Multiple H1 tags are OK according to developer. I have my doubts. Please advise...
-
Hi,
My very well known and widely respected developer is using multiple H1 tags I see - they like using them in their code and they argue multiple H1s conform with HTML5 standards. They are resisting a recode to one H1 tag per page.
However, I know this is clearly an issue in Bing, so I don't want to risk it with Google. Any thoughts on whether it's best to avoid multiple H1 tags in Google (any evidence and reasoning would be great - I can then put that to my developer...)
Many thanks for your help, Luke
-
I understand. Good reminder.
-
Hi AWC - this is tangential to the topic, but important for Q+A and Moz community participation in general.
Please, in the future, work to be as generous and empathetic in replies as possible. This community is meant to be a haven from many of the nastier corners of the web and while your comment was not excessively insulting, it wasn't kind either. Contributions both big and small are welcome here, as are opinions.
If we're going to maintain the amazing community here, we have to be mindful about the impacts of negativity. Thanks for understanding.
-
I think Ryan's point about HTML5 is good to keep in mind, but the problem is that we don't have any great guidance on what Google thinks about HTML5 right now, at least at this level of detail. They're waiting for the standard to evolve into common practice, just like the rest of us. I suspect, though, that if HTML5 is changing the rules, they may scale back their judgment.
-
To be fair, how do you know that they're "spammy", "abusive", or "irrelevant"? I've seen people just use them badly - for example, for CSS styling. Is it a best practice? No. Would I do it? No. Will it have major SEO implications in 2012? Probably not.
I've seen instances where an H1 was used badly, but not in a deliberately spammy or even irrelevant way. Developers often treat tags as much more interchangeable than they should.
-
Nobody said it would tank a site nor was it asked if it would tank a site. Until the H1 goes by way of meta keywords, the use of it will have some relevance and in my opinion should be used properly.
Of 200 plus algorithm elements, there are undoubtedly plenty of others that are "not a big deal" but that doesn't mean we shouldn't use them correctly.
Whew, there sure has been a lot of time spent on something that's "not a big deal."
-
No, Google just beat the value out of the H1 to the point its on life support..
I agree. That's why having 18 of them on one of your pages probably isn't going to tank your site.
I am not advocating more than one H1 tag... just sayin' that I don't think that this is a big deal.
-
I agree. I've been in touch about the developer's work now. It's simply not good practice, yet. I've heard that Bing is more definite in its advice on H1 than Google.
-
No, Google just beat the value out of the H1 to the point its on life support.
Sorry Egol, but if the innocents had no regard for SEO they wouldn't be putting a tag on it.
-
Keep in mind that some people innocently use
tags for formatting text. These folks are building websites because they have a message to share without any regard to SEO. And some of these websites pull an enormous amount of traffic because they are built by content area experts who write with enthusiasm and verve.
I don't think that google is pulling out a stick to beat these people.
-
Hi Luke,
As you can tell, it touched a nerve. I was looking for the moz link to a thread regarding this same issue and Alan (one of the Gurus) said multiple H1's can affect engines differently and if I remember correctly he made reference to a negative response from Bing.
Until H1's achieve the lofty status of meta keywords, I will continue to treat them with some importance and approach them with best practice.
I'll listen for the rumbling coming from your direction.
Good luck.
-
Thanks for feedback AWCthreads - tis a good question - ho hum - he's just not using them right. I've had this problem with people putting in hidden tags too. They're just not taking Google, etc., into account. Almost screamed as I counted through them yesterday hee hee.
-
Thanks Jennifer. Yup, doing all that too. I'm paying him on contract and part of the prob is if he's using H1s so much it could end up in a lot of expensive re-programming. I'm gonna stamp my feet I think. I often wonder whether anyone's tested the impact of such heavy use of H1s. We need an SEO Moz testing lab ;-).
Thanks for your input too AWCthreads Some good points there...
-
Hi Jennifer, If you're going to weigh in, you've got to bring more substance than a regurgitation of Rand's posts on the value of H1 and how SEO time is best spent. When my staff runs an SEOmoz on page optimization report and gets flagged for having 2 H1's on the page (which happened several times today), I didn't say, "Worrying about the H1's on the page is not that big of a deal." Nor did I say, "Make sure the site is crawlable and all those other high priority things." I described a bit of history of the H1, its purpose and best practice considering its value in optimization which is to say 1 is best, 2 is acceptable and more than 2 is not necessary nor is is best practice. I also added that if it wasn't of some importance, Rand certainly wouldn't have it as an element in his research tools. Having 18 H1's on a page doesn't seem excessive. It is what it is, which is asinine. That rumbling coming from down the hall is not thunder from above, but me having a visit with a developer and anyone else who thinks 18 H1's is acceptable or seemingly excessive.
-
18 H1s definitely seems excessive, however in the grand scheme of things this would be a much lesser priority in my book than many other things. I mean if this is the biggest problem, then you're doing quite well. If you're wondering if the developer is doing the right things overall, that might be a different question. I just don't think that worrying about the H1s on the page is that big of a deal. I'd make sure the site is crawlable and all those other high priority things before I spent too much time on this.
-
I was doing real well until I read this: "Ive noticed the developer's used about 18 per page" Multiple H1's are one thing, but excessive, spammy, abusive, irrelevant H1's are another.
Why in the world is he even bothering with an H1 tag if he's got 18 of them? Ask him, "What are you telling the bots with your H1's - 18 different things or the same thing 18 different times?" No wonder the value of the tag has declined so much since its inception. That volume of H1's is what Cutt's is referring to in his 2009 video.
Our CMS site auto-generates a header H1 tag when enabling optimization for mCommerce. So, when I put an H1 on the page for categories and products, the page has multiple H1's. I'd like to have one but will live with 2.
-
That definitely sounds like too many H1 tags.
On my pages I have two: one for the site name and the second for the page title. The site name H1 is in my
<header>section, while the other is in mysection. I wouldn't advice using more than 1 per section.</header>
-
Thanks David, Ryan, EGOL, Nakul - really useful feedback
I think I'm erring on the side of caution really, quite simply because any risk is too much risk. I'll read up on HTML5 some more Ryan as it sounds like it's changing thing a great deal. I've noticed the developer's used about 18 per page, for all headings. which seems quite strange, and possibly incorrect even in HTML5. I mean, blog posts headings to tweet headings to... just about every heading.
-
I would look at the pages and ask myself the question: Does this page really have more then 1 "Primary" heading ? Can you do 1 primary heading and then sub-headings ? If all such options are exhausted and the only way to address the structure and layout of the page is by having multiple H1 Tags...do it. But I would do it as a last resort or when it's absolutely necessary and it makes sense from a user perspective.
-
I have multiple H1 tags on some of my pages and don't see any problem. Just telling my observations.
If this is your site and you have concerns about multiple H1s.... maybe the developer needs to know that he is being paid by the hour and you are being paid on the basis of results. So if he wants any more hours he better not be messing with your results.
-
I had a conversation about this very topic recently, here is the advice I got:
Headings get totally different treatment in HTML5, we have to throw away everything we knew about this from HTML4/XHTML.
In earlier versions of HTML we only had headings (h1 - h6), there are no other sectioning elements at all. That is why we had to be very careful about our usage of the h1 tag, and there was always controversy regarding it usage.
In HTML5 the sectioning is much more powerful. We have a whole bunch of new elements for sectioning and the algorithm used to generate the outline is far more complex, and flexible. In short, it no longer matters how many h1 tags we have on a page.
We must still adhere to a structured approach and be careful to generate the right outline (one that reflects the proper structure of the document), and this is what this theme does.
To conclude and clarify, in HTML5 it doesn't matter if there is multiple h1 tags on a page, what matters is how they are used in conjunction with the other sectioning elements, and that the outline produced represents the correct structure of the document.
-
Best practices is to only use 1 h1 tag per page. You can see a video from mat cutts here mentioning you can have more if done correctly - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIn5qJKU8VM
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
-
Google suddenly stops ranking a page for a "keyword" with same "keyword" in title tag. Low competition.
Hi all, We have released our next version of product called like "software 11", which have thousands of searches every month. So we have just added this same keyword "software 11" as page title suffix to one of the top ranking pages. Obviously this is the page has been added suddenly with "software 11" at page title, multiple header tags and 1 mention in paragraph. Google ranked it for 2 days and suddenly stopped showing this page in entire results for the same keyword we optimised the page for. Why does it happened? Does Google think that we are overdoing with this page and ignoring it? Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | vtmoz0 -
Google URL Shortener- Should I use one or multiple???
I have a client with a number of YouTube videos. I'm using Google URL Shortner to allow the link to show in the YouTube text (as its a long URL). Many of these links go to the same page ex .com/services-page Should I use a single short URL for each video linking to the .com/services-page or should they be unique each time? If unique, would Google possibly think I'm trying to manipulate results? Thanks in advance. I'm just not sure on this one and hope someone knows best practice on this. Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | mgordon1 -
Submitting a page to Google Search Console or Bing Webmaster Tools with nofollow tags
Hello, I was hoping someone could help me understand if there is any point to submit a domain or subdomain to Google Search Console (Webmaster Tools) and Bing Webmaster Tools if the pages (on the subdomain for example) all have nofollow/noindex tags ... or the pages are being blocked by the robots.txt file). There are some pages on a data feed onto a subdomain which I manage that have these above characteristics ... which I cannot change ... but I am wondering if it is better to simply exclude from submitting those from GWT and BWT (above) thereby eliminating generating errors or warnings ... or is it better to tell Google and Bing about them anyway then perhaps there is a chance those nofollow pages may be indexed/contextualised in some way, making it worth the effort? Many thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | uworlds
Mark0 -
How does Google handle product detail page links hiden in a <noscript>tag?</noscript>
Hello, During my research of our website I uncovered that our visible links to our product detail pages (PDP) from grid/list view category-nav/search pages are <nofollowed>and being sent through a click tracking redirect with the (PDP) appended as a URL query string. But included with each PDP link is a <noscript>tag containing the actual PDP link. When I confronted our 3rd party e-commerce category-nav/search provider about this approach here is the response I recieved:</p> <p style="padding-left: 30px;">The purpose of these links is to firstly allow us to reliably log the click and then secondly redirect the visitor to the target PDP.<br /> In addition to the visible links there is also an "invisible link" inside the no script tag. The noscript tag prevents showing of the a tag by normal browsers but is found and executed by bots during crawling of the page.<br /> Here a link to a blog post where an SEO proved this year that the noscript tag is not ignored by bots: <a href="http://www.theseotailor.com.au/blog/hiding-keywords-noscript-seo-experiment/" target="_blank">http://www.theseotailor.com.au/blog/hiding-keywords-noscript-seo-experiment/<br /> </a> <br /> So the visible links are not obfuscating the PDP URL they have it encoded as it otherwise cannot be passed along as a URL query string. The plain PDP URL is part of the noscript tag ensuring discover-ability of PDPs by bots.</p> <p>Does anyone have anything in addition to this one blog post, to substantiate the claim that hiding our links in a <noscript> tag are in fact within the SEO Best Practice standards set by Google, Bing, etc...? </p> <p>Do you think that this method skirts the fine line of grey hat tactics? Will google/bing eventually penalize us for this?</p> <p>Does anyone have a better suggestion on how our 3rd party provider could track those clicks without using a URL redirect & hiding the actual PDP link?</p> <p>All insights are welcome...Thanks!</p> <p>Jordan K.</p></noscript></nofollowed>
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | eImprovement-SEO0 -
Hide keyword tag or not?
We have a mandatory keyword tag field in our cms page templates, which we have to keep
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | AMurelli
as our internal search facility bases queries on the keywords we use. Should we hide the keywords from the search
engines, as I read that Bing uses it as a spam signal? Or do we just need to stick to best practise ensuring the keywords match the keywords found in the body content? Many thanks for any help. Sophie0 -
Are multiple domains spammy if they're similar but different
A client currently has a domain of johnsmith.com (not actual site name, of course). I’m considering splitting this site into multiple domains, which will include brand name plus keyword, such as: Johnsmithlandclearing.com Johnsmithdirtwork.com Johnsmithdemolition.com Johnsmithtimercompany.com Johnsmithhydroseeding.com johnsmithtreeservice.com Each business is unique enough and will cross-link to the other. My questions are: 1) will Google consider cross-linking spammy? 2) what happens to johnsmith.com? Should it redirect to new site with the largest market share, or should it become an umbrella for all? 3) Any pitfalls foreseen? I've done a fair amount of due diligence and feel these separate domains are legit, but am paranoid that Google will not see it that way, or may change direction in the future.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SteveMauldin0 -
Multiple domains pointed at one site
I know things are changing and the things Google thinks are cheating searchers from finding what they are really looking for are changing too. So, I have multiple domain names that are related to my site, but not the actual site name. For instance, I have a certification program called Certified NetAnalyst that has a few domains for it... .com, .org and other derivatives like NetAnalyst. I would like to point the domains to my main company web site and not create a site just for the certification. Does Google think it is cheating to point domain names with my company branding names to my main web site? What about domain name forwarding to a specific URL, like taking the certification name domains and pointing them to the certification page instead of the main site? Wondering if one could no follow (don't know how to do that) the domain forwarding links so it is not duplicate content? Is that possible in some way? Could you put another robots.txt file with excludes in the domain forwarding url landing page so it would not be duplicate content? For the future I want all SEO "juice" to go to the main domain, but the keyword value of the domain names is valuable. I sure would be grateful if someone that has a good understanding and specific recent experience with Google policy and enforcement could offer some sage and practical advice and perhaps a case study example where Google "likes it" or on the other hand a good explanation of why I may not wish to do this! Thank You! Bill Alderson www.apalytics.com
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Packetman0071 -
Farmer Update Case Study. Please question my logic here. (Very long!)
Hi SEOmoz community! I would like to try to give a small (well...) case study of a Farmer victim and some logical conclusions of mine that you are more then welcome to shred to pieces. So, I run MANY sites ranging from low to super quality and actually have a few that have been hit by farmer but this particular site had me scratching my head as to why it was torched. Quick background: Sitei s in a very competetive niche, been around since 2004 initially as a forum site but from 2005 also a content driven site. Site is an affiliate site and has been ranking top 5 for many high-value commercial KW's and has a big long-tail of informational kw's. Limk profile is a mix between natural, good links and purchased links from various qualilty sources. Content is high quality written articles, how-to's, blog posts etc. by in-house pro writers plus UGC from a semi active forum (20-30 posts a day). Farmer: After Farmer, this site's vertical is pretty much same as before with the biggest exception being my site. I quickly discounted low-quality content (spider-food) and focused instead on technical reasons. I took this approach since this site isn't the most well kept site I have and I figured the crappy CMS + PHPBB might have caused isseus. I didn't want to waste my time crawling the site myself so I quickly downloaded all the URLs that Majestic had crawled. Too my surprise the result of Majestic's crawler was over 3 million URLs when the real number would likley be 30-40k and Google has about 20k indexed. After scanning through the file with URLs I knew I had issues. Massive amounts of auto-generated dupe pages from the forum and so on. By adding around 20 new lines to robots.txt I was able to block millions of pages from being crawled again. My logic: Ok, so now I think I've found what caused the drop. Milllions of dupe pages and empty pages could have tripped the Farmer algo update to think the site is low quality or dupe or just trying to feed the spiders with uselessness. My WEAK point in this logic is that I can't prove that Google even knew about (or smart enough to ignore them). Google WMT tells me they've crawled an average of around 10k pages the last 90 days. Given this I'm doubting my logic and if I've found the issue or not. My next step is to see if this gets resolved algorithmically or not, if not i feel I have a legitimate case to submit a reinclusion request but i'm not sure? Since I haven't been a contributing member to this community I'm not looking to get direct help with my site, but hopefully this could spark some discussion about Farmer and maybe some flaming of my logic regarding the update 🙂 So, would any of you have drawn similar conclusions as I did? (Sweet blog bro!)
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | YesBaby0