H1 Tag.
-
As far as I know to rank well H1 tag should be present in all pages and it should be one of the first things in the page, it also should include the keywords.
I was checking my site and magento generates the H1 with an image,
I dont know if this is wise?
class="logo">The Printer Depo<a <span="">href</a><a <span="">="</a>http://www.theprinterdepo.com/" title="The Printer Depo" class="logo">width="377px" src="https://www.theprinterdepo.com/skin/frontend/default/MAG060062/images/logo.gif" alt="The Printer Depo" />
-
Can you please explain more? I am seo beginner, so for now I am just correcting the things that seomoz pro tells me, errors and warnings. I have reduced errors to 0, and I am trying to reduce warnings also.
-
I don't think that the H1 makes a massive amount of difference on its own. However, I think that search engines do actively look for a semantic structure. In other words, you should use H1 and structure the content along with H2 and H3, and a couple of image ALTs in there for good measure.
To be honest, your site has a few other SEO issues that I would look at first like lack of textual content and webmastery for example.
-
Hi levalencia1
H1 tags are a ranking factor, though one of so many and have a very small direct impact on rankings.
Is still worth having an appropriate & relevant H1 tag though, perhaps more-so for User Experience than for SEO.
Ideally, H1 tags would be actual text rather than a logo or an image. However so long as the logo/image has descriptive Alt Text (which it does in the example in your question, though maybe 'Printers & Printer Supplies' would be better than the brand name) then that's also fine.
Hope that helps,
Regards
Simon
-
There should be a unique heading on each page to give crawlers a good start on determining the topical relevancy of the page.
Heading tags should only be used as headings (think about how you would layout a document or thesis.. you would structure the text ordered with
s then
s etc
In this case, it looks like there is a unique
tag on each of the category & product pages - I wouldn't worry about it too much
-
Hi.
First of all I'd like to tell you one thing: H1 is not anymore so determinant as a single ranking factor, as you can verify from the 2011 Search Engine Ranking Factors by SEOmoz.
Said that, H1 is still important, especially to help Search Engines to understand "semantically" the content of the page the same H1 is present.
That means that neither the standard solution Magento offers, neither your idea are totally correct.
Let me explain it.
To have as H1 the Logo of your site, means that you are going to have the same H1 for every page of your site. This is not suggested, because you are indirectly telling to the crawlers that "The Printer Depo" is an important keyword for every page your site have... and that is not surely true.
More over, having as H1 you logo (hence, the alt text of it) can cause that more H1 tags will be present in your page (i.e.: in the product page, usually the name/title of the product is treated as H1); and this is not really a good practice, also because you are telling to the search engines that your document is about the 1st H1 keywords and the 2nd one too, fact which may create confusion.
My suggestion (which is also a suggestion Yoast offers in its old but still useful Magento SEO guide) is to maintain the logo as H1 in your home page (using the hack you did is ok), but making the logo has H3 in all the other pages.
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
-
Which Version Url to Use for Canonical Tags and in General for Homepage.
I want to put canonical tags on the homepage of a site. cant figure out the version of URL of the homepage should be with a / at the end or without the / ( www.example.com of www.example.com/ ) if I put into the google the URL with / I get the URL without the / in my browser, and it isn't showing as a redirect in my moz extension or other tools. But when I copy the URL from browser and paste elsewhere it pastes with a / I have two questions 1 - in general how does it work with URLs of homepages - I see this happening with lots of sites? 2 - which URL should I set as the canonical version of my homepage? Thanks so much
Technical SEO | | Ruchy0 -
Where can i install my missing title tag?
in the site crawl area is says "missing title tag" and im not sure how to put it in does it go on my website? if so how because i already have a tracking code in the google analytics area
Technical SEO | | raheemah0 -
After I 301 redirect duplicate pages to my rel=canonical page, do I need to add any tags or code to the non canonical pages?
I have many duplicate pages. Some pages have 2-3 duplicates. Most of which have Uppercase and Lowercase paths (generated by Microsoft IIS). Does this implementation of 301 and rel=canonical suffice? Or is there more I could do to optimize the passing of duplicate page link juice to the canonical. THANK YOU!
Technical SEO | | PFTools0 -
Are duplicate page titles fixed by the canonical tag
Google Web Master Tools is saying that some of my pages have duplicate page titles because of pagination. However, I have implemented the canonical tag on the paginated pages which I thought would keep my site from being penalized for duplicate page titles. Is this correct? Or does canonical tag only relate to duplicate content issues?
Technical SEO | | Santaur0 -
Duplicate pages in Google index despite canonical tag and URL Parameter in GWMT
Good morning Moz... This is a weird one. It seems to be a "bug" with Google, honest... We migrated our site www.three-clearance.co.uk to a Drupal platform over the new year. The old site used URL-based tracking for heat map purposes, so for instance www.three-clearance.co.uk/apple-phones.html ..could be reached via www.three-clearance.co.uk/apple-phones.html?ref=menu or www.three-clearance.co.uk/apple-phones.html?ref=sidebar and so on. GWMT was told of the ref parameter and the canonical meta tag used to indicate our preference. As expected we encountered no duplicate content issues and everything was good. This is the chain of events: Site migrated to new platform following best practice, as far as I can attest to. Only known issue was that the verification for both google analytics (meta tag) and GWMT (HTML file) didn't transfer as expected so between relaunch on the 22nd Dec and the fix on 2nd Jan we have no GA data, and presumably there was a period where GWMT became unverified. URL structure and URIs were maintained 100% (which may be a problem, now) Yesterday I discovered 200-ish 'duplicate meta titles' and 'duplicate meta descriptions' in GWMT. Uh oh, thought I. Expand the report out and the duplicates are in fact ?ref= versions of the same root URL. Double uh oh, thought I. Run, not walk, to google and do some Fu: http://is.gd/yJ3U24 (9 versions of the same page, in the index, the only variation being the ?ref= URI) Checked BING and it has indexed each root URL once, as it should. Situation now: Site no longer uses ?ref= parameter, although of course there still exists some external backlinks that use it. This was intentional and happened when we migrated. I 'reset' the URL parameter in GWMT yesterday, given that there's no "delete" option. The "URLs monitored" count went from 900 to 0, but today is at over 1,000 (another wtf moment) I also resubmitted the XML sitemap and fetched 5 'hub' pages as Google, including the homepage and HTML site-map page. The ?ref= URls in the index have the disadvantage of actually working, given that we transferred the URL structure and of course the webserver just ignores the nonsense arguments and serves the page. So I assume Google assumes the pages still exist, and won't drop them from the index but will instead apply a dupe content penalty. Or maybe call us a spam farm. Who knows. Options that occurred to me (other than maybe making our canonical tags bold or locating a Google bug submission form 😄 ) include A) robots.txt-ing .?ref=. but to me this says "you can't see these pages", not "these pages don't exist", so isn't correct B) Hand-removing the URLs from the index through a page removal request per indexed URL C) Apply 301 to each indexed URL (hello BING dirty sitemap penalty) D) Post on SEOMoz because I genuinely can't understand this. Even if the gap in verification caused GWMT to forget that we had set ?ref= as a URL parameter, the parameter was no longer in use because the verification only went missing when we relaunched the site without this tracking. Google is seemingly 100% ignoring our canonical tags as well as the GWMT URL setting - I have no idea why and can't think of the best way to correct the situation. Do you? 🙂 Edited To Add: As of this morning the "edit/reset" buttons have disappeared from GWMT URL Parameters page, along with the option to add a new one. There's no messages explaining why and of course the Google help page doesn't mention disappearing buttons (it doesn't even explain what 'reset' does, or why there's no 'remove' option).
Technical SEO | | Tinhat0 -
• symbol in title tag
We have a few title tags with a circular dot symbol, which is created by the code "•" Humans see a dot, but googlebot sees • Does this negatively impact our SEO, or is googlebot aware that **• == *** to human eyes
Technical SEO | | lighttable0 -
Do DoubleClick DART Tags degrade link juice to your site?
My site has a content distribution agreement with Yahoo Finance for the daily articles we publish. It's delivered to them via XML, and while we don't have in-line links within the article, we do have 1. Clickable Logo image 2. Standard language at the end of the article with a link back to our registration page We use DART clicktags (http://ad.....) that redirects to our homepage combined with ?src=YahooFinance&affiliateId=77 query strings that are generated by these clicks to measure registration and sources My question is twofold. 1. Are the doublclick clicktags hurting the valuable linkbacks from Yahoo Finance for picking up our content 2. What should be done with the query string extentions once people land. We still want to see that data in our Google Analytics, so is a rel=canonical the appropriate solution?
Technical SEO | | Yun0 -
I am wondering if I should use the Meta 'Cache" tag?
I am working on removing unnecessary meta tags that have little impact on SEO and I have read so many mixed reviews about using the Meta 'Cache' tag. I need to informative information on whether or not this tag should be used.
Technical SEO | | ImagetecLP0