Faking headings, good or bad?
-
Recently i got into a discussion with someone regarding the use of headings on an e-commerce website.
i had used headings whenever a heading was used in the design, they all marked the subject of the given section.
For example: The sidebar contains items for filtering products. Each filter had a
containing the name of the filter, like colors or brands.
The discussion i had was about whether the use of headings was appropiate because the words contained within the heading had nothing to do with the main subject of the page (Soccer in this case).
The advice from the SEO agency was to replace the headings with a different html element like a div or span and style this so it looks like tge heading in the design.
What do you guys think?
-
Given they were
tags and not something more powerful like an
, I'm not sure how detrimental it would've been, however, I think your SEO agency is right to change the HTML element to something else.
How the
tags were being used was outside their initial design (page hierarchy and design), as davebuts pointed out above.
-
I agree with your SEO agency.
Heading tags should be used to provide a hierarchy for the content on a page, not just to format text.
Heading tags should be avoided in page templates where they are not relevant in demonstrating the hierarchy of content on a page - ie. in the header, main navigation, sidebars and footer.
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
-
Would you consider this title to be keyword stuffing or bad?
A competitor uses the following format for all of their meta titles: [Store Name] Voucher Codes, Cashback & Discount Codes | [Website Name] They do vary their titles slightly, depending on which keywords are searched for, for the particular store. What do you think about this title? I'm torn between it looking a little 'stuffy' but them also getting across the point that their page offers all of that.
On-Page Optimization | | vickluque0 -
"Heading 1" vs. "Title" Style for SEO
In Word, you can specify "Heading 1" text which Google presumably treats the same as an HTML tag. Is there any benefit in using the "Title" style? Is it the equivalent of a web page's title?
On-Page Optimization | | BlueLinkERP0 -
Using H3-4 tags in the footer or sidebars: good or not?
Howdy SEOmoz fans! Is it considered a good / bad / neutral practice to include H tags in the footer, as a mean to group a few links? Take http://www.seomoz.org/ for instance: - Voted Best SEO Tool 2010! = H2
On-Page Optimization | | AxialDev
- Looking for SEO consulting? = H3
- Product and Tools = H3 Company = H3 etc. I often see the same principle applied to sidebars. I feel like because they don't contribute to the actual content structure and because they are repeated from page to page, we should avoid them, but I have nothing to back my intuition. [+] Perhaps they are helpful for usability (screen readers) and thin added value (i.e. category names that carry more weight than if they weren't headers). What do you think? Thanks for your time.1 -
Are My footer links bad?
I started working here recently, they said the footer links were to help with navigation of their most popular products. I am curious after reading http://www.seomoz.org/blog/internal-linking-strategies-for-2012-and-beyond if having these footer links could hurt the ranking of those key words after the penguin update. I am looking more into the analytics, and have not seen a negative impact yet.
On-Page Optimization | | DoRM0 -
Would Changing the Titles of Root Categories Be Bad?
I have researched some more effective keywords to change my root category titles to. I am wondering if it would be a bad idea to change these titles considering all the things that could go wrong. From what i'm gathering there are a LOT of things that can go wrong but at the same time these things do need to be changed sometime! Is this a good or a bad idea & why? What could go wrong? Should I try changing the category titles one at a time instead of risking every one of my keywords / category titles not working out in the serps right away?
On-Page Optimization | | Mike.Bean0 -
Keep our category navigation in tree structure but move our URLs to a more flat structure. Good plan?
In our Magento store, products are arranged into categories, subcategories and so on. We typically have 3 or 4 layers of category depth. This makes it nice and easy for customers to find stuff, but it means that the end categories have massive long urls. I'd like to keep our category tree structure in place from a navigation point of view, but I feel the url structure is pushing some important stuff to the back of the shop as it were. We have something like 200 categories in total. So, assuming every individual category has an a unique name, I'd like to rewrite the urls so that: ourshop.com/car-parts/
On-Page Optimization | | DWJames
stays as
ourshop.com/car-parts/ ourshop.com/car-parts/suspension/
becomes
ourshop.com/suspension/ ourshop.com/car-parts/suspension/springs
becomes
ourshop.com/springs/ ourshop.com/car-parts/suspension/springs/thismake-lowering-springs
becomes
ourshop.com/thismake-lowering-springs/ and so on....
I'll need some custom magento URL rewrite work done, but that's another story. The real question is whether you guys feel this is worthwhile? Are there any other stores with a deep categorised navigation structure, but a flat url structure? thanks, James0 -
How best to approach archiving badly optimised content
I signed up SEO Moz about a month ago as i'm currently rebuilding my site from scratch and wanted to learn from current mistakes. At present I use the forum software Invision Power Board to manage my site and one thing i've learnt is that it is terrible for SEO, there are so many thousands of errors listed by the crawler that it's not even worth trying to fix it. However because it has 5 or 6 years worth of content alot of which is on Google I don't want to totally remove it, rather I would prefer to archive it of with a big banner at the top letting anybody that visits it know that it's no longer in use and pointing them to the frontpage. I should note that it is in a subfolder already so the location of any of the links won't be changed. So the few questions I have are: The forum index has alot of link juice and I would like to redirect that to the new forum index, however for archive purposes the old index still needs to be accessible. Some topics are very popular and appear high in Google and have alot of backlinks. The important information in these forum topics will be available elsewhere on the new rebuilt site. Again I would like to redirect both link juice and users to the new page, however being a forum topic there are tens or hundreds of pages of old comments that need to still be accessible for reference. There are bound to be duplicate meta title and description issues with new similarly named categories appearing both on the new site and the old forum, is this going to be that much of a problem? So really what i'm asking is, how should I go about archiving this of without destroying content and rankings, but still making sure that the new stuff is getting the right exposure both to users and search engines alike?
On-Page Optimization | | freezedriedmedia0 -
Tag clouds: good for internal linking and increase of keyword relevant pages?
As Matt Cutts explained, tag clouds are OK if you're not engaged in keyword stuffing (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYPX_ZmhLqg) - i.e. if you're not putting in 500 tags. I'm currently creating tags for an online-bookseller; just like Amazon this e-commerce-site has potentially a couple of million books. Tag clouds will be added to each book detail page in order to enrich each of these pages with relevant keywords both for search engines and users (get a quick overview over the main topics of the book; navigate the site and find other books associated with each tag). Each of these book-specific tag clouds will hold up to 50 tags max, typically rather in the range of up to 10-20. From an SEO perspective, my question is twofold: 1. Does the site benefit from these tag clouds by improving the internal linking structure? 2. Does the site benefit from creating lots of additional tag-specific-pages (up to 200k different tags) or can these pages become a problem, as they don't contain a lot of rich content as such but rather lists of books associated with each tag? Thanks in advance!
On-Page Optimization | | semantopic0