Is is it true that Google will not penalize duplicated content found in UL and LI tags?
-
I've read in a few places now that if you absolutely have to use a key term several times in a piece of copy, then it is preferable to use li and ul tags, as google will not penalise excessive density of keywords found in these tags. Does anyone know if there is any truth in this?
-
lol... thanks for that report.
Should we go back and read for the laughs?
-
I just read several more articles on that site. Overall junk. I would find a new blog to get your info from.
-
** In that case you can use “li” and “ul” tag, moreover Google doesn’t penalize for repeating words under these tags.**
ha ha... that is B.S.
The author of that does not know how Google handles
-
and
I can imagine Matt Cutts telling people ... "Its OK to stuff the
- tag guys"
- tag guys"
-
-
Thanks for the response,
I've found it here http://www.dailytechpost.com/index.php/8-best-tips-for-css-for-seo/#comment-69311 amongst several other places. I'm not in to stuffing keywords and fully aware that writing natural prose is the way to go, it was more a reference for where there is an excessive amount of keywords coincidently, such as when using technical terms which cannot be substituted and form part of every element of a text. Or perhaps if you are talking about a concept and natural prose feels a little repetitive, such as writing about infographics.
-
Maybe they are not today. I'm not to sure about this like the others I'm asking myself who told you this.
I do recommand you do not to try fooling the big G around. Duplicate content is kind of not so valuable content in the best case. You should use your efforts building great content instead of trying to duplicate.
Because even if it was the case they are not doing it right now, they probably will one day.
From my experience, duplicate is duplicate anywhere you put it !
-
Exactly. **Content is written for the visitors, not the search engines. **
If you are familiar with the subject and are writing naturally, the content will do just fine with all of the search engines, and more importantly your visitors.
-
Where did you hear this at? That makes no sense and I have never heard anything like that.
And do not stuff keywords or even try to see if you can get away with it. Thats poor optimization and does not look well for users. Write and design for your users and you should be fine.
-
I have never heard that
-
are safe for anything.
Don't bet on the behavior of Google.
Also, I don't pay any attention to the number of times that I use a word in copy. None. I try to write naturally without regard for search engines.
-
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 ranking content for phrases that don't exist on-page
I am experiencing an issue with negative keywords, but the “negative” keyword in question isn’t truly negative and is required within the content – the problem is that Google is ranking pages for inaccurate phrases that don’t exist on the page. To explain, this product page (as one of many examples) - https://www.scamblermusic.com/albums/royalty-free-rock-music/ - is optimised for “Royalty free rock music” and it gets a Moz grade of 100. “Royalty free” is the most accurate description of the music (I optimised for “royalty free” instead of “royalty-free” (including a hyphen) because of improved search volume), and there is just one reference to the term “copyrighted” towards the foot of the page – this term is relevant because I need to make the point that the music is licensed, not sold, and the licensee pays for the right to use the music but does not own it (as it remains copyrighted). It turns out however that I appear to need to treat “copyrighted” almost as a negative term because Google isn’t accurately ranking the content. Despite excellent optimisation for “Royalty free rock music” and only one single reference of “copyrighted” within the copy, I am seeing this page (and other album genres) wrongly rank for the following search terms: “free rock music”
On-Page Optimization | | JCN-SBWD
“Copyright free rock music"
“Uncopyrighted rock music”
“Non copyrighted rock music” I understand that pages might rank for “free rock music” because it is part of the “Royalty free rock music” optimisation, what I can’t get my head around is why the page (and similar product pages) are ranking for “Copyright free”, “Uncopyrighted music” and “Non copyrighted music”. “Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted” don’t exist anywhere within the copy or source code – why would Google consider it helpful to rank a page for a search term that doesn’t exist as a complete phrase within the content? By the same logic the page should also wrongly rank for “Skylark rock music” or “Pretzel rock music” as the words “Skylark” and “Pretzel” also feature just once within the content and therefore should generate completely inaccurate results too. To me this demonstrates just how poor Google is when it comes to understanding relevant content and optimization - it's taking part of an optimized term and combining it with just one other single-use word and then inappropriately ranking the page for that completely made up phrase. It’s one thing to misinterpret one reference of the term “copyrighted” and something else entirely to rank a page for completely made up terms such as “Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted”. It almost makes me think that I’ve got a better chance of accurately ranking content if I buy a goat, shove a cigar up its backside, and sacrifice it in the name of the great god Google! Any advice (about wrongly attributed negative keywords, not goat sacrifice ) would be most welcome.0 -
Content on product category pages - does Google care?
Hi All, I've always been unsure about the importance of content on product category pages. Nobody reads it. If you search for "living room chairs", you're just going to want to see a big list of living room chairs - not read content about living room chairs, how to choose one, etc. On virtually any ecommerce site, category pages have a paragraph or two of total bla-bla. Does this have any impact on search rankings? More specifically, will Googlebot see content on how to choose a living room chair and say "Yes! This is really helpful content"? Or, will it realize that the searcher intent on this keyword is really just to see a list of chairs, and ignore this content - or at least downplay its importance? WDTY?
On-Page Optimization | | BarryBuckman0 -
I have a lot of internal duplicate content as intros to a series of articles, is this bad?
On a site that I'm working on there is a series of posts with the same beginning to their titles. All of the titles start with Christ's Church ("Mormons"): And then about the first four paragraphs of all these posts is exactly the same, it is just explaining this series of posts. I'll link to a couple of examples so you know what I'm talking about. I know there are several other problems with these posts/site 🙂 but I am specifically curious about the partial duplicate title and the first few paragraphs being duplicate. http://www.mormonchurch.com/3259/christs-church-mormons-helping-out-a-friend http://www.mormonchurch.com/2969/christs-church-mormon-happiness-is-found-only-through-christ There are about 30 posts similar to these. Thank you, I look forward to your responses.
On-Page Optimization | | ThridHour1 -
Does this site have a duplicate content issue?
Google WMT is showing me only 2 short meta descriptions under "HTML Improvements" but I believe http://www.customgia.com may have a content duplication issue. Numerous keywords are used repeatedly across many product descriptions. To make matters worse, every product page has a "Design It!" button that sends the user to a flash-based jewelry designer in which they can edit the product's appearance. I'm not sure if these "designer pages" are adding unnecessary and potentially damaging duplicate content but it's certainly a possibility. There are many items on this site that are similar to one another but not the same. The product description tend to use the same phrases over and over again - words like crystal, Swarovski, beaded, design it, customize, change, pearl, glass beads, iridescent, pearl, drop earrings are used a lot. What I'm stuck on is whether or not I should be focusing on a content duplication issue as the primary SEO problem or if there is something bigger. Thank you for any assistance you can provide!
On-Page Optimization | | rja2140 -
Google pulling in wrong title tag!
Has anyone else seen their title tag different in the SERPS to what you have called it in the <title>?? </p> <p>I work for MITIE and when you type in "facilities management" it shows our title tag as "<a style="font-weight: bold;" href="http://www.mitie.com/services/strategic-outsourcing/integrated-facilities-management">Integrated <em>facilities management</em> - Mitie</a>" and it should be "<span>MITIE | Facilities management - Facilities management companies - Facility management UK" </span></p> <p><span>The only thing I can think of is that it's picking it from the H1 on the page but why it'd do that! The page is here www.mitie.com/services/strategic-outsourcing/integrated-facilities-management</span></p> <p><span>Any ideas?</span></p></title>
On-Page Optimization | | KarlBantleman0 -
Where does Google say this?
Just came across this article: http://www.searchmarketingstandard.com/tips-for-avoiding-thin-content And, it states, "Google says that it will ignore pages with less than 200 words of body text " I submitted a comment to the author, but was wondering in the meantime if anyone knows where Google says this?
On-Page Optimization | | nicole.healthline0 -
How could I avoid the "Duplicate Page Content" issue on the search result pages of a webshop site?
My webshop site was just crawled by Roger, and it found 683 "Duplicate Page Content" issues. Most of them are result pages of different product searches, that are not really identical, but very similar to each other. Do I have to worry about this? If yes, how could I make the search result pages different? IS there any solution for this? Thanks: Zoltan
On-Page Optimization | | csajbokz0 -
Google Penalty?
What are the characteristics of a Google penalty - i.e. how do you know by looking at the rankings for your keywords? Do all keywords that you had previously ranked for fall from say top 5 to nowhere? Do you disappear from SERP for a branded keyword? Or something else?? Basically how do you know if you have been penalized? Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | inhouseninja0