Forum Moderators: open
Let's assume we're talking about two-word phrases here, e.g. keyword1+keyword2.
Obviously, you can only put so many of these into a page title. I think Google ignores the page title if it's longer that x kb, but not sure what x is.
And I *know* that Google ignores data on a page that comes after x kb -- again, not sure what x is.
So you can only realistically massage a limited number of two-word phrases into any one page. I'm just curious about what that limited number might be.
And just to add there has been a update, backlinks, PR and SERPs have changed. Anybody noticed this. Please post if the SERPs are good / bad.
[edited by: nileshkurhade at 4:41 pm (utc) on Jan. 11, 2004]
If you can fill an entire site with content related to a keyphrase, I'd go for the 1 page per keyphrase solution. If not, try to make just as many sites as you can fill with quality content.
If I remember correctly, Google will only show 67 characters in a title on its search results. I've seen titles that were much bigger then 120 characters, but Google chops them off at 65 to 67 characters that it shows. It depends on if you are at the end of a word at that point in the title. Not all search engines do this. I've seen some search engines go well beyond 67 characters like MSN.
As far as more then one keyword phrase on a home page. I have a home page that ranks very well in about 35 different two keyword phrases. I think it depends on many factors. For example:
How many competitors have pages for that keyword phrase that you are trying for, and how powerful are those pages.
How many pages you have in your website that talk about that keyword phrase. {Outdoor Widgets} and {Indoor Widgets}, ect?
Also how many links are pointing to your home page that has anchor text for that keyword phrase?
I can go on, but I think you see it depends on to many things to answer with just a simple list. I would use the old trail and error method on my home page. That is if you have the time and money. It works for me and I would not hesitate to do the next home page the same way.
I was on the phone with a partner Friday morning talking about the fact that his site was still on page three for his company name.
Friday night he was number four and it has stuck so far.
Cygnus, thanks for letting me know that Google will only show the first 67 characters of a title on its search results. I knew there was a limit but wasn't sure what it was...
[webmasterworld.com...]
It seems that one keyphrase per page is the wise, conservative approach, then...
I think this may be a mistake. Ever since Google added the ~ synonym operator, I've paid some attention into trying to get synonyms on the page. And since Florida, I've been paying more attention to this. Stemming is definitely here, and synonyms may be here in anchor text and definition of linking neighborhoods.
If synonyms aren't playing a part in the on-page algo yet, I'm sure they eventually will be. Particularly if Google is going to punish you for using the exact phrase ;), they've got to look at something on the page to figure out what it's about.
Thanks for that link to the title tags discussion. It's very interesting.
I agree with you about the stemming/synomyms, as I have first-hand experience of this. It's hard to know how to use it correctly though -- i.e. should you include at least one reference to the alternate version of the word within the text of the site (this seems to work for me)?
Or is it enough to just presume Google will pick up on synonyms/same-stem variations?
...should you include at least one reference to the alternate version of the word within the text of the site...?
This seems pretty sparse to me. I still think of the immediate unit of optimization as the page... and then I group pages into a site that has some coherence to it (do a Google search for theme pyramids on webmasterworld.com to see at least one approach to this).
Right now, since Google seems to demote some sites that appear to be trying too hard, instead of repeating the exact phrase too many times on a page, I might build some of the phrases with synonyms. Eg, "big widgets" might be echoed as "huge widgets" or as "big widgetsynonyms" or as "big adjective widgetsynonyms."
It's almost as if you start with a slight degree of over optimization which gives you some awkward sounding repetition in your prose, and then you make the prose sound good by replacing some of the repetitions with synonyms. I always use the good-sounding-prose test.
Ditto with links. I have absolutely no hard and fast data to confirm that this works... just a sense about which of my pages in some Florida "dictionary" areas are doing well.
All my other pages target a single phrase and we've been pretty good at hitting those. I think PR and internal link importance are the factors affecting the pages I have that aren't doing well. (we have an articles section and the pages that aren't so hot are all linked from the articles page, not on our template navigation bar just yet).
I put a page up talking about the differences in terminology to help with the algo's interpretation of my overall site theme. I don't know if it works, but having a decent quantity of all my keyword targets mentioned in more than one page is good policy IMO.
I think targeting large quantities of phrases on a single page is bad for a couple of reasons...
1) when you're looking for a site, you check out the title on the SERP. I rarely click on obviously keyword stuffed titles because more often than not I'll either get bombarded by popups or the page won't have the info I need.
2) when I'm buying something, I want to read a little bit about it. Just a little to satisfy my thirst for making sure I'm buying the right thing.
20 keywords means not much in the way of reading.
3) after two unsuccessful clicks on the SERPs, I tend to start looking at descriptions. Those are clipped from anywhere on your page, so irrelevant text means no clickie from me. Also keyword clusters in page descriptions turn me away.
Remember, you not only want really good positioning, but assuming you don't hit #1 or #2, you have to give the user a reason to want to click to your site.
I might build some of the phrases with synonyms. Eg, "big widgets" might be echoed as "huge widgets" or as "big widgetsynonyms" or as "big adjective widgetsynonyms."
Thanks again Robert. What I like about this is that it's similar to the approach writers would use anyway -- particularly in avoiding repetition. Although I suppose a writer would look for less obvious synonyms, whereas in this case we want to use straightforward synonyms and suffix variations that the algo will detect.
NevetS, I agree with you -- it's important to think of the user at all times. Too often "optimisation"
is used here to refer only to a statistical word-count process, but I also take it to mean optimising the balance between inclusion of keywords and sensitivity toward real readers.
I might build some of the phrases with synonyms. Eg, "big widgets" might be echoed as "huge widgets" or as "big widgetsynonyms" or as "big adjective widgetsynonyms."
Thanks again Robert. What I like about this is that it's similar to the approach writers would use anyway -- particularly in avoiding repetition.
Precisely. A combination I forgot to include is "huge widgetsynonyms," where you're not repeating anything. This approach can also help picking up what I call peripheral phrases, particularly if you're well situated for your core phrase.
nevetS - Yes, I agree as well. The user is all-important.
