Forum Moderators: open
Thanks anyone!
Barbara
There is some evidence to suggest that not having a Keywords tag for Google actually does some good.....but that is speculation IMHO.
My advice is keep the Title tag to less than 73 characters, keep the Description tag to less than 150 characters, and keep the Keywords tag to less than 250 characters.....not for Google, but for Inktomi.
Barbara
...perhaps I'm trying to do too many things and capture too many audiences with one website
Meta tags should be page specific, with some thought given overall to the site. If you're having trouble keeping your keywords tag under 500 characters, for either a page or an entire site, though, you're doing something very wrong.
Here are some threads that comment about the meta keywords tag in relation to page content, and page and site focus (both threads at a time when it was rumored that the tag was actually still being used).
Meta keywords and page copy
[webmasterworld.com...]
Meta Keyword Tags
still supported?
[webmasterworld.com...]
Consensus now is that the meta keywords tags is essentially useless. Google has said they "reserve the right to use it," but for all practical purposes they ignore it. Inktomi has said they may use it for some purposes.
But even if it were being used, you can't build a focussed page around 50-60 words... you build it around 2 or 3 or 4 or so words, with some extras thrown in as "peripheral" targets.
See also:
Make intelligent use of META tags - Part 1
[webmasterworld.com...]
I know we're not supposed to spam the board with private URLs, so I'll generalize my situation. I have a site which is basically a billboard of several professionals offering their various services. They all have one common factor, but otherwise each offers different services. It's not just pictures and links. There are general details on services and contact information. So the keywords used cover the common factor (which would be highly used in search engines) along with keywords pertaining to each service. I just don't know how to cut back the character/keyword count to be fair to everyone. If excessive amounts hamper positioning, I'll obviously have to do something.
I appreciate your input!
Barb
I have a site which is basically a billboard of several professionals offering their various services.
That's a very problematic kind of site to optimize. Why are they all grouped together on one domain?
Does the common factor create any commonality of keywords or inbound links? If not, just off the top of my head, I'd encourage you to consider setting it up so each professional has his or her own domain.
I guess I tried to avoid the topic, as a large portion of the general public look at us as "envelope stuffers". Our common keyword (using Dmoz.org standards)is virtual assistant, as we all "work from home"; "telecommute". Most of us do have our own domains; at least those that can afford it.
We wanted to pool together to 1) increase our links for ranking and 2) draw on each other's strengths to get exposure 3) rise above the depths of being buried in job boards, etc.
So that said, we have numerous keywords to be fair to everyone: recruiting, web design, programming, data entry, technical writing, illustrators, administrative assistants, word processing, etc. etc. etc. Perhaps my only option is to minimize the skill sets and just concentrate on job titles.
The reason I specifically questioned, is that I've viewed the meta keywords used on tons of "trash" sites (in our opinions) that bog down results on queries - hiding the candidates - and giving high page ranks to job banks. To beat their positions will probably be a painful experience. But I will note that they use far more keywords than we are - yet we have page content to support ours and don't meet meta keyword standards.
Perhaps our only hope is winning the "Google" battle and not concern ourselves with the little robots.
Thanks for listening!
Barb
There is no relation between the appearance of a phrase in the keywords tag of a competitor's site and its ranking for that phrase. Don't assume that most corporate or portal sites have any idea about how to optimize a site.
It's sometimes helpful or amusing to look at competitive keywords tags to see what their wish lists are... but, at best, that's all they are: fanciful wish lists.
On large corporate or portal sites, there's often no organized follow through on the wish list... no relation between the site content, titles, headings, links, and the keyword tag content.
I should add, and I don't mean to be discouraging... that the general terms you cite, like "programming," "data entry," or "technical writing" are extremely competitive. You will need location or niche modifiers to have any chance whatsoever of ranking on phrases including these terms, and even then it may still be very difficult.
The trick is to select relevant target phrases that will be searched for which you have a chance of ranking.
It's from an online chat about two years on Abondance (France), that included Matt Cutts and Stephanie Kerebel of Google. Can't tell who the Google answer is from, but it sounds like our buddy Matt.
In response to "Is it still necessary to fill up the meta-keywords?" one of the Google reps replies:
"I think that we're open to either kind of deal. Let's see. Google uses meta-keywords, but not as much as most other search engines. I would still include them, but don't worry about putting a ton of effort into it."
Empasis added, and that's probably the most operative phrase.
It's a bit out of date, but the transcript is here [chat.abondance.com...]
The trick is to select relevant target phrases that will be searched for which you have a chance of ranking... and to build pages and content around these.
