| 3:15 am on Apr 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I am not sure that it is the only reason, but it seems that Google now takes the meta descriptions seriously.
The search results for most of my pages are just the extracts from my meta descriptions.
So the same description for many pages, as I believe is not a good idea.
However, I believe, there is a more general reason also.
After Big Daddiy only the Big Daddies, i.e. the pages with the original contents may have high SERP.
If your other pages just continue the main topic and have no other different theme, your only Big Daddy is the first page of your article. All other pages are "just small children".
[edited by: Vadim at 3:18 am (utc) on April 16, 2006]
| 3:17 am on Apr 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
As an experiment, you could change the meta descriptions. Make them all different from one another.
If you make no other changes and things improve over time, it could be important. -Larry
| 3:51 am on Apr 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Last fall was when I first began to notice meta descriptions coming back to the search results in a big way. At that time I saw pages return from the supplemental index after we made sure they had unique titles and unique meta descriptions. In that case (highly suggestive but too small a sample to be conclusive) both the title and description had been identical for all the "parts" of the article.
Since that experience, I've now changed the way I write titles for multi-page articles. I used to use:
"Article Title - part 1"
"Article Title - part 2"
...and so on.
Now I've switched to using:
"1 - Unique Summary Page Phrase"
"2 - Unique Summary Page Phrase"
It took a bit more thinking to come up with the title and description. - but really only a couple minutes per page. When I thought of the two appearing together in the search results -- sort of like Adwords with a few more characters allowed, then the process started to flow for me.
I also think that putting the number first in the title, as I showed above, offers better usability for tabbed browsing.
| 4:16 am on Apr 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Google is definetely taking the "Description" meta tag into account. We did 4 small 6 page sites and on 1 site forgot to give each page a unique meta description tag. It was the only site out of those 4 that came up with the message
"In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the one already displayed"
Last week we made unique tags for that site and Google has already picked up one other page.
| 3:58 pm on Apr 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|The problem is this: When I use site:www.example.com, only the first page of the article gets displayed, all the rest 4 are displayed only when I select "repeat the search with the omitted results included.". |
If a Google search returns pages with identical or near identical description snippets (whether it be from META description or from on page text), Google will show one URL and dump the rest into "omitted results." This doesn't mean those pages are supplemental.
| 4:41 pm on Apr 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Halfdeck are you saying that this doesn’t affect the performance of omitted pages in the real search results?
Can anybody else confirm what Halfdeck said?
|Need More Hits|
| 10:09 pm on Apr 17, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I am in agreement with the same meta description possibly putting you in the supp hell
I would like to here from someone that does not use the meta description tag.
| 10:17 pm on Apr 17, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Having the same meta description on every page will cause you problems. That has been demonstrated many times. Do a site:domain.com search and see how far you get before the "repeat this search with omitted results included" message appears.
Having no meta description on every page will cause the same problems, because Google will use the first few words on the visible page for the snippet, and that is most likely to be the navigation bar... which is likely to be the same on every page.
You must use a unique title and meta description on every page.