Same Alt tag on the images
-
Can We have same alt tags on all the images? Below pages have images with same alt tag "astrologer Ravi sharma". I used name of the person on every image. before today, all images were shown in google images but today no image is there. any comment.
Like - http://www.astrologerravisharma.com/astrologer-ravi-sharma-photos/
-
You are wasting a chance to get more text in your website, alt tags aren't worth much but all the same it a chance to get a keyword or relevant text in your site.
It may also be a bad signal to a search engine and they may no longer trust your alt tags when deciding what the image is about
-
William has given some great points - remember what alt tags are for: They are for screen readers which are normally used by impaired users so try to make them descriptive e.g "astrologer Ravi sharma in X paper" "astrologer Ravi sharma on the moon" etc. It could be Google has looked at your images and thought you're trying to be sneaky and use the alt tags for SEo advantages rather than help your users. Follow Williams advice and I'm very sure you will be great!
-
It's OK to have his name, just add more to it to differentiate the photos.
-
Every image on the website is having "Ravi Sharma" (name of the person). that's why i used his name on every image. Should i change the alt tag or only need to add description to the images?
-
I would tend to agree with William here. The objective of the alt tag is to help give context to the image if the image cannot be displayed. If you are able to describe the image in a way that relates to your post, you will be better off than trying to stuff keywords in the alt tag. If an image is related to the post, search engines (particularly google) should gain a contextual understanding which is better in the long run.
In my experience, I find that the more I try to "optimize images", the more unnatural they are. Again, we are trying to be natural and helpful.
Hope that helps.
-
Try to be more descriptive than that in the alt tags. Quickly describe what the image is about. You never want to duplicate alt tags on different images, because those images are not the same. Alt tags are there to describe the image in a short, concise way.
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
-
Probably basic, but how to use image Title and Alt Text - and confusing advice from Moz!
I've been doing SEO on my business's site for years and have got good results. I've always used image Titles and Alt Text text. Our blog posts are image-intensive, often with 100-200 pictures (not surprising since we're photographers). For any given blog post, I've tended to have a uniform image Title for each image and then a more specialised Alt Text tag giving a description. A typical image on one of our blog posts would be like this: Image filename: wedding-photography-at-so-and-so-venue-001.jpg .... 002, 003 etc Image Title Attribute: Wedding Photography at So-And-So-Venue by Our-Company-Name - this would be the same for every image in the blog post. Alternative Text: Bride and groom exchanging vows during wedding ceremony at so-and-so-venue - this would be tailed for each image. So my question is - is this right? The Moz help page for image SEO is actually incorrect in one aspect: https://moz.com/ugc/10-tips-for-optimizing-your-images-for-search "Alt text (short for “alternative text”) is used to highlight the identity of an image when you hover over it with your mouse cursor. It also shows as text to all users when there are problems rendering the image." This is not the case. Hovering over the image in Firefox, Chrome, Edge and Opera ALL display the Image Title, NOT Alt Text. Thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | robandsarahgillespie0 -
Should I add no-follow tags to my widget links?
Matt Cutts recommended in a video in 2013 to add rel="nofollow" on widget links that link back to your website. Some background of my company: We're a software company for website chat. There's a 'powered by' link in our widgets that links back from our users' websites to our website. Currently these are all follow links. I checked out the links of our competitors, and it seems none of them have no follow on their widget backlinks. This, together with the fact that the video is quite old and information on this issue rather scarce, makes me doubt whether we should change our widget backlinks to no follow. Does anyone have thoughts on this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Maximuxxx0 -
Google SERPs displaying Tracking Tags
Hello, I'm hoping someone can help me! Can you tell me why Google would be displaying the tracking URLs in the SERPs (screenshot - http://i.imgur.com/gbskD26.jpg)? I'm thinking it may have to do with the canonical URLs, but I'm not sure.. Thanks in advance! gbskD26.jpg
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Mindstream_Media0 -
Why isn't the rel=canonical tag working?
My client and I have a problem: An ecommerce store with around 20 000 products has nearly 1 000 000 pages indexed (according to Search Console). I frequently get notified by messages saying “High number of URLs found” in search console. It lists a lot of sample urls with filter and parameters that are indexed by google, for example: https://www.gsport.no/barn-junior/tilbehor/hansker-votter/junior?stoerrelse-324=10-11-aar+10-aar+6-aar+12-aar+4-5-aar+8-9-aar&egenskaper-368=vindtett+vanntett&type-365=hansker&bruksomraade-367=fritid+alpint&dir=asc&order=name If you check the source code, there’s a canonical tag telling the crawler to ignore (..or technically commanding it to regard this exact page as another version of the page without all the parameters) everything after the “?” Does this url showing up in the Search Console message mean that this canonical isn’t working properly? If so: what’s wrong with it? Regards,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Inevo
Sigurd0 -
Should Schema.org Tags go on every page?
Happy Monday Moz World! I am just wondering what are some best practices when using Schema.org Tags. For Example, I have a client who provides multiple services and provides unique content on each webpage. The design of each of the webpagesare unique, and conveys information differently. My question is: If each page of a company's website has unique content that describes a service or product, could I essentially change the url & description of the Schema Tag so that each of my pages are indexable by relationship to that page's content? Thanks ahead of time for the great responses! B/R Will
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MarketingChimp100 -
Risk Using "Nofollow" tag
I have a lot of categories (like e-commerce sites) and many have page 1 - 50 for each category (view all not possible). Lots of the content on these pages are present across the web on other websites (duplicate stuff). I have added quality unique content to page 1 and added "noindex, follow" to page 2-50 and rel=next prev tags to the pages. Questions: By including the "follow" part, Google will read content and links on pages 2-50 and they may think "we have seen this stuff across the web….low quality content and though we see a noindex tag, we will consider even page 1 thin content, because we are able to read pages 2-50 and see the thin content." So even though I have "noindex, follow" the 'follow' part causes the issue (in that Google feels it is a lot of low quality content) - is this possible and if I had added "nofollow" instead that may solve the issue and page 1 would increase chance of looking more unique? Why don't I add "noindex, nofollow" to page 2 - 50? In this way I ensure Google does not read the content on page 2 - 50 and my site may come across as more unique than if it had the "follow" tag. I do understand that in such case (with nofollow tag on page 2-50) there is no link juice flowing from pages 2 - 50 to the main pages (assuming there are breadcrumbs or other links to the indexed pages), but I consider this minimal value from an SEO perspective. I have heard using "follow" is generally lower risk than "nofollow" - does this mean a website with a lot of "noindex, nofollow" tags may hurt the indexed pages because it comes across as a site Google can't trust since 95% of pages have such "noindex, nofollow" tag? I would like to understand what "risk" factors there may be. thank you very much
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | khi50 -
What tags/coding are not good for SEO?
what tags/coding are not good for SEO? and also what tags not to include while creating website. For example - I read some where to avoid Span tag.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JordanBrown0 -
Disadvantages of linking to uncompressed images?
Images are compressed and resized to fit into an article, but each image in the article links to the original file - which in some cases is around 5Mb. The large versions of the images are indexed in Google. Does this decrease the website's crawl budget due to the time spent downloading the large files? Does link equity disappear through the image links? Either way I don't think it's a very good user experience if people click on the article images to see the large images - there's no reason for the images to be so large. Any other thoughts? Thanks. 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Alex-Harford0