Don't use an h1 and just use h2's?
-
We just overhauled our site and as I was auditing the overhaul I noticed that there were no h1's on any of the pages. I asked the company that does our programming why and he responded that h1's are spammed so much so he doesn't want to put them in. Instead he put in h2's. I can't find anything to back this up. I can find that h1's are over-optimized but nothing that says to skip them altogether. I think he's crazy. Anyone have anything to back him up?
-
I think that basic on page seo needs to be followed. Meaning that you should have one h1 on the page and above the fold. That will signal to google the importance of that phrase. The rest should be h2 and h3 but used sparingly. This will give google something to compare the h1 to. I know some sites make the mistake of putting all there keywords on the main page in h1, that doesn't work and hurts the site in rankings. I'm not sure what your programmers thinking is, maybe he has knowledge that I don't have which is very possible but from my experience and constant reading of seo best practices h1 implemented correctly helps.
-
I feel the same way. Thanks for the moral support!
-
To be fair, your programmer probably doesn't have a huge understanding about SEO and has probably just misunderstood something he has read somewhere.
Yes h1 tags can be over optimized and can have an effect but the simple answer is, don't over optimize the h1 tags. Just because some people abuse them isn't a good reason to exclude them. In fact, I would actively encourage you not to exclude them as they are an important part of your on-page SEO strategy.
-
I have very little to back him up.
I appreciate that h1 tags are over-optimised when they are poorly executed (e.g. keyword stuffing or using more than one instance of a h1 per page) however the same can be said for h2 tags.
If I were in your position I would look for further clarification of what he sees as over-optimized h1 tags.
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
-
Is it bad from an SEO perspective that cached AMP pages are hosted on domains other than the original publisher's?
Hello Moz, I am thinking about starting to utilize AMP for some of my website. I've been researching this AMP situation for the better part of a year and I am still unclear on a few things. What I am primarily concerned with in terms of AMP and SEO is whether or not the original publisher gets credit for the traffic to a cached AMP page that is hosted elsewhere. I can see the possible issues with this from an SEO perspective and I am pretty sure I have read about how SEOs are unhappy about this particular aspect of AMP in other places. On the AMP project FAQ page you can find this, but there is very little explanation: "Do publishers receive credit for the traffic from a measurement perspective?
Algorithm Updates | | Brian_Dowd
Yes, an AMP file is the same as the rest of your site – this space is the publisher’s canvas." So, let's say you have an AMP page on your website example.com:
example.com/amp_document.html And a cached copy is served with a URL format similar to this: https://google.com/amp/example.com/amp_document.html Then how does the original publisher get the credit for the traffic? Is it because there is a canonical tag from the AMP version to the original HTML version? Also, while I am at it, how does an AMP page actually get into Google's AMP Cache (or any other cache)? Does Google crawl the original HTML page, find the AMP version and then just decide to cache it from there? Are there any other issues with this that I should be aware of? Thanks0 -
Parallax Scrolling when used with “hash bang” technique is good for SEO or not?
Hello friends, One of my client’s website http://chakracentral.com/ is using Parallax scrolling with most of the URLs containing hash “#” tag. Please see few sample URLs below: http://chakracentral.com/#panelBlock4 (service page)
Algorithm Updates | | chakraseo
http://chakracentral.com/#panelBlock3 (about-us page) I am planning to use “hash bang” technique on this website so that Google can read all the internal pages (containing hash “#” tag) with the current site architecture as the client is not comfortable in changing it. Reference: https://developers.google.com/webmasters/ajax-crawling/docs/getting-started#2-set-up-your-server-to-handle-requests-for-urls-that-contain-escaped_fragment But the problem that I am facing is that, lots of industry experts do not consider parallax websites (even with hash bang technique) good for SEO especially for mobile devices. See some references below: http://searchengineland.com/the-perils-of-parallax-design-for-seo-164919
https://moz.com/blog/parallax-scrolling-websites-and-seo-a-collection-of-solutions-and-examples So please find my queries below for which I need help: 1. Will it be good to use the “hash bang” technique on this website and perform SEO to improve the rankings on desktop as well as mobile devices?
2. Is using “hash bang” technique for a parallax scrolling website good for only desktop and not recommended for mobile devices and that we should have a separate mobile version (without parallax scrolling) of the website for mobile SEO?
3. Parallax scrolling technique (even with "hash bang") is not at all good for SEO for both desktop as well as mobile devices and should be avoided if we want to have a good SEO friendly website?
4. Any issue with Google Analytics tracking for the same website? Regards,
Sarmad Javed0 -
When Is It Okay To Use Bold, Underline & Italic Text? Should I Stay Away From My Keywords?
Hey guys I have a few questions. I am pretty sure that I was penalized by Panda a few years back because I went very heavy on bold, italic and underlining my keywords. Since then I removed the bold, italic and underlines and never have used them again. I was just reading an article on the Moz Blog and I saw some bold words. My questions are, When Is It Okay To Use Bold, Underline & Italic Text? Should I Stay Away From My Keywords? Any help would be great! Thank you.
Algorithm Updates | | Videogamefan1 -
Anyone Notice Google's Latest Change Seems to Favor Google Books?
I've noticed a change in the search results lately. As I search around I notice a lot of results from books.google.com Seems a little (ok a lot) self serving... JMHO
Algorithm Updates | | get4it0 -
How to find keywords competitor is using
I am doing work for a landscaping company and having trouble with finding the best keywords. Most of keywords are so expensive on adwords to use, so obviously we want to optimize as best possible. How do I find what keywords competitors are using for campaigns and/or optimized for? thx.
Algorithm Updates | | SexyLeggings0 -
Crosslinking & Managing Multiple Domains in Same Webmaster Tool's Account
I am wondering if there are any consequences if you manage multiple websites in the same Webmaster Tool's account and cross link between them? My guess is that this would be a very easy thing for Google to detect and build into their algorithms. Hence affect the link juice from those domains that are owned by the same person. I am looking for verification on this. Thanks, Joe
Algorithm Updates | | csamsojo0 -
How come google image search doesn't link to the right page?
For one site I work with the images link to the home page of the site rather than the page the image lives on. I think this is hurting my bounce rate quite a bit. Thoughts?
Algorithm Updates | | NetvantageMarketing0 -
Issue: Having to Fight Product Marketing to Use Keywords
This is sort of a "DUH!" moment to me. I know everyone has come across this at some point in time and am interested in hearing how others deal with this. A little background: I was researching keywords for new menus and pages. Sometimes, people (product marketing in my case) do not give me a heads up on changes they want to make to pages and it is always a fight with them to change it. This is pretty normal for me and I am use to it. It is one of those things that they don't want to discuss it with you because they know you are going to critique their work. and, yes, change it for the good of the company. I had a co-worker say to me:
Algorithm Updates | | SmartBear
"We may have to start making [pages] meaningful to the human visitor than satify the bot army". My response was:
"What better way to make it [web page] meaningful to users by knowing which terms they search on the most in our industry? Keyword research is not just for Search Engines, it is actual live data as to what most people are searching. That is why I put such a high precedence on it and report on trends. You can bet that if 100,000 people are searching for [keyword], that is what they want to see when they search for it." Anyways, that is how I handled this particular event. I have several responses when these comments pop up from time to time. Usually it is something to the fact that they are not the ones who will get fired if leads drop via organic search, so we better try this. But today, I was feeling kind of spunky and decided to take another route. What are some of your responses to these types of remarks? Hopefully this will make for a good discussion.0