How to know when do use singular vs plural in anchor text and on-page copy?
-
I'm building out a specific section of our site and I want to make sure I target it correctly.
Is there a rule of thumb when to know how to use "car" vs "cars"? (as an example)
Is there a specific way to research the right approach?
thank you!
-
A lot of results for singular/plural and synonyms are so similar as to be nearly identical for the first page or two, which is what really matters, and which is what Gregory Baka is referring to. You will notice a lot of times if you search for something you'll see synonyms and variants bolded in the description and title in the SERPs. That would be your signal that one is being treated as synonymous with (though not "identical to") the other.
In terms of singular vs plural I tend to include both variations naturally within descriptions and on-page copy. External links tend to contain both versions too unless you're buying the anchor text. I would think, based only on common sense and experience, and not any quantifiable study, that Google looks for a natural variation. If you have two different landing pages, one targeting singular and the other targeting plural, that would not only be wasting effort, money, link equity, etc... but it would seem very unnatural. If I were writing an algorithm I'd probably figure out a way to push such pages lower in the results unless other signals point to really high quality at the page and/or domain level.
ALL of this "common sense" stuff flies out the window though when any ambiguity of intent or results is involved. For example, with "cars" you could be talking about the animated movie, which is why you see IMDB, Disney and Wikipedia in the results. This disambiguation factor is why Google is pushing for semantic markup of the web, and is probably why topic modeling has become increasingly important (e.g. want to rank better for "cars" when the user intent is to find the animation, use words like "Pixar" and "Lightening Steve McQueen" in the copy).
As a rule of thumb, I tend to go with whatever sounds better and makes more sense to the user. For example, on a category page I might write "blue widgets" in the title, but I'd use "blue widget" on a single product page. From there I go with what the data says. Looking at Analytics a few months later I pay attention to traffic and keywords as a follow-up. If the "blue widgets" category page gets 80% of it's traffic from a #3 ranking for "blue widget" when it ranks #1 for "blue widgets" that tells me I should probably change the title to the singular version.
In the end I usually find I get the best results when I don't think too hard about it and just go with my gut when writing. I know that's not scientific or anything, but if it works it works.
-
No research. Just memory of doing searches with and without an S for my own keywords and noticing that the results were fairly similar.
I just checked garden and gardens - many of the page 1 results are the same.
Then I checked tool and tools - very different results because of the band "Tool"
Checking garden tool and garden tools takes it back to many similar page 1 results.
The original poster just asked for a Rule of Thumb. So perhaps the answer is "It depends on the keyword. Google it and see what happens."
-
I did a search for "car" vs "cars" and I see a drastically different number of results.
3.3B vs 1.5B, respectively.
Do you have any research to support your response? Just curious where you're getting your information from.
-
When the plural is made by just adding an S, then Google seems not to differentiate the singular or plural. You can verify it by opening two windows and searching for the term both with and without the S and seeing if the results are ranked differently.
But if the plural is a whole different word, like Goose and Geese or Mouse and Mice, then you will definitely have to makes a decision on which to use.
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
-
Ranking without use of keywords on page & without use of matching anchor text??
Howdy folks. So, here is a dilemma. One of competitors of ours is somehow ranking for a keyphrase "houston chronicle obituaries" without any usage of these keywords on the page, without any full or partial anchor text match ("chronicle" is not used anywhere). The rest of competitiors' rankings make sense. Any ideas?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DmitriiK0 -
Same page Anchor Links vs Internal Link (Cannibalisation)
Hey Mozzers, I have a very long article page that supports several of my sub-category pages. It has sub-headings that link out to the relevant pages. However the article is very long and to make it easier to find the relevant section I was debating adding inpage anchor links in a bullet list at the top of the page for quick navigation. PAGE TITLE Keyword 1 Keyword 2 etc <a name="'Keyword1"></a> Keyword 1 Content
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ATP
<a name="'Keyword2"></a> Keyword 2 Content Because of the way my predecessor wrote this article, its section headings are the same as the sub-categories they link out to and boost (not ideal but an issue I will address later). What I wondered is if having the inpage achor would confuse the SERPS because they would be linking with the same keyword. My worry is that by increasing userbility of the article by doing this I also confuse them SERPS First I tell them that this section on my page talk about keyword 1. Then from in that article i tell them that a different page entirely is about the same keyword. Would linking like this confuse SERPS or are inpage anchor links looked upon and dealt with differently?0 -
Suspected hacking - Google has detected that some of your pages may contain hidden text or cloaking
I got below message from google, But I did not see any hidden text, Please check it. http://www.astrologerravisharma.com/: Suspected hacking Google has detected that some of your pages may contain hidden text or cloaking, techniques that are outside our Webmaster Guidelines. Specifically, we detected that your site may have been modified by a third party. Typically, the offending party gains access to an insecure directory that has open permissions. Many times, they will upload files or modify existing ones, which then show up as spam in our index. Sample URLs: http://www.astrologerravisharma.com/ http://www.astrologerravisharma.com/about-us/ http://www.astrologerravisharma.com/achievements/ Recommended action Clean up the hacked content so that your site meets Google's Webmaster Guidelines.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bondhoward0 -
Do I need to use rel="canonical" on pages with no external links?
I know having rel="canonical" for each page on my website is not a bad practice... but how necessary is it for pages that don't have any external links pointing to them? I have my own opinions on this, to be fair - but I'd love to get a consensus before I start trying to customize which URLs have/don't have it included. Thank you.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Netrepid0 -
Blocking Pages Via Robots, Can Images On Those Pages Be Included In Image Search
Hi! I have pages within my forum where visitors can upload photos. When they upload photos they provide a simple statement about the photo but no real information about the image,definitely not enough for the page to be deemed worthy of being indexed. The industry however is one that really leans on images and having the images in Google Image search is important to us. The url structure is like such: domain.com/community/photos/~username~/picture111111.aspx I wish to block the whole folder from Googlebot to prevent these low quality pages from being added to Google's main SERP results. This would be something like this: User-agent: googlebot Disallow: /community/photos/ Can I disallow Googlebot specifically rather than just using User-agent: * which would then allow googlebot-image to pick up the photos? I plan on configuring a way to add meaningful alt attributes and image names to assist in visibility, but the actual act of blocking the pages and getting the images picked up... Is this possible? Thanks! Leona
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HD_Leona0 -
Are links to on-page content crawled / have any effect on page rank?
Lets say I have a really long article that begins with links to <a name="something">anchors on the same page.</a> <a name="something"></a> <a name="something">E.g.,</a> Chapter 1, Chapter 2, etc, allowing the user to scroll down to different content. There are also other links on this page that link to other pages. A few questions: Googlebot arrives on the page. Does it crawl links that point to anchors on the same page? When link juice is divided among all the links on the page, do these links count and page rank is then lost? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | anthematic0 -
Questions about Vittana.org's blogging contest and having bloggers use specific anchor text.
Hi All, Kenji Crosland here. I just joined vittana.org (yesterday!) to do some of the blogger outreach and content creation/link building. Although most of the links we've gotten in the past are branded links, we've decided to actively pursue anchor text links with specific keywords. If you check, you'll see that vittana has a relatively high domain authority. At the beginning of next week we'll be conducting a blogging contest with A-list celebrity tech bloggers. I don't think we'll have time to contact influencers in other areas for this contest unfortunately. When these A-list bloggers write their posts, we want them to have a link to this page: http://www.vittana.org/students To me, this seems a great opportunity to win on certain keywords we've discovered that should be easy to win and yet have a high volume of monthly searches. These are 5 word plus keywords that have over 300,000 searches per month. The students page, however, isn't optimized for those keywords. In the long run we want to win for the more difficult keyword "literacy". The word "literacy" is what we think will be a part of our new tagline: "Literacy is not enough". Because of time constraints, we won't be able to create landing pages to win for those "low hanging fruit" keywords in time for the blog contest. My question is: to what extent should we optimize the http://www.vittana.org/students page for the five word plus low hanging fruit keywords that we've discovered. I imagine if the content isn't relevant our clickthrough rates will suffer even if we do win for it (Altering our meta description is a possibility here) . Should we just try for the difficult keyword from the get go and come up with other ways to win for the low hanging fruit keywords? I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vittana_seo0 -
What should my optimal anchor text look like, given cannibalization risk?
We have a content page with the explicit goal of ranking highly for "raised garden beds". We drive traffic from this page to our various types of raised garden beds in our store. The "FarmsteadRaised Garden Bed" is one such product. http://eartheasy.com/grow_raised_beds.htm Should we avoid using "raised garden beds" in the anchor text of the internal links pointing to the products in our store because of cannibalization? We recently changed the anchor text of the internal links to have keywords instead of just "click here" or "more info" - was this a good idea? What should our optimal anchor text look like?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | aran0880