Meta Keywords ... Client request
-
I have a client who would like to include Meta Keywords in their site as they have seen competitors with it, we haven't used Meta Keywords tag before as doesn't impact ranking as we all know - however if I am to put them in - is there a limit - would 200 + negatively impact the site?
Thanks
-
I would use no more than seven remember Google stopped valuing the keyword tags because people were stuffing them.
30 keywords is stuffing, and could possibly send spam signals.
-
It's also worth bearing in mind that while some search engines no longer use meta keywords others continue to do so, so you could negatively impact on the long tail of your search engine traffic from some of the smaller search engines.
-
Thanks for that Shaun - I've settled for about 30 then will work more into the text etc. I thought Yahoo & Bing didn't use the tag either anymore? Maybe I'm mistaken?
Thanks again!
-
I would be cautious about of putting a volume of 200+ keywords as this could be interpreted as a spam signal. It might be wise to take search market share stats (G v B v Y) back to the client and put forward for and against arguments to the client.
-
They won't negatively impact your rating. The only problem with using them is that your competitors will be able to view what keywords you are trying to rank for, whereas you currently have the upper hand on all your competitors. They are still used in Bing and Yahoo I believe though, so if you are focusing SEO efforts on these search engines then they will be beneficial.
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
-
Does Google push down for not ranking top for branded keywords?
Hi all, Usually websites rank for their branded keywords. Some times third party websites takeover the websites for branded keywords. If there are more number of such queries where website is not ranking (top) for branded keywords, Google push down website in overall rankings? Any correlation? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Will Google penalize 2 sites for targeting "like" keyword phrases?
I own (2) different websites, one an HTML site that has been live for 20 years and a ecommerce site that has been live for 7 years. We sell custom printed (branded) tents for use at trade shows and other indoor and outdoor events. While our ecomm site targets "trade show" tents our HTML site targets "event" tents. I believe that the keyword phrases are dissimilar enough that targeting "trade show tents" on one site and "event tents" on the other should not cause Google to penalize one or the other or both sites for having similar content. The content is different on both sites. I'm wondering if anyone has experience with, or opinions on, my thoughts... either way. Thanks,
Algorithm Updates | | terry_tradeshowstuff
Terry Hepola0 -
Primary keyword in every page title of website
Hi all, We can see many website page titles are filled with "brand name & primary keyword" at suffix. Just wondering how much this gonna help. Or can we remove "primary keyword" from other non-relevant pages and limit the same to important pages to rank well? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Does anyone know what causes the long meta description snippet?
You know the ones I mean... Google have been infrequently displaying some meta descriptions as 3-4 lines long for some time now. But recently, I've been noticing them more. Not sure whether it's just a coincidence that I've been seeing more for my searches, or whether Google are displaying more in this format. Does anybody know what causes Google to prefer the longer meta description or extended meta description for some results?
Algorithm Updates | | Ria_0 -
Help Me Change My Client's Mind
My client wants to build a second site to provide targeted links for SEO to his main site. He's interested in buying a TLD with some near topic authority/links and then build the second site's authority up from there. He is clear that this could get him in trouble for a link scheme, but thinks it can all be hidden from Google. Off the top of my head I was able to recall a few of the pain-in-the-neck things you'd have to do to not get caught, but he seemed unconvinced. I recall you'd have to have: Different registrar Different contact/WhoIs Different site host Different G/A, GWT Logging into second's site's G/A, GWT with different IP address not used for main domain With the exception of the last one, he didn't seem to think it would be too hard. Aren't there more difficult maneuvers required for hiding this from Google? I want to be able to point out to him how ridiculous this low integrity effort will be, without losing the client. Thanks! Best... Darcy
Algorithm Updates | | 945010 -
Is this spamming keywords into a url?
My company has previously added on extensions to a url like the example below http://www.test.com/product-name/extra-keywords My question is since there is no difference between the pages http://www.test.com/product-name and http://www.test.com/product-name/extra-keywords and you don't leave the product page to reach the extra-keyword page is this really necessary? I feel like this is probably not a best practice. Thanks for any suggestions.
Algorithm Updates | | Sika220 -
A client asked: "Are you guys aware of any recent changes to Google noquery traffic? I am seeing some chatter around this." Is he referring to "not provided" traffic?
I'm not sure what my client means by this question. I assume he's talking about "not provided" traffic. Is there something I'm missing? Thanks for reading!
Algorithm Updates | | DA20130 -
Conveying Farmer Update To Client
I work with a site that saw their super competitive top terms drop off page one with the Farmer update. So, #4 to #12.... that kinda thing. In the last year they've added a huge catalog of 500,000 item pages. The catalog has climbed to a 76% bounce rate, where as the handful of top pages is in the 20s +/-. To date, I haven't had much of anything to do with the catalog. That makes for a sitewide average bounce rate of almost 70% which has almost doubled in the past year as the catalog has ramped up. The catalog gets a ton of search traffic and sells a lot of items via that organic traffic. I'm advocating for a variety of measures, including cleaning up the catalog: 301ing out of stock pages to the homepage 301ing 100% bounce rate pages who've had hundreds/thousands of visits over time.. Improving the user experience. Offering rainchecks for out of stock items. They generally don't believe that the huge bounce rate (bad user experience stats) is hurting their top terms on their top pages. They see it as two different issues. Any thoughts on how to present evidence that the catalog is the culprit? In researching it, I found these two quotes: "In particular, it's important to note that low quality pages on one part of a site can impact the overall ranking of that site," the Google spokesman said. and... "Google spokesman told PCMag that sites that believe they have been adversely impacted should "extensively evaluate their site quality." Not only that, but the item descriptions are straight from the manufacturer, so the pages aren't that unique text-wise. Any industry standard on catalog page bounce rates? Not that it's the only possible area of SEO improvement, because it's not. I thought those quotes were pretty conclusive, but I guess not. Is there some straight-from-Google additional info to suport this? Or, am I just wrong to focus on user experience... bounce rate, pages, time on site, etc? Thanks! Mike
Algorithm Updates | | 945010