Searching for a keyword on html source code of a website via Google
-
Is such a thing possible? Can we google for a specific keyword that can be found on the source code of a website? Is there any search operator for this? Thanks in advance!
-
Why do you want keyword from a HTML source?, instead of that why can't you do a keyword analysis online , with can help you in understanding your competitor profile online. I can help you with Keyword research. Please reply me back in case if you are looking for any assistance.
I also recommend SEOMoz tool for competitor analysis. Great tool for learning and understanding the SEO results.
:Naveen Srikantaiah
-
Thank you so much Martijn! Definitely helps! Have a great day...
-
Hi,
Eventually the answer to your question is No. Google doesn't have an operator to search within the source of a document/ Web site. As far as I know, those and a couple of others are the only ones available within Google. I also checked Bing and Blekko. But they both also seem not to provide an operator like you would like to have.
Hope this helps!
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
-
What are your opinions on the Google News vs Spanish Government Issue ?
Greg Sterling said: "Governments across Europe are justifiably alarmed by the declining fortunes of their respective newspaper industries. However punitive or parasitic taxation measures targeting Google, masquerading as copyright protections, are not the answer." Do you agree?
Industry News | | Tintanus1 -
How Google could quickly fix the whole Links problem...
A Thursday morning brainstorm that hopefully an important Google manager will see... Google could quickly end all the problems of link buying, spammy links, and negative SEO with one easy step: Only count the 100 best follow links to any domain. Ignore all the nofollows and everything beyond the 100 best. They can choose what "best" means. Suddenly links would be all about quality. Quantity would not matter. Fiverr links, comment links, and all the other mass-produced spam links would literally be ignored. Unless that's all a domain had, and then they would surely be stomped by any domain with 100 decent natural links. Would it be an improvement over today's situation?
Industry News | | GregB1230 -
Are qr codes still worth the effort.
I Have a client who is interested in qr codes. Not by my suggestion. I haven't heard much about them lately and was wonder if anyone thinks its worth the time. If you think they are, then where is "the" place to get them at a reasonable cost?
Industry News | | NateStewart0 -
Get Google To Crawl More Pages Faster on my Site
We opened our database of about 10 million businesses to be crawled by Google. Since Wednesday, Google has crawled and indexed about 2,000 pages. Google is crawling us at about 1,000 pages a day now. We need to substantially increase this amount. Is it possible to get Google to crawl our sites at a quicker rate?
Industry News | | Intergen0 -
Will Google ever begin penalising bad English/grammar in regards to rankings and SEO?
Considering Google seem to be on a great crusade with all their algorithm updates to raise the overall "quality" of content on the Internet, i'm a bit concerned with their seeming lack of action towards penalising sites that contain terrible English. I'm sure you've all noticed this when you attempt to do some proper research via Google and come across an article that "looks" to be what you're after, then you click through and realise it's obviously been either put together in a rush by someone not paying attention or putting much effort in, or been outsourced for cheap labour to another country whose workers aren't (close to being) native speakers. It's getting really old trying to make sense of articles that have completely incorrect grammar, entirely missing words, verb tenses that don't make any sense, randomly over-extravagant adjectives thrown in just as padding, etc. etc. No offense to all those from non-native speaking countries who are attempting to make a few bucks online, but this for me is becoming by far more of an issue in terms of "quality" of information online as opposed to some of the other search issues that are being given higher priority, and it just seems strange that Google have been so blasé about it up to this point - especially given so many of these articles and pages are nothing more than outsourced filler for cheap traffic. I understand it's probably hard to code in something so advanced, but it would go a long way towards making the web a better place in my opinion. Anyone else feeling the same way? Thoughts?
Industry News | | ExperienceOz1 -
What is the SEO term for Tree Search Engine results when we lookup for a company?
Hi Folks, I have a newbie question: When I do a Google search for: SEOmoz i get a SERP for SEOmoz in a form of a Tree, on the other hand if I search another company, let's say PAF.ca I get individual page results on google. Question is: What is the difference between the two, and how do we usually ask Google to display results of a Company name in the form of a tree or Main Category with Subpages in the SERP when looking for that company name. For my Visual Friends, Please find attached a Print screens that could explain my question a bit more. eAQpw.jpg
Industry News | | Motrd0 -
Google Product Feeds - New Requirements
We are in the jewelry industry, and for Google product feeds, we list our products under "Apparel & Accessories > Jewelry". As of the new Google feed requirements, they are saying that we have to choose a gender and color for each product that is in the Apparel category. While this makes sense for clothes, it doesn't exactly for jewelry because many items are for both men and women, and there's not always a color associated with each product. I can enter some of these fields manually, but with 5,000+ products, it makes it difficult w/ each update. Anyone have solutions for this? Or a way around it? Can we just include those fields but leave them blank? Any other solutions?
Industry News | | applesofgold1 -
Google+ profiles and Rel Author. Extensive question
A bit of a mammoth question for discussion here: With the launch of Google+ and profiles, coupled with the ability to link/verify authorship using rel=me to google+ profile - A few questions with respect to the long term use and impact. As an individual - I can have a Google+ Profile, and add links to author pages where I am featured. If rel=me is used back to my G+ profile - google can recognise me as the writer - no problem with that. However - if I write for a variety of different sites, and produce a variety of different content - site owners could arguably become reluctant to link back or accredit me with the rel=me tag on the account I might be writing for a competitor for example, or other content in a totally different vertical that is irrelevant. Additionally - if i write for a company as an employee, and the rel=me tag is linked to my G+ profile - my profile (I would assume) is gaining strength from the fact that my work is cited through the link (even if no link juice is passed - my profile link is going to appear in the search results on a query that matches something I have written, and hence possibly drain some "company traffic" to my profile). If I were to then leave the employment of that company - and begin writing for a direct competitor - is my profile still benefiting from the old company content I have written? Given that google is not allowing pseudonyms or ghost writer profiles - where do we stand with respect to outsourced content? For example: The company has news written for them by a news supplier - (each writer has a name obviously) - but they don't have or don't want to create a G+ profile for me to link to. Is it a case of wait for google to come up with the company profiles? or, use a ghost name and run the gauntlet on G+? Lastly, and I suppose the bottom line - as a website owner/company director/SEO; Is adding rel=me links to all your writers profiles (given that some might only write 1 or 2 articles, and staff will inevitably come and go) an overall positive for SEO? or, a SERP nightmare if a writer moves on to another company? In essence are site owners just improving the writers profile rather than gaining very much?
Industry News | | IPINGlobal541
