Keyword text block on homepage - keep or do away with?
-
One of my sites is getting a major refresh on the home page, which is good and bad.
The legacy homepage was very long, and had a lot of text (thousands+ of words) in the body, with about 450+ links (internal/external) on the page. A ton of graphics, etc etc. Yuck.
The revamped homepage is much improved. Very short, visual, fast, and SEO optimized. It's more of launching pad into the rest of the site. But, the text in the body is much less, perhaps a 100 words or so.
The worry is that with so little text, matching the target kw count will appear as stuffing. The 'solution' was to include a visible text box at the bottom of the page, with about 300 words, basically what would typically appear in an 'about' section of a site. But instead, its located on the bottom of the homepage to beef up the pages content, and to avoid looking too 'stuffed'.
Visually, its unattractive IMHO and while the text is good and informative, its under the fold and will likely not change that much going forward. This all seems very 10 years ago to me, but I'd like a second opinion.
Is this box of text a good strategy?
-
Sounds like you are agreeing with me, Ryan.
As I mentioned, if you go overboard with "optimizing" you end up having a site that is not linkable or attractive enough for other people to link to you naturally, so although you will get traffic for using the keyword rich content, title, etc, you are getting it at the cost of future links. That's lacking a long term strategy.
I would never link to a website that looked too keywordy or spammy even if it wasn't one and I am confident there are many others like me.That being said - if you have smaller "satellite" sites, and those sites are meant to cater to a specific niche and their main objective is to get traffic to your main website rather than create new leads/sales on their own, then its a different story - I would go for optimizing first in this case. I would make sure most keywords that I care for are covered. User experience is still important (or they'll bounce) but not as much as it is for your main MOTHER site.
-
I disagree Syed.
Google wants the best user experience. They have billions of dollars riding on providing the best user experience. The challenge is that sometimes webmasters believe their judgement on the best user experience is better then Google's.
I would suggest that whenever there is a conflict between what you feel would be the best user experience and what Google rewards, do serious research on the subject. Could Google be wrong? Absolutely. It is more likely that the webmaster or SEO might be mistaken.
EGOL's suggestion is perfect. He continuously modified his site over time to ensure the best user experience. In the end he wound up with a home page design that wasn't what he expected, but that user's love. The result is a great user experience AND great results from Google.
-
Ask yourself this - is Google traffic of utmost importance or does user experience what matters most?
Its a vicious cycle.. if you "over optimize" your website, you may initially rank higher but will become less "linkable" to other resources. Also, it may get stunted or even bowled over by competition who converts much better than you.
I always go for user experience first unless my site couldn't live without organic traffic
-
**The legacy homepage was very long, and had a lot of text (thousands+ of words) in the body, with about 450+ links (internal/external) on the page. A ton of graphics, etc etc. **
This sounds like the homepage of my site... I started out with a small homepage like you describe and then added a little more to it and visitor engagement went up.... added a little more and visitor engagement went up... added more and visitor engagement went up....
Now my homepage looks like the latimes.com. The actions of my visitors are hard to argue with.
-
Tough one. While I do see the value of having some added text, it also seems very 'engine targeted' rather than 'user targeted'. Is there any value in this for the users? If there isn't, could you try to improve the text so that it is? If the sole purpose of this text is to please the engines, I might consider getting rid of it, otherwise it is a nice sub-fold semi-useful piece of text for both users and engines and I would keep it.
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
-
Canonical Homepage Multi-language Website
Hello, Our development department is building a multi-language webshop.
On-Page Optimization | | X-com_Maasbree
Due to the multi-language module that they've used, we have example.com and example.com/nl having exactly the same content. In order to avoid duplicate content, those pages have the following canonicals:
1. example.com -> Canonical to example.com/nl
2. example.com/nl -> Canonical to example.com/nl Do I loose SEO-value by not canonicalising directly to the root-domain homepage (example.com)?0 -
Meta tag keywords with the same words in them.
I'm updating some older pages and was wondering about potential penalties from having keywords that start with the same phrase. It's a geographic area so there is the "full name" and the abbreviated name. I'd like to have keywords for both. For example: virginia beach, va beach, virginia beach attraction, virginia beach things to do, va beach attraction, va beach things to do, virginia beach dolphins tour, va beach dolphins tour Is that spammy? I understand they don't have the same weight as they used to but I'd like to optimize for them anyway since I'm redoing some things. Thanks in advance.
On-Page Optimization | | recoil0 -
? Keyword stuffing
I have a new website. Did "on page grading". Although the page received a grade of A the only area that did not receive a check mark was key word stuffing. It recommended I not use keyword more that 15 times but I only counted 11 uses of the key phrase "breast augmentation." However the phrase is also used in alt tag of images which would take me over 15. Are alt tag on images counted and is this a concern? I tried to use "augmentation mammaplasty" to reduce the use of the phrase "breast augmentation" but will use of "augmentation" and "breast" alone also cause the count to increase for the phrase "breast augmentation"
On-Page Optimization | | wianno1680 -
Targeting local keywords and service areas.
Hi, I run a small photo booth rental business in San Francisco, CA that serves the greater Bay Area. I've created different webpages for each location that we serve, ie: "San Francisco Photo Booth", "Oakland Photo Booth", "San Jose Photo Booth", etc.... I'm assuming that for each city, the strongest keyword would be "City-Photo Booth". However, I also want to target different variations of the keyword, such as: San Francisco Photo Booth: -Photo Booth San Francisco -SF Photo Booth -San Francisco Photobooth -San Francisco, CA Photo Booth -etc.... Will adding these keywords onto the same webpage dilute the relevance of my main keyword "San Francisco Photo Booth"? Also, is there any way to place these words within the text of the webpage so that it does not sound akward and unnatural to the reader? Any advice would be appreciated, thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | pharcydeabc0 -
Avoid Keyword Self-Cannibalization
<dl> <dt>Cannibalizing link</dt> <dd>Several links...
On-Page Optimization | | 678648631264
</dd> <dt>Explanation</dt> <dd>It's a best practice in SEO to target each keyword with a single page on your site (sometimes two if you've already achieved high rankings and are seeking a second, indented listing). To prevent engines from potentially seeing a signal that this page is not the intended ranking target and creating additional competition for your page, we suggest staying away from linking internally to another page with the target keyword(s) as the exact anchor text. Note that using modified versions is sometimes fine (for example, if this page targeted the word 'elephants', using 'baby elephants' in anchor text would be just fine).</dd> <dt>Recommendation</dt> <dd>Unless there is intent to rank multiple pages for the target keyword, it may be wise to modify the anchor text of this link so it is not an exact match.</dd> <dd>How do I fix this?
</dd> </dl>0 -
Bold just the primary keyword or primary and secondary
Hello! Advice is much appreciated. I'm targeting two keywords, primary and secondary. Should i bold just the primary keyword or primary and secondary? The same for the alt tag and URL. Should i include just the primary keyword or primary and secondary? Thank you. Shane
On-Page Optimization | | ShaneO0 -
Keyword reversal
Suppose you want a page in your website to rank for a two word phrase like "red wagon". So you create a page mywebsite.com/redwagon.html and optimize it for "red wagon". Suppose the domain name redwagon.com is taken, but the domain name wagonred.com is available. Is it possible to take advantage of the available domain name wagonred.com to improve the rank of mywebsite.com/redwagon.html?
On-Page Optimization | | ChristopherGlaeser0 -
Keyword Self- Cannibalization
I have a question about Keyword Self Cannibalization. I have a web page which is targeting the main keyword as "sarees". But this same page has internal linking from the keywords Benarasi Silk Sarees, Silk Saree, Traditional Sarees, cotton sarees,etc to their respectve pages. We are optimizing those pages separately for their respective keywords as well. When I run on-page report card for these web page from seomoz tool, I got an error says "Avoid Keyword Self-Cannibalization". Is this due to the internal linking from these keywords? Can anybody recommend a solution for this problem?
On-Page Optimization | | semvibe1
