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"
-
-
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 -
What to do with repetitive content
Hi, I recently took over a site from another SEO firm. They created lots of articles targeting the same terms. The articles aren't bad but I fear they could dilute the site's ranking power for a given term. I don't want to give away the specific industry, but let's say they have eight pages targeting the term "______ billing software." I'd rather focus their resources on ranking one page for that term. Does that make sense? And if so, how do I do that? The company has a writer that can see if any of the content is good enough to add to their primary ______ billing software page. Would you 301 redirect all these pages to the one you want to rank, or would you canonicalize them? Or am I way off base in my thinking?
On-Page Optimization | | rich.owings0 -
Duplicate Content for Event Pages
Hi Folks, I have event pages for specific training courses running on certain dates, the problem I have is that MOZ indicates that I have 1040 duplicate content issues because I'm serving pages like this https://purplegriffon.com/event/2521/mop-practitioner I'm not sure how best to go about resolving this as, of course, although each event is unique in terms of it's start date, the courses and locations could be identical. Will Google penalise us for these types of pages, or will they even index them? Should I add a canonical link to the head of the document pointing to the related course page such as https://purplegriffon.com/courses/project-management/mop-management-of-portfolios/mop-practitioner. Will this solve the issue? I'm a little stuck on what to do for the best. Any advice would be much appreciated. Thanks. Kind Regards Gareth Daine
On-Page Optimization | | PurpleGriffon0 -
Does hreflang restrain my site from being penalized for duplicated content?
I am curently setting up a travel agency website. This site is going to be targeting both american and mexican costumers. I will be working with an /es subdirectory. Would hreflang, besides showing the matching language version in the SERP´s, restrain my site translated content (wich is pretty much the same) from being penalized fro duplicated content? Do I have to implement relcannonical? Thank ypu in advanced for any help you can provide.
On-Page Optimization | | kpi3600 -
Removing syndicated duplicate content from website - what steps do I need to take to make sure Google knows?
Hey all, So I've made the decision to cancel the service that provides my blog with regular content / posts, since it seems that having duplicate content on my site isn't doing me any favors. So I'm on a Wordpress system - I'll be exporting the posts so I have them for reference, and then deleting the posts. There are like 150 or so - What steps should I take to ensure that Google learns of the changes I've made? Or do I not need to do anything at all in that department? Also - I guess I've assumed that the best decision would be to 'remove' the content from my blog. IS that the best way to go? Or should I leave it in place and start adding unique content? (my guess is that I need to remove it...) Thanks for your help, Kurt
On-Page Optimization | | KurtBullock0 -
Issue: Duplicate Page Content (index.htm)
I get an error of "**Issue:**Duplicate Page Content" for the following pages in the SEOMOZ Crawl Diagnostics. But these pages are the same one! Duhhhh.... Is there a way to hide this false error? http://www.stdtime.com/ http://www.stdtime.com/index.htm BTW, I also get "**Issue:**Duplicate Page Title" for this page. Another false error...
On-Page Optimization | | raywhite0 -
Should I let Google index tags?
Should I let Google index tags? Positive? Negative Right now Google index every page, including tags... looks like I am risking to get duplicate content errors? If thats true should I just block /tag in robots.txt Also is it better to have as many pages indexed by google or it's should be as lees as possible and specific to the content as much as possible. Cheers
On-Page Optimization | | DiamondJewelryEmpire0 -
Will duplicate content supplied from a hotel provider damage my website, or simply just the pages that it appears on?
Hi, I currently have a lot of hotel listings pages with little or no content, as I'm scared that if I place duplicate hotel descriptions on the pages then Google will stop ranking the page. I've found that having descriptions of some kind do help conversion significantly, so I'm considering generating unique hotel descriptions on each main page (page 1 in each set of listings) - these are the pages that Google indexes. On subsequent pages (page 2, page 3 etc.) I'm thinking about resorting to displaying the duplicate affiliate content hotel descriptions - these pages can be crawled but are set to noindex. My question is, do you think this is likely to have an effect on my website in the rankings, and as a result push my primary pages (that contain 100% unique content) down in SERPs. Thanks Mike
On-Page Optimization | | mjk260