Comments on: How to Avoid Using Poisonous Meta Tags

By: Pas pÃ¥ med dÃ¥rlige META-koder! - Mikkel deMib Svendsen

Pas pÃ¥ med dÃ¥rlige META-koder! - Mikkel deMib Svendsen — Sat, 26 Aug 2006 11:49:18 +0000

[...] SEO BlackHat havde et godt indlÃ¦g i denne uge om ovenstÃ¥ende problem. IfÃ¸lge hans undersÃ¸gelserÂ (og de plejer at vÃ¦re grundige og fornuftige) kan identiske META-koder pÃ¥ alt for mange af dine sider give problemer. Det ser alvorligt ud til, at sÃ¥danne identiske META-koder kan vÃ¦re vÃ¦re medvirkende, eller udslagsgivende, Ã¥rsag til at Google vÃ¦lger at placere sider i det der kaldes “supplemental index”. [...]

By: nuevojefe

nuevojefe — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 22:26:24 +0000

I recommend trying to input some small string of text that isn’t found on the page in that exact form, but is obviously relevant and uses topical keywords then follow that up dynamically with X amount of characters of text taken from the body of the post followed by Ellipsis points at the cutoff.

That usually makes a unique, non-entirely grabbed from the body, full description that is likely to include proper keywords if you focus on including important stuff at the beginning of posts most times.

By: deviant

deviant — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:17:39 +0000

So would it make sense to go through all older posts and add exerpts or has the damage already been done?

By: Murmeltiertag?

Murmeltiertag? — Tue, 22 Aug 2006 08:26:05 +0000

[...] …oder besser gesagt Murmeltier-Jahr. Ich bin heute echt ins Grübeln gekommen. Der Grund der Verständnislosigkeit: Aaron Wall und Quadzilla posten fast gleichzeitig die “heisse Neuigkeit”, dass es besser ist, Meta-Informationen (vor allem den title- und description-tag) zu varriieren. Laut Aaron verschenkt man sonst gute Chancen oder schadet der Seite sogar. [...]

By: Alexandra DST

Alexandra DST — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 18:24:05 +0000

Interesting post from Aaron on SEObook about ThreadWatch similar results due to same titles and meta descriptions:
http://www.seobook.com/archives/001796.shtml

By: Alexandra DST

Alexandra DST — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 18:07:12 +0000

I do the same on my websites but I prefer to put the name of the site behind the important keywords in the title, not before, otherwise I would have every single title starting with the same words which is, I think, a mistake.
I also use different meta descriptions to avoid duplicate content between product pages which are very similar to each others.

By: rjonesx

rjonesx — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 17:35:01 +0000

This is absolutely true – Google is using title tags and meta descriptions to determine a large proportion of its duplicate content penalty. We have seen this across PR8 sites with thousands of pages, so it is definitely affecting anyone and everyone.

By: Sean Fraser

Sean Fraser — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 16:31:33 +0000

I’ve never understood why sites that are able to use descriptions, don’t use them. I’ve found that meta:descriptions have always assisted search rankings. And, more importanly, search users get a first impression from your site with descriptions. That’s a site’s first conversion point.

Each search engine renders site “descriptions” differently: compare Google versus MSN versus Ask. MSN includes header elements; Google doesn’t.

Adding meta:descriptions on blogs is – Fairly – simple. CMS templated sites are possilbe but tricky.

By: braveheartdesign

braveheartdesign — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 13:34:22 +0000

With the decrease in importance of the description tag, would an option be to omit this tag and just let the search engines display a snippet of tag that matches the query?

By: anty

anty — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 12:14:21 +0000

Thanks QuadsZilla, but I did both points, I have read your post