-
Hello!
Today we have some issues when Google is indexing our
instead of our seo-title. Our headline appears in the <title>tag while our seo-headline appears in the <meta name="title"> tag. And Google seems to index the <title> tag in most cases. </p> <p><strong>Here is from our source code: </strong><br /><title>Duellen: Apple Iphone 6 vs Samsung Galaxy S6 - XX</title>
Should we stick with both of these and put the same content in both <title>and <meta name="title"> tags or should we go with just one of them?</p> <p>Best regards,<br />Danne</p> <p> </p></title>
-
Ha, you got it done while I was still typing. Good, thorough answer.
-
Ok, so I've had a lot of discussion on this topic in the past but not recently. Pardon my bookmarks being a little old but they all still apply the same.
First, there is no meta value for title. See the documentation here: http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_meta.asp
The only values are:
- application-name
- author
- description
- generator
- keywords
There is a standard attribute for title (http://www.w3schools.com/tags/ref_standardattributes.asp) but specifies a bit of text more like a "tooltip" not a title tag.
The actual <title>tag <span data-mce-mark="1">defines the title of the document. Title in a meta element defines the title of the meta element. In other words, no it has virtually no effect.</span></span></p> <p><span data-mce-mark="1"><span data-mce-mark="1">Supporting SEO docs:</span></span></p> <p>http://moz.com/community/q/title-vs-meta-title<br />http://forums.seochat.com/web-design-coding-programming-11/should-i-use-title-meta-title-460889.html<br />http://www.raisemyrank.com/articles/meta-title.htm<br />http://themeaningofweb.blogspot.com.au/2008/10/difference-between-and-nametitle-tags.html</p> <p> </p></title>
-
Hi Danne
First of all, it's only the <title>tag here that is the required HTML element, when looking at <a href="http://validator.w3.org/" target="_blank">W3C Compliant Markups</a>.</p> <p>The <meta name="title"> tag is just meta data content, and different crawlers will use or not use that information as they see fit. In the case of Google, it very seldom, if at all, ever uses this tag for its indexation purposes.</p> <p>Fast forward again to the <h1> tag, and its use is also <a href="http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/Use_h1_for_Title" target="_blank">W3C recommended</a>.</p> <p>So you can see the trend here - Google will look at the W3C elements and consider them for indexing more than the <meta name="title"> tag. To put it bluntly, the <meta name="title"> is a waste of code.</p> <p>If you want a certain phrase to be indexed, considered, or to show up in the SERP, I would add it to your <title> tag and remove the <meta name="title"> altogether, to reduce the clutter and any chance of conflicting messages.</p></title>
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
-
Added a canonical ref tag and SERPs tanked, should we change it back?
My client's CMS uses an internal linking structure that includes index.php at the end of the URLs. The site also works using SEO-friendly URLs without index.php, so the SEO tool identified a duplicate content issue. Their marketing team thought the pages with index.php would have better link equity and rank higher, so they added a canonical ref tag, making the index.php version of the pages the canonical page. As a result, the site dropped in the rankings by a LOT and has not recovered in the last 3-months. It appears that Google had automatically selected the SEO-friendly URLs as the canonical page, and by switching, it re-indexed the entire site. The question we have is, should they change it back? Or will this cause the site to be reindexed again, resulting in an even lower ranking?
Technical SEO | | TienB240 -
How can we analyze about duplication?
Howdy all, We have a few pages being hailed as copies by the google search comfort. Notwithstanding, we accept the substance on these pages is unmistakably extraordinary (for instance, they have totally unique list items returned, various headings and so on) An illustration of two pages google discover to be copies is underneath. in the event that anybody can spot what may be causing the copy issue here, would especially see the value in ideas! Much appreciated ahead of time.
Technical SEO | | camerpon090 -
[Organization schema] Which Facebook page should be put in "sameAs" if our organization has separate Facebook pages for different countries?
We operate in several countries and have this kind of domain structure:
Technical SEO | | Telsenome
example.com/us
example.com/gb
example.com/au For our schemas we've planned to add an Organization schema on our top domain, and let all pages point to it. This introduces a problem and that is that we have a separate Facebook page for every country. Should we put one Facebook page in the "sameAs" array? Or all of our Facebook pages? Or should we skip it altogether? Only one Facebook page:
{
"@type": "Organization",
"@id": "https://example.com/org/#organization",
"name": "Org name",
"url": "https://example.com/org/",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/xxx",
"https://www.facebook.com/xxx_us"
], All Facebook pages:
{
"@type": "Organization",
"@id": "https://example.com/org/#organization",
"name": "Org name",
"url": "https://example.com/org/",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/xxx",
"https://www.facebook.com/xxx_us"
"https://www.facebook.com/xxx_gb"
"https://www.facebook.com/xxx_au"
], Bonus question: This reasoning springs from the thought that we only should have one Organization schema? Or can we have a multiple sub organizations?0 -
Rankings Dropped to Nothing
We're kind of in crisis mode, as our ad revenue is about to take a huge hit. Hoping someone can help me figure out what to do next. Site: https://indoorgardening.com Here's what I did (below) that I think broke things somehow. I'm clearly not an SEO expert but thought I was making things better. And things did improve over the last week or so but then fell apart 2 days ago. 1. Most posts did not have a Yoast focus keyword. I added keyword phrases and used Yoast suggestions to optimize for that and for readability. 2. In some cases I changed post titles to better reflect the keyword phrase. 3. In some cases I changed the slug per Yoast's suggestion and did a 301 redirect from the old slug to the new one. 4. I used Grammarly to fix all spelling, grammar, punctuation, etc. 5. Some Yoast-suggested changes that were made: Image alt tags, subheading structures, adding keyword to subheadings, first paragraph, and meta description, changed sentence length for those over 20 words to clean up the text, added transition words where applicable, reworded passive voice sentences, added internal links when needed, eliminated consecutive sentences (first word), improved Flesch reading ease when necessary. 6. I also added or changed Amazon affiliate links where needed and swapped out images when necessary. Results:
Technical SEO | | Jbyron
I started this project about 3 weeks ago. On 11/29 we had one of our highest traffic days, with 1017 hits coming from Google. On 11/30, 257 hits came from Google, and on 12/1, 3 (three!!) hits came from Google. At this point, 82 of 89 posts have a double green "Good" score in Yoast; 6 are "OK" and 1 does not have a focus keyword designated. Thanks in advance for any help anyone can provide. -John0 -
Surge in spammy links
Hi, Our website www.foodjet.com has recently seen a huge amount of spammy incoming links to non-exisiting URLS: They all target pages that lead to a 404 and which clearly do not exist on our website. Since they have started to appear our DA has plummeted. I have already disavowed some domains, but more re-appear just as fast. I have also checked if our site has been hacked, which does not seem to be the case. What am I missing? And/or what can I do?
Technical SEO | | FoodJEt0 -
Canonical Tags for Legacy Duplicate Content
I've got a lot of duplicate pages, especially products, and some are new but most have been like this for a long time; up to several years. Does it makes sense to use a canonical tag pointing to one master page for each product. Each page is slightly different with a different feature and includes maybe a sentence or two that is unique but everything else is the same.
Technical SEO | | AmberHanson0 -
Weird Google indexing issues with www being forced
IM working on a site which is really not indexing as it should, I have created a sitemap.xml which I thought would fix the issue but it hasn't, what seems to be happening is the Google is making www pages canonical for some of the site and without www for the rest. the site should be without www. see images attached for a visual explanation.
Technical SEO | | Donsimong
when adding pages in Google search console without www some pages cannot be indexed as Google thinks the www version is canonical, and I have no idea why, there is no canonical set up at all, what I would do if I could is to add canonical tags to each page to pint to the non www version, but the CMA does not allow for canonical. not quite sure how to proceed, how to tell google that the non www version is in fact correct, I dont have any idea why its assuming www is canonical either??? k11cGAv zOuwMxv0 -
Redirect Chain Issue
I just found I'm having a redirect chain issue for http://ifixappliancesla.com (301 Moved Permanently). According to Moz, "Your page is redirecting to a page that is redirecting to a page that is redirecting to a page... and so on" These are the pages involved: 301 Moved Permanently
Technical SEO | | VELV
http://ifixappliancesla.com
https://ifixappliancesla.com https://www.ifixappliancesla.com/ This is what Yoast support told me: "The redirect adds the https and then the www, ending at: https://www.ifixappliancesla.com/. You want all variants of your site's domain to end up at: https://www.ifixappliancesla.com/ " - which is totally true. But I would also like not to have the redirect chain issue! Could you please give me an advise on how to properly redirect my pages so I don't have that issue anymore?0