How does Google handle fractions in titles?
-
Which is better practice, using 1/2" or ½"?
The keyword research suggests people search for "1 2" with the space being the "/".
How does Google handle fractions? Would ½ be the same as 1/2?
-
That is exactly correct. Searchers are not using symbols in their search, so it's much more practical to optimize for 3/4, 1/2, or half inch (as the keyword research suggests) rather than these fractional symbols because they are impossible (?) for users to generate using a standard keyboard. Especially if products are unusual sizes like 8/11 or 3/16.
-
This is actually very true. Google's keyword planner has seen many updates over the years, but still it can't process some very common symbols and characters. Whilst many of these characters are common in human language, many are not 'commonly typed' and as such I guess there would be little to no point in Google updating KWP. This in and of itself may be useful information though, as it points to the fact that - keywords which include such characters, are probably barely typed
-
Unfortunately, some keyword research tools may strip that special character out, so I'd be a little wary of the results. It may not reflect what Google does in all cases.
-
While this is interesting (especially to me and others who like to dig into the nuances of search), I'm not sure if it helps you much practically. I don't think a typical searcher is every going to enter "¾" (or, if some do, it's incredibly low volume).
-
Can you provide a context? Over the past couple of years, Google has started to treat symbols differently depending on the context. I've seen weird situations with the $ sign, for example.
In some cases, Google will try to actually do the math and pull up calculator functions, for example. However, the handle a search like [3/4" wrench] pretty well and seem to understand the context (and match it to '3/4' in title tags, etc.).
-
Ok, so I ran a quick test and have an answer for anyone interested.
¾ is not equal to 3/4.
If the user searches for 3/4, Google will not return results with ¾.
However, if the user searches for ¾, Google will return results with ¾.
Hope this helps!
-
We have many similar i.e. 3/4, 5/8, 11/16, etc.
-
I personally don't think that Google handles this data exceptionally well:
https://d.pr/i/2Y562I.png (Keyword Revealer screenshot)
https://d.pr/i/El2skX.png (Ahrefs screenshot)
https://d.pr/i/Y3bQ3p.png (Google keyword planner screenshot)
... however, I do sometimes see such keywords returned from Google Search Console and / or Google Analytics under GSC's "Search Queries" (search terms) report. So it makes me wonder, if Google really has such trouble, why does it highlight and record such keywords, passing them to me for further analysis?
Maybe it's actually not a big deal, it's just that Google's keyword planner (in terms of full unicode support) is way, WAY out of date (something they should have patched and fixed 5-6 years ago IMO)
Regardless of this though, more people do seem to search by 'half' or '50%', people 'almost' never type "½" as it's so hard to type in a web browser, you almost always have to copy and paste the symbol unless you have some kind of rich-text field entry add-in / extension
Google can process the symbol as search entry text:
https://www.google.com/search?q=%C2%BD
Google often states that actually, using unicode characters (even in URLs, in UTF-8) is ok in modern times. This is a compromise they have had to make, as many foreign characters are packaged in various unicode character sets
This is the full list of UTF-8 symbols:
http://www.fileformat.info/info/charset/UTF-8/list.htm
If you Ctrl+F for '½', it is technically in that list. As early as 2008 Google was recorded indexing UTF-8 URLs:
https://www.seroundtable.com/archives/018137.html
Much more recently, the debate has been raised again:
https://searchengineland.com/google-using-non-english-urls-non-english-websites-fine-294758
"For domain names and top-level domains non-Latin characters are represented with Unicode encoding. This can look a little bit weird at first. For example, if you take Mueller, my last name, with the dots on the U, that would be represented slightly differently as a domain name. For browsers and for Google search, both versions of the domain name are equivalent; we treat them as one and the same. The rest of the URL can use unicode utf-8 encoding for non-Latin characters. You can use either the escape version or the unicode version within your website; they’re also equivalent to Google."
Obviously Google is talking about URLs here, but usually Google becomes capable of reading characters in markup (content, Page Titles etc) first and then accepts them for valid URL usage later. I would surmise that it probably is 'ok' to use them, but it probably would not be 'optimal' or 'the best idea'
-
Also: "50%"
-
Hello, out of interest why not just use the word "half"? I have a feeling that most people would use the word, not the fraction especially on a mobile device; where you'd be required to swap between the alphabetical & numerical keyboards.
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
-
Google slow to index pages
Hi We've recently had a product launch for one of our clients. Historically speaking Google has been quick to respond, i.e when the page for the product goes live it's indexed and performing for branded terms within 10 minutes (without 'Fetch and Render'). This time however, we found that it took Google over an hour to index the pages. we found initially that press coverage ranked until we were indexed. Nothing major had changed in terms of the page structure, content, internal linking etc; these were brand new pages, with new product content. Has anyone ever experienced Google having an 'off' day or being uncharacteristically slow with indexing? We do have a few ideas what could have caused this, but we were interested to see if anyone else had experienced this sort of change in Google's behaviour, either recently or previously? Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | punchseo0 -
Why do Local "5 pack" results vary between showing Google+, Google+ and website address
I had a client ask me a good question. When they pull up a search result they show up at the top but only with a link to their G+ page. Other competitors show their web address and G+ page. Why are these results different in the same search group? Is there a way to ensure the web address shows up?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Ron_McCabe0 -
Google not taking Meta...
Hello all, So I understand that Google may sometimes take content from the page as a snippet to display on SERPs rather than the meta description, but my problem goes a little beyond that. I have a section on my site which updates everyday so a lot of the content is dynamics (products for a shop, every morning unique stock is added or removed), and despite having a meta description, title and receiving an 'A' grade in the MOZ on page grader, these pages never show up in Google. After a little research I did a 'site:www.mysite.com/productpage' in Google and this indeed listed all my products, but interestingly for every single one Google had taken the copyright notice at the bottom of the page as the snippet instead of the meta or any H1, H2 or P text on the page... Does anyone have any idea why Google is doing this? It would explain a lot to me in terms of overall traffic, I'm just out of ideas... Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HB170 -
Why are some pages indexed but not cached by Google?
The question is simple but I don't understand the answer. I found a webpage that was linking to my personal site. The page was indexed in Google. However, there was no cache option and I received a 404 from Google when I tried using cache:www.thewebpage.com/link/. What exactly does this mean? Also, does it have any negative implication on the SEO value of the link that points to my personal website?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mRELEVANCE0 -
Google and Product Description Tabs
How does Google process a product page with description tabs? For example, lets say the product page has a tab for Overview, Specifications, What's In the Box and so on. Wouldn't that content be better served in one main product description tab with the tab names used as (htags) or highlighted paragraph separators? Or, does all that content get crawled as a single page regardless of the tabs?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AWCthreads0 -
Switching from Google Plus Local to Google Plus Business
Greetings, We have a website design firm located in India. We wanted to target customers in our city who are looking for website design locally. And with google plus local and a few content marketing would get us into first page very soon because none in the competition is using social signals or even content marketing. BUT unfortunately from last month even though our Google Places is verified we cant verify our Google Local Plus page https://plus.google.com/b/116513400635428782065/ It just shows error 500. Its a bug and its been a year for people without it being addressed. So we are skeptical if our strategy would work without Google+. At the least we decided we would just make company local page and connect it with website. But it might not have effect as local. So we are still unsure which step to take either to wait for google to fix it.(feedbacks emails calls nothing worked) OR We start the process with Google Business Category.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | hard0 -
We are ignored by Google - what should we do?
Hi, We believe that our website - https://en.greatfire.org - is being all but ignored by Google Search. The following two examples illustrate our case. 1. Searching for “China listening in on Skype - Microsoft assumes you approve”. This is the title of a blog post that we wrote which received some 50,000 visits. On Yahoo and Bing search, we rank first for this search. On Google, however, we rank 7th. Each of the six pages ranking higher than us are quoting and linking to our story. 2. Searching for “Online Censorship In China”. This is the title of our front page. Yahoo and Bing both rank us third for this search. On Google, however, we are not even among the first 300 results. Two of the pages among the first 10 results link to us. Our website has an average of around 1000 visits per day. We are quoted in and linked from virtually all Western mainstream media (see https://en.greatfire.org/press). Yet to this day we are receiving almost no traffic from Google Search. Our mission is to bring transparency to online censorship in China. If people could find us in Google, it would greatly help to spread awareness of the extent of Internet restrictions here. If you could indicate to us what the cause of our poor rankings could be, we would be very grateful. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GreatFire.org0 -
Google bot vs google mobile bot
Hi everyone 🙂 I seriously hope you can come up with an idea to a solution for the problem below, cause I am kinda stuck 😕 Situation: A client of mine has a webshop located on a hosted server. The shop is made in a closed CMS, meaning that I have very limited options for changing the code. Limited access to pagehead and can within the CMS only use JavaScript and HTML. The only place I have access to a server-side language is in the root where a Defualt.asp file redirects the visitor to a specific folder where the webshop is located. The webshop have 2 "languages"/store views. One for normal browsers and google-bot and one for mobile browsers and google-mobile-bot.In the default.asp (asp classic). I do a test for user agent and redirect the user to one domain or the mobile, sub-domain. All good right? unfortunately not. Now we arrive at the core of the problem. Since the mobile shop was added on a later date, Google already had most of the pages from the shop in it's index. and apparently uses them as entrance pages to crawl the site with the mobile bot. Hence it never sees the default.asp (or outright ignores it).. and this causes as you might have guessed a huge pile of "Dub-content" Normally you would just place some user-agent detection in the page head and either throw Google a 301 or a rel-canon. But since I only have access to JavaScript and html in the page head, this cannot be done. I'm kinda running out of options quickly, so if anyone has an idea as to how the BEEP! I get Google to index the right domains for the right devices, please feel free to comment. 🙂 Any and all ideas are more then welcome.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ReneReinholdt0