How To Optimize For Same Word, Different Spelling
-
Hi all.
Just wondering what peoples stance is on using multiple variations of keywords on a webpage - those keywords that have the same meaning and search intent, but are just spelt differently.
i.e. 'woodscrews' and 'wood screws' (the latter has a significantly higher search volume)
You could approach the webpage in 4 different ways;
1. Use ONLY 'wood screws' on-page, and in the page <title><br />2. Use ONLY 'woodscrews' on-page, and in the page <title><br />3. Use BOTH 'wood screws' and 'woodscrews' on-page, and BOTH in the page <title><br />4. Use BOTH 'wood screws' and 'woodscrews' on-page, but ONLY one variation in the page <title></p> <p>We've run some tests in the past but there were never any clear takeaways, a mixed bag of results really.</p> <p>Also, If they are considered the same keyword by Google why are the ranking positions always different for each variation?</p> <p>I'm not sure there' a specific answer to this, just interested to hear peoples thoughts really.</p> <p>Many thanks in advance!</p> <p>Lee.</p></title>
-
Many thanks, Donna.
I'm seeing things completely different to you. Screwfix does use both variations on-page (METAs and content). They also rank #1 for both variations.
Strange! I am searching from the UK, but the ranking Screwfix pages should be the same regardless.
Lee
-
You will rank for both, once your site has earned enough authority on the topic. Google appears to be interpreting the terms as synonymous. You're likely seeing variations cause they (Google) are perpetually testing.
If I search for "woodscrews" today, only one page 1 search result (Screwfix) uses "woodscrews" in their title tag and on-page content. The nine others do NOT and yet still manage to rank on page 1 for the term.
You may see different results, but my point is, it may be less of a conundrum than you think. If you want to try to rank for both variations, you're going to have to out-optimize all competitors, including the 1 (Screwfix) that does manage to rank for a different spelling of the term. Screwfix has not used the spaced version of the term (wood screws) even once on the page. When you take into consideration EGOL's points, that may be a problem for you.
Also of note, Screwfix does NOT rank on page 1 for "wood screws" (with the space). So they really have traded off one for the other.
-
Fair commments, Egol.. I can certainly see the logic.
The problem is that people use both variants.. so we want to rank for both!
It’s a conundrum
-
For me, there are two issues.
A) If one of the variants is incorrect or ignorant then my visitors will see it. This is a concern of people who run formal or academic sites. Some people might not link to me If I don't know how to spell some of the most commonly used words on my site.
B) Incorrect or ignorant usage could be a slight deduction from Google.
-
Many thanks, Egol.
Do you think that using both variants on page would cause any issues?
All the best.
Lee
-
I usually go to Google.com and do a few searches. That usually reveals what variants of the query are being used by people in their content and how Google will respond to the different variants.
In the case of "woodscrews"... Google says....
**About 3,990,000 results (0.54 seconds) **
Did you mean: wood screws
Now, I know what most vendors are using and see that Google will offer "wood screws" as the preferred variant. So, I would write all of my content using that variant. I usually agree with Google's preferred variant from my personal experience. However, if their preferred variant was an incorrect usage or an ignorant usage, then I will think about how that would fit into my website. But, since my websites are written in a formal context, I almost always go with proper, formal language.
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
-
How to Optimize With Wordpress SEO Plugin YOAST?
Hi Everyone, I am currently using Moz's page optimization format to improve our website's SEO. https://mathandmovement.com/ This is the format, these are all of the areas that we need to improve for each of our website's pages, according to Moz. include 3 keywords max: <url>www.mysite.com/my-keyword-phrase</url> <page title="">2 keywords max <title>Primary Keyword - Secondary Keyword - Brand</title></page> 2 keywords max: keywords in my headers 2 keywords max: keywords in my headers ![keyword](image file) <focus keyword="">1 with YOAST</focus> We are currently using the free version of YOAST for our SEO. My question to you is this, will our pages still have good SEO if we use appropriate keywords (high monthly volume, below 40 difficulty ranking, High Organic CTR,) and put them in the format above? Or since the free version of YOAST only let's us optimize 1 keyword, will we still rank for the other two/three that we put in our meta and page titles/h1s, h2s, urls, and overall paragraph text? Please also let us know what we can do to improve our SEO! Thanks so much, Emma
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | emmamathandmovement0 -
Pages excluded from Google's index due to "different canonicalization than user"
Hi MOZ community, A few weeks ago we noticed a complete collapse in traffic on some of our pages (7 out of around 150 blog posts in question). We were able to confirm that those pages disappeared for good from Google's index at the end of January '18, they were still findable via all other major search engines. Using Google's Search Console (previously Webmastertools) we found the unindexed URLs in the list of pages being excluded because "Google chose different canonical than user". Content-wise, the page that Google falsely determines as canonical instead has little to no similarity to the pages it thereby excludes from the index. False canonicalization About our setup: We are a SPA, delivering our pages pre-rendered, each with an (empty) rel=canonical tag in the HTTP header that's then dynamically filled with a self-referential link to the pages own URL via Javascript. This seemed and seems to work fine for 99% of our pages but happens to fail for one of our top performing ones (which is why the hassle 😉 ). What we tried so far: going through every step of this handy guide: https://mza.seotoolninja.com/blog/panic-stations-how-to-handle-an-important-page-disappearing-from-google-case-study --> inconclusive (healthy pages, no penalties etc.) manually requesting re-indexation via Search Console --> immediately brought back some pages, others shortly re-appeared in the index then got kicked again for the aforementioned reasons checking other search engines --> pages are only gone from Google, can still be found via Bing, DuckDuckGo and other search engines Questions to you: How does the Googlebot operate with Javascript and does anybody know if their setup has changed in that respect around the end of January? Could you think of any other reason to cause the behavior described above? Eternally thankful for any help! ldWB9
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SvenRi1 -
Can’t put a finger on, what is causing 12 year domain, SEO optimized and decent link profile to rank lower than other less superior domains.
Can’t put a finger on, what is causing 12 year domain, SEO optimized and decent link profile to rank lower than other less superior domains. I have dissected the site and link, content, etc profile using ahrefs tools, still no luck, and unfortunately they do not have a community to ask anyone opinion. Hoping someone on Moz will be able to provide me with a secondary opinion or something I obviously missing here. Looking for any constructive feedback/professional opinion with fresh look on what maybe the cause of our down rankings and what may be a cause of it. Any feedback is very much appreciated. Search Term: 3030 aventura condos / One of our link samples (SE Position #6): https://goo.gl/FbYj4V Competing Domains (SE Position #1): https://goo.gl/fLPKX5 Competing Domains (SE Position #2): https://goo.gl/GqXGse
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Im_Jake0 -
Same language, Different countries. What would be the best way to introduce it?
Hello, We have a .com magento store with the US geo targeting We're going to launch a different versions soon, one for the US, and another one for Canada (we're going to add a Spanish and French versions later as well) The stores content will be same, except currency and contact us page. What would be a better strategy to introduce it to Google? What is better URL structure? example.com/ca/ , example.com/en-ca/ , or ca.example.com/ ? Should we stay with the original www.example.com/ (example.com) and just close an access to /ca/ and /us/ / or use rel=canonical / or use "alternate" hreflang to avoid duplicate content issues? Thanks in advance
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Meditinc.com0 -
Subdomain vs Subdirectory - does the content make a difference?
So I've read through all of the answers that suggest using a subdirectory is the best way to approach this - you rank more quickly and have all of your content on one site. BUT what if you're looking to move into a totally new market that your current site/content isn't in any way relevant to? Some examples are Supermarkets such as Tesco (who seem to use a mix of methods) http://www.tesco.com/groceries/, http://www.clothingattesco.com/, http://www.tesco.com/bank/ which links out from their main site to http://www.tescobank.com/ etc and Sainsburys http://www.sainsburys.co.uk/ who use subdomains - here they have their grocery offering, their bank offering, clothes, phones etc split into subdomains. If you have a product that is totally new to your Brand and different from all the products on your current site, does this change the answer to subdirectory vs subdomain? Would be great to hear your expert opinions on this. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | giffgaff2 -
Breadcrumb wording and keywords
This is real estate website related. For every neighborhood I have a "condos" and "houses" page. In the breadcrumb structure I may have: "home > island condos > city condos > region condos > neighborhood condos". Questions: Some breadrumb structures have 5-6 different breadcrumb link and repeating the word "condos" in each link seems redundant. Would it be better just to list "island", "city", "region", "neighborhood" and never use the word "condos" or "houses" in the breadcrumbs? For users this would be better. If I implement what I suggest in 1) - deleting "condos" or "houses" wording from breadcrumb links, then on a condos page the word "region" (as an example) will lead to the "region condos" page whereas the exact same word "region" on a house page will lead to the "region houses" page. This means I will have a situation where the anchor text in breadcrumbs become 100% identical for my "condos" and "houses" pages, however, the they lead to different pages. Is this OK? I have in past been told that when I use internal anchor text, that the link should always leads to the same page. Having same anchor leading to different pages would not be good….is that so? thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | khi50 -
Facebook page optimization
I'm working with a client who is "under attack" by one unhappy customer. That customer created a Facebook page to share her outrage, and her page is outranking my client's (consistently immediately above his FB page). I've checked all of the obvious things... page name page URL About section, and all business-related data He has MANY more "Likes" than she does, makes posts far more frequently (with much better Engagement), references his company name in almost every Post (as she does), and on and on. My main question is this... are there one or two factors that seem to have the most impact on how a given FB page ranks? Thanks for your help, Moz family! 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | measurableROI0 -
Help! Optimizing dynamic internal search results pages...
Hi guys, Now I have always been against this, and opted to noindex internal search results pages to stop the waste of link juice, dupe content, and crawl loops... however, I'm in a discussion with somebody who feels there may be a solution, and that the pages could actually be optimized to rank (for different keywords to the landing pages of course). Anybody come across such a thing before? My only solution would be still to noindex and then build static pages with the most popular search results in but that won't suffice in this case. Any recommendations would be much appreciated 🙂 Thanks, Steve 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SteveOllington0