got the following result No More Than One Canonical URL Tag Number of Canonical tags <dl> <dd>2</dd> <dt>Explanation</dt> <dd>The canonical URL tag is meant to be employed only a single time on an individual URL (much like the title element or meta description). To ensure the search engines properly parse the canonical source, employ only a single version of this tag.</dd> <dt>Recommendation</dt> <dd>Remove all but a single canonical URL tag</dd> </dl> I have looked into the source code of one of the pages http://www.sabaileela.co.uk/acupuncture-london and can see that there are two "canonical" tags. Does anyone have any advise on which one I should ask the developer to remove? I am not sure how to determine the relative importance of either link.
On-Page Optimization | | brian.james0