18 Meta Tags Every Webpage Should Have in 2013

The definitive guide to Search and Social Meta Tags you should be using in 2013. No fluff, no wasted code, just what you need to use.

Let’s get back to basics. If I’m to be honest, flashbacks of arguments with copywriters in ad agencies turn me off to the discussion of metadata. However the reality of the situation is that as Search and Social continue to rapidly converge, it is us SEOs that are left to pick up the technical end of the stick and metadata continues to land on our plate.

The most important function of metadata is not the ability to influence rankings, but its ability to encourage your content to make the best first impression possible. The Big 3 social networks all allow marketers the ability to provide metadata specific to the channel and therein lies the opportunity to provided titles, descriptions and pictures that resonate directly with audience in a given channel.

Adoption of New Metadata

The Common Crawl, which is an incredible resource that all SEOs should be at least mindful of, has developed a microsite called the Web Data Commons where they identify trends extracted from the Common Crawl corpus. Schema.org, the new vocabulary that search engines have forced us to learn without providing too much immediate benefit, appeared in 43.05% of the 1,811,471,956 typed entities that appeared in the 3,005,629,093 URLs on the 40,600,000 domains that make up the August 2012 Common Crawl Corpus. As you might imagine the highest occurring microformat types being used are by far VideoObject (Schema.org) and Breadcrumb (RDFa). This makes complete sense because those are the two that have the most direct value in the SERPs.

When compared to the 2010 Corpus, RDFa was of course the most popular, but in 2012 Schema.org came with a vengeance quickly closing the gap. You might think it more reasonable to use RDFa rather than Schema.org, but with the search engines pushing it you can expect a higher reward from Schema.org. So it’s a good time to embrace it.

Now on to the list!

The Usual Searchspects

While Google keeps messing around with our tried and true understanding of the title and meta description they are still the most important meta tags for an SEO to prepare. Obviously, the on-page content is key, but if we can’t get them to click through then what is the point? In an upcoming post on the Poetry of SEO, Devin Asaro will talk about how to approach this copy so that it is engaging and elegant and mimics ad copy. For the time being let’s just dive into the usual searchspects.

  1. Page Title
    Long regarded as the most important on-page factor, the title tag has recently taken a lot of scrutiny. A recent post has determined that page titles aren’t limited to 70 characters, but rather pixel-width. Also a little further back Cyrus Shepard tested titles longer than 70 characters to see what Google would do. In the wild I’ve seen extremely long titles are oftentimes chopped down or rewritten algorithmically to display the most relevant text to a query.

    Unless you want to measure the pixel-width of your titles and hope that Google shows the right thing, your best bet is to make page titles as keyword-relevant as possible and up to 70 characters. I honestly can’t think of a case where I’ve left something up to Google and they did a better job than I thought I could.


    <title>Up to 70 Characters of Keyword-relevant text here</title>

  2. Meta Description – If your webpage were a commercial, this would be its slogan. In our upcoming search behavior study in cooperation with SurveyMonkey we’ve found that 43.2% of people click on a given result due to the meta description. Gone are the days of meta descriptions that listed keywords and just said the “Official site of…” and the main purpose of this text is to draw the user in, let them know what to expect if they click and convince them to do so with a strong call to action. The kicker is you get 155 characters to make it happen; think of it as like writing a tweet, but with 15 extra characters.


    <meta name=”description” content=”155 characters of message matching text with a call to action goes here”>

  3. Authorship Markup – As I predicted at SearchLove NYC in November 2011, and has been verified by Eric Schmidt, Google is going to rank content that is connected to authors that they deem to be reliable sources over content that is not. A cool visible incentive is that you get name and your pretty picture in the SERPs if you’re an author.

    If you’re a publisher your posts start appearing in the right rail of the SERPs.

Now let’s look at the metatags that make the magic happen!

  • Rel-Author– This is a meta tag that can be implemented that specifies who the author of a piece of content is and uses Google+ to identify them. Initially Google rolled this out as just a tag that you place in the <head> of the code, but ultimately they would realize it’s not realistic that authors will have that type of control over the page and expanded to a more modular form.Format:For the version that goes in the <head> tag, you use the following:
    <link rel=”author” href=”https://plus.google.com/[YOUR PERSONAL G+ PROFILE HERE]”/>

    For the more modular version you would emulate XFN’s rel-me and place the link directly on the page. I’ve got to admit this is a great link building strategy.

    <a href=”[profile_url]?rel=author”>Google</a>

    If you use this method you will have to take the second step in verification by linking to your content from your Google+ profile. For more information see Google’s explanation.

  • Rel-Me – Rel-me is just the XFNversion of rel-author. You simply place the meta tag on a link back to your Google+ profile.Format:

    <a href=”https://plus.google.com/[YOUR PERSONAL G+ PROFILE NUMBER]” rel=”me”>Me on Google+</a>

  • Rel-Publisher –Rel-publisher is for business entities to claim ownership of their content. This can be used in context with rel-author or in place of it, but you should be pointing to a business profile on Google+ rather than an individuals.Format:<link rel=”publisher” href=”https://plus.google.com/[YOUR BUSINESS G+ PROFILE HERE]”/>

Don’t be late to the authorship markup party as it would not be surprising to see Google wipe out the visibility of content simply because there are no verifiable authors connected to it.

Social Meta Tags

Social Media is obviously a great place for content discovery, but oftentimes the meta data created for Search is not enough to encourage people to click through therefore it is best to use the meta tags each social platform provides. These metatags are not about keyword stuffing at all, but rather grabbing people’s attention and getting them to click. We all know that the users of Google+ are primarily tech people, users on Facebook are busy stalking their ex-girlfriends and Twitter users are bombarded with timelines moving at the speed of thought. Let’s talk about the channel-specific metadata options.

OpenGraph tags

Facebook’s OpenGraph allows you to specify metadata to optimize how your content appears in a user’s timeline. The added benefit of using this data is that by creating an “Edge” in Facebook you can obtain some fantastic data about the users checking out your content via Facebook Insights. If you don’t use Open Graph tags Facebook will default to standard metadata.

  1. og:title –This is the title of the piece of content. You should use this as a headline that will appeal to the Facebook audience. It is completely ok to use a different title than the one on the actual site as long as the message is ultimately the same. You have 95 characters to work with.Format:
    <meta property=”og:title” content=”iAcquire’s awesome blog”/>
  2. og:type – This is the type of object your piece of content is. For your purposes it will usually be blog, website or article, but if you want to get fancy Facebook provides a complete list.Format:
    <meta property=”og:type” content=”article”/>
  3. og:image –This is the image that Facebook will show in the screenshot of the content. Be sure to specify a square image to ensure the best visibility in a user’s timeline. If you don’t specify an image at all you are left to the mercy of the user to pick which image represents your content based on what Facebook can scrape. That is typically not the way to ensure the best first impression.Format:
    <meta property=”og:image” content=”http://www.iacquire.com/some-thumbnail.jpg”/>

  4. og:url– This is simply the URL of the page (or edge). You should specify this especially if you have duplicate content issues to make sure the value of the edge in Facebook is consolidated into one URL.Format:
    <meta property=”og:url” content=”http://blog.iacquire.com”/>

  5. og:description –This is the description Facebook will show in the screenshot of the piece of content. Just like the standard meta description it should be catchy and contain a call to action, but in this case you have nearly twice the number of characters to work with. Make sure this too speaks to the Facebook audience. You have to 297 characters to make it happen.Format:

    <meta property=”og:description” content=”Stop hitting refresh on your ex-girlfriend’s Facebook page? You should check out the iAcquire blog and learn something instead”/>

  6. fb:admins – This metatag is critical for getting access to the wealth of data made available via Facebook Insights. You simply have to specify the Facebook User IDs in the metadata of those users you want to have access. For more information on Facebook Insights see the documentation.Format:
    <meta property=”fb:admins” content=”USER_ID”/>

Due to its overwhelming adoption, the other social networks will all default to Open Graph Meta tags if there are no other meta tags present. However, as I mentioned earlier in this discussion, to only prepare one set of metadata is to ignore the ability to speak to the different people in the different channels. Understanding that Google+ is mostly tech users, Facebook’s audience is far more varied and Twitter’s audience is often dealing with content flying by at the speed of thought – why not account for that with your metadata?

For more information see the Open Graph Protocol documentation.

Twitter Cards

Twitter Cards are simply Twitter’s answer to the Open Graph Protocol and you might have noticed them in the wild, but here’s a screenshot from Twitter’s documentation.

The added benefit is making your content stand out in the otherwise chaotic Twitter timeline and ultimately bringing back more people. Also, it has long been thought that many users will retweet an article without actually reading it, using Twitter Cards as advertisements will help facilitate resharing of content as well. Most of these tags mirror what you’ve just read about Facebook Open Graph so I’ll be brief.

  1. twitter:card– This is the card type. Your options are summary, photo or player. Twitter will default to “summary” if it is not specified.Format:
    <meta name=”twitter:card” content=”summary”>
  2. twitter:url– This is the URL of the content.Format:
    <meta name=”twitter:url” content=”http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/arts/music/amid-police-presence-fans-congregate-for-whitney-houstons-funeral-in-newark.html”>
  3. twitter:title–This is the title of the content to be shared and should be limited to 70 characters after which Twitter will truncate. Again, go for headlines instead of keywords.Format:
    <meta name=”twitter:title” content=”Parade of Fans for Houston’s Funeral”>
  4. twitter:description– This is the description of the content to be shared and should be limited to 200 characters after which Twitter will truncate. Again, go for engaging text, you have more opportunity here than the actual tweet does.Format:
    <meta name=”twitter:description” content=”NEWARK – The guest list and parade of limousines with celebrities emerging from them seemed more suited to a red carpet event in Hollywood or New York than than a gritty stretch of Sussex Avenue near the former site of the James M. Baxter Terrace public housing project here.”>
  5. twitter:image – This is the image that will be displayed on the Twitter Card and it should be a square image no smaller than 60×60 pixels.
    <meta name=”twitter:image” content=”http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/02/19/us/19whitney-span/19whitney-span-articleLarge.jpg”>

There are more optional twitter card meta tags such as site and creator which specify the twitter handles of the site and the author of responsible for the content, but they are not required for the content to make a good first impression so I have omitted them. For more information see the Twitter Card documentation.

Schema.Org (for Google+)

Until recently, I hadn’t realized that while Google+ will default to standard metadata or Facebook Open Graph tags, the platform also gives webmasters the ability to specify metadata specifically for Google+ using Schema.org. The beauty of it is since it’s Schema.org you can use it on nearly any HTML tag on content that is already on the page.

  1. Itemscope=”[pageType]” – where [pageType]is Article, Blog, Book, Event, LocalBusiness, Organization, Person, Product or Review.
  2. itemprop=”name”– This acts as the title attribute of the rich snippet and should be limited to 140 characters.
  3. itemprop=”description”– This is the description of the rich snippet and should be limited to 185 characters
  4. itemprop=”image” This is the image of the rich snippet with an optimal size is 180 x 120. Google+ will shrink this image, but if it is too small it will not be displayed.


While all the other types of metadata go in the <head> section of the code, this code will potentially live in various places throughout the website. Here’s an example (from Google) of how it could be employed.

Google+ looks for metadata in the following order: Schema.org > Facebook OpenGraph > Standard Metadata > Best Guess from Scraping. See the Google+ Snippet Documentation for more information.

So…where’s the Meta Keywords?

I must admit that the discussion of meta keywords is a pet peeve of mine that I rank up there with people saying “SEO Optimization” or “ATM Machines,” but since it comes up so often with clients I figured that it’s worth mentioning here. The Meta Keywords is of no positive value to any major Search Engine especially not Google (check the link out, they said it officially in 2009). Bing uses them to determine if you are spamming or not, but beyond that the only reason a page should have meta keywords is if the internal search engine requires them. If that’s the case however I would suggest you either consider a new Content Management System or lean on Google’s custom search, after all it’s free.

…And Rel-canonical?

Sure rel-canonical is incredibly important, but is only needed when you have duplicate content issues or you’re looking to move the link equity from one page to another. Therefore it’s not needed on every page on the web and if you’re a small part of the population that cares about Bing, they don’t really believe in it.

Some Parting Gifts (Bookmarklets)

Unfortunately, tools such as the Mozbar and Screaming Frog currently do not scrape for Social Metadata so I’ve developed some bookmarklets to help with the cause. Just drag the following links to your bookmark bar and you should be good to go. Wordpress is giving me troubles with the bookmarklets so just create a new bookmark and copy and paste the following code into the Location or URL field.

  • Open Graph Helper[code type=”javascript”]javascript: (function () { function d() { window.alert(“Sorry, the report is unable to run.”) } var a = document.createElement(“script”); a.setAttribute(“src”, “http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.6.2/jquery.min.js”); a.setAttribute(“id”, “iprReportQuery”); document.getElementsByTagName(“head”)[0].appendChild(a); var b = 0; var c = setInterval(function () { var a = document.getElementById(“iprReportQuery”); window.console.log(a); var e = typeof a == “undefined”; if (!e) { var f = jQuery.noConflict(true); var g = typeof f == “undefined”; window.console.log(f); if (!g) { clearInterval(c); window.console.log(“jQuery ” + f.fn.jquery + ” has been injected.”); f(document).ready(function (a) { var description = a(‘meta[property|=”og:description”]’).attr(‘content’) || ”; console.log(‘description is ‘ + description); var title = a(‘meta[property|=”og:title”]’).attr(‘content’) || ”; console.log(‘title is ‘ + title); var image = a(‘meta[property|=”og:image”]’).attr(‘content’) || ”; console.log(‘image is ‘ + image); var url = a(‘meta[property|=”og:url”]’).attr(‘content’) || ”; console.log(‘url is ‘ + url); var qStr = encodeURI( “description=” + description + “&title=” + title + “&image=” + image + “&url=” + url); var e = “http://www.ipullrank.com/tools/og-parse.php?” + qStr; window.console.log(e); var g = ‘
    Close This Window

    ‘; f(“body”).append(g); f(“#iprCloseMe”).bind(“click”, function () { f(“#reportWindow”).fadeOut(“slow”) }); f(“#reportWindow”).fadeIn(“slow”) }); return }++b; if (b == 10) { clearInterval(c); window.console.log(“Sorry, unable to inject jQuery now.”); d() } } }, 500) })()[/code]

  • Twitter Card Helper[code type=”javascript”] javascript: (function () { function d() { window.alert(“Sorry, the report is unable to run.”) } var a = document.createElement(“script”); a.setAttribute(“src”, “//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.8.3/jquery.min.js”); a.setAttribute(“id”, “iprReportQuery”); document.getElementsByTagName(“head”)[0].appendChild(a); var b = 0; var c = setInterval(function () { var a = document.getElementById(“iprReportQuery”); window.console.log(a); var e = typeof a == “undefined”; if (!e) { var f = jQuery.noConflict(true); var g = typeof f == “undefined”; window.console.log(f); if (!g) { clearInterval(c); window.console.log(“jQuery ” + f.fn.jquery + ” has been injected.”); f(document).ready(function (a) { var description = a(

Also you can use Google’s own Structured Data Testing Tool for checking your Schema.org data.

So, tell me, what do you think are the meta tags that no page can live without?

responses to “18 Meta Tags Every Webpage Should Have in 2013”

  1. Robert Lloyd says:

    Canonical should be used regardless, especially if you’re adding taking parameters to urls such as UTM.

    • Yehoshua Coren says:

      Rel canonical – yes, that’s right.

      However, in general if you’re using UTM parameters you should do it on a hash and then use _setAllowAnchor(true) as it is much cleaner for SEO.

      • Michael King says:

        So what you’re saying is the params can create potential duplicate content? Oh, ok. =]

        • Lyndon NA says:

          Yes, Parameters and Values are one of the biggest causes for internal duplication issues.

          index.php?param1=val1 & param2=val2 & param3=val3
          index.php?param2=val2 & param3=val3 & param1=val1
          index.php?param3=val3 & param1=val1 & param2=val2

          All would show the same page/content – but are different URLs.

          Throw in surplus/redundant params )(such as & theme=print, & track=123 etc.) and you can get a shed load of URLs for the same content.

          (It’s also a big contributor to things like Stub/Holding/Blank pages – devs really need to work out such things properly, 1) correct ordering or PV pairs, and rejection of non-relevant PVs).

          (Odd – using “& para” (without space) results in an ascii char (¶)?)

    • bmilleare says:

      I agree, but not because of UTM params. With some enterprise CMS Systems (see what I did there, Mike? :)) you might have duplication issues that you aren’t aware of yet, and that haven’t been crawled.

      All sorts of weird shit can happen in the wild and so properly configured canonicals can protect you to some extent.

    • Lyndon NA says:

      CLEs should be used regardless – because you don’t know what may be appended to a URL.
      There are various listing sites out there that tack on extra parameters/values – and can cause internal dupe issues.

      Further – you cannot rely on Devs/Programmers to handle Params properly.
      The chances are high that you can not only have the P/Vs in various orders/sequences, but irrelevant P/Vs can be added and the system will not scrub them from the URL.

  2. […] am off now to dissect this post about meta data from Mike King. Come tomorrow, my site should be all metaed […]

  3. Iwein Dekoninck says:

    Another important piece of metadata is a set of rel-alternate-hreflang links. Obviously only relevant in a multi-lingual and/or multi-region setting.

  4. Lyndon NA says:

    Meta Keywords…
    Unfortunately – G “may” still use them – just not in direct/obvious ways.
    Apparently – they may still use them for association/identification of relevancy.
    (No positive ranking influence, more to do with discovery?)

    Before I was told that – I was under the same impression.

    • Woj Kwasi says:

      Also, don’t forget news_keywords to help in Google News if you’re a publisher

    • Jason Diller says:

      not right.

      google doesnt use meta keywords anymore…for anything.

      waste of time

      • Lyndon NA says:

        Okay – I’ll play the Joker card … Last time you spoke to a Googler or ExGoogler was ….when Jason Diller?

        This came direct from someone at/from Google.
        (There are also theories that G may use Keywords for anti-spam methods, but this is yet to be confirmed)

        • Jason Diller says:

          eh, you’re right. I have never spoke to a Googler.

          Well played

          • Joe Griffin says:

            i just pasted a URL above that validates your position and publicly states that they do not use it – this came out more than 3-years ago. They do use the meta keywords news tag which is totally different meta type.

          • Lyndon NA says:

            @Joe Griffin : They do Not use the Meta Keyword tag for Direct Ranking influence.I know, and I’ve been telling people that for years.
            That is not the same as G saying they do not use it at all, or for non-ranking.Further, as I said, I’ve had someone from G tell me that G may opt to use the contents to identify associated terms etc.

            @Jason Diller : 😀

          • I agree. Just because Google says they’re not using it for raking purposes doesn’t mean they’re no using it for something else or that they can’t change their mind and start using it in the future (unlikely imo, but still possible). In fact, just because Google says they’re not doing something doesn’t mean they’re not doing it. It simply means they *say* they’re not doing it.

          • Steve says:

            I think it’s pretty clear based on Matt’s comments:

            “In those days, keyword meta tags quickly became an area where someone could stuff often-irrelevant keywords without typical visitors ever seeing those keywords. Because the keywords meta tag was so often abused, many years ago Google began disregarding the keywords meta tag.”

            “Google has ignored the keywords meta tag for years and currently we see no need to change that policy.”

            The two keywords I see there are: disregarding and ignored

            Disregard: pay no attention to; ignore.

            Ignore: refuse to take notice of or acknowledge; disregard intentionally.

  5. ATM machines….I still do that

  6. […] 18 Meta Tags Every Webpage Should Have in 2013, iAcquire Blog […]

  7. […] 18 Meta Tags Every Webpage Should Have in 2013, iAcquire Blog […]

  8. Rank Watch says:

    Liked the way you have described the meta keywords usage which is so very true. The new meta news_keywords tag still holds the key in only helping the news articles rank for the news (publishers) on Google news and other relevant Google properties. But every search engines have stopped using meta keywords as a relevancy or a ranking signal.

  9. […] 18 Meta Tags Every Webpage Should Have in 2013 (iacquire.com) […]

  10. Dean Wilson says:

    Hi Mike, thanks for this. You said “Don’t be late to the authorship markup party as it would not be surprising to see Google wipe out the visibility of content simply
    because there are no verifiable authors connected to it.” Do you think therefore guest posting will become somewhat obsolete as we can’t be verified on other sites?

    • Michael King says:

      Nope, you can be verified with the 2-step process of linking to G+ profile and then adding the site you wrote on to your G+ profile.

  11. Rel=canonical regardless! best practice whether the site has duplicate content problems or not.

  12. Awesome article! Thanks a lot 🙂

  13. […] you can also do advanced meta mark up these days too for more social networks a good post here: 18 Meta Tags Every Webpage Should Have in 2013 | iAcquire Blog also check the links chris posted up. James Norquay Blog|ProfessionalSEO.com.au | […]

  14. […] So…where’s the Meta Keywords – 18 Meta Tags Every Webpage Should Have in 2013 – … […]

  15. […] 18 Meta Tags Every Webpage Should Have in 2013 – iAcquire […]

  16. […] 18 Meta Tags Every Webpage Should Have in 2013 (iacquire.com) Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:Like Loading… Tags: All-In-One SEO, free seo, free seo tips, free seo tool, Google, PageRank, Promotion, search engine optimization, seo, seo tips, SEO Title Tag, Web search engine Top Posts & PagesSteps to follow for onpage optimization […]

  17. DavidJLenehan says:

    What about rel=’next’? Useful for e-commerce sites.

  18. edoceo says:

    Tools on SEO Sorcerer (seosorcerer.com) can provide checks for OpenGraph, Twitter and those other meta tags

  19. bencomp says:

    You’re confusing “Schema.org” with “microdata”. Schema.org is the vocabulary and can be used with RDFa just as well. And vice versa, microdata can be used with other vocabularies.

  20. So would any 1 be able to give a quick 1 -2 – 3 if I wanna obtain about 100 followers?

  21. Erik Nielsen says:

    Awesome list. I’ve added this, and other tags, to a markdown file on github. Fork it if you want to add more.


  22. James Dy says:

    Great post. Very detailed information containing all of what the meta tags I really needed for my site. Good Job! I tested it on http://ampotech.blogspot.com/

  23. Tawee says:

    great post, Will have to adapt with http://www.bigdealthailand.com

  24. Your article is way too detailed for me. My site is http://howbees.com, it is about how to do things. Can you specify which keywords should I use? All it have tutorials, guides etc. Any specific help would be highly appreciated.

  25. puAction says:

    Wow! Absolutely great stuff! Some of those meta tags would appear in my website for sure… because of you… 🙂 Thanks !


  26. AdamsEdge Marketing says:

    This is great info and I love that it is so current. The social media info I have not seen elsewhere. Thanks so much! I’m looking forward to using this info!


  27. Vipul Makwana says:

    Its really awesome post….. I got too much new useful things to learn…. 🙂

  28. Meta Tags are very important part of a website to get proper visibility in search engines. It helps the crawlers to identify the page properly with the help of meta tags.

    Thanks ipullrank for the wonderful post. This post helps every one to understand why meta tags are an important factor.

  29. Editors says:

    Thank you. We were lacking twitter meta tags. Got them today…. http://www.blueplanetjournal.com

  30. Arun Trikha says:

    I am just new blogger but I think this artcle will help.

  31. timesate says:

    thnx for posting this is really great http://www.clinicme.com

  32. Manaday Mavani says:

    Very nice post mate! However, could you please elaborate how to embed itemscope properties in Blogger templates?? I am getting error for this line of code while adding the same properties to the blogger template’s html tag.

  33. wpsuperplugins says:

    Nice post! 🙂

  34. Most Search Engines doesn’t give now importance to keywords. But what about the Youtube? I found meta keywords in their video source page.

    • Steve says:

      Just because a page has meta keywords doesn’t mean it’s doing anything. Some SEOs/webmasters will include meta keywords on all their pages “just in case something changes in the future” or “maybe there is a meta search engine that still uses them.”

  35. saurav jain says:

    something new and interesting that is not present on other blogs .
    good job 🙂


  36. Loek Bergman says:

    Great article! I liked already microformats, but those social media tags can be really helpful pointing out for who the content should be interesting and meaningful. Two questions though. You do not have the meta-tag description in your header, but the version of Google+. Is that good enough for other search engines? Secondly: why do you have a canonical in your header? You have no duplicate content.

  37. jyoti says:

    tnanks. but what you have to say as google+ link what it is benefical for an tour site

  38. Techo3 says:

    We tried to integrate facebook with our blog, but we are facing many problems in doing so. Like button is not displaying right information after clicking on it. Sometimes it asks to confirm like. Please help us sir.

    Also we tried to include Facebook meta tags you mentioned above. But an error is occuring ” Open quote is expected for attribute “property” associated with an element type “meta”.”. Please do help us.

  39. Are there any WP plug-ins that do the Twitter card meta data for you?

  40. So Keywords Meta Tag has no value, then why do I still see sites with a absolutely horrible content presence appear top with the keywords all crammed into the keywords meta tag?

  41. Shawn Raloff says:

    Thank you!

  42. Neil Coleclough says:

    Thanks for a great article. Helping to improve tooltrolley.co.uk!

  43. Neil Coleclough says:

    Also helping with http://www.gedoretools.co.uk

  44. BestVN says:

    thanks, you visit http://bestvn.org

  45. nice and beautifully helpful

  46. nice article………………

  47. Great article …Thanks for your great information

  48. Thank you very much my friend.

  49. Thanks! Every bit of SEO knowledge helps!
    Ill be removing my keywords from all my pages. I did wonder if engines used them and I figured recently that they may be using them to see what people are targeting and if they spam based on it.. I suspect its best to remove them ( like you said )

    Thanks again!

    Anything to help rank our Live chat software higher the better!

  50. Activ Hub- China Digital Intel says:

    Just to add a bit more petrol to the already contentious KEYWORDS debate.
    For what it is worth BAIDU, still uses keywords, or at least did in one of their releases a few months back. So if you are marketing in China, add the Meta Keyword tag, Baidu says no more than 100 Characters though.. [in Chinese of course]. :>

  51. Jon R says:

    Not only Baidu (China) places greater emphasis on keywords, but also Naver (Korea) and Yandex (Russia). If you are marketing beyond the wide reach of Google it is still important to have meta keywords in your pages.

  52. Sidney Allen says:

    Great article about metatags – it’s a funny topic that people seem to cover in pieces but this is the first article I’ve found that puts it all together. It will be quite interesting to see how the next round of G updates changes things – they do seem to love the author relationship tags a lot lately – helped me a lot at http://www.persontopersonloans.org.

  53. 18 Meta Tags Every Webpage Should Have in 2013 : thanks for the information…

  54. Liz Madeley says:

    I know what you mean about people saying “ATM Machines”…”PIN number” is another one 🙂

  55. Steve Sharp says:

    Do you recommend meta tags on every page? What about ‘thank you’ pages?

  56. SMG Designs says:

    What would you recommend for one page responsive websites in terms of SEO? Does
    having a one page website affect my overall SEO performance?

  57. Very good stuff @mikek

  58. Ryan Bradley says:

    Great article Mike, but I think the canonical link part is a little misleading, unintentionally I’m sure. Duplicate content is more than just 301’s like Bing suggests, because a lot of duplicate content you can’t 301 because it’s dealing with the same URL. For example: urls with #, ?, etc. in them can cause duplicate content issues and only a canonical URL’s can properly deal with them. However I do agree that if you’re doing a canonical instead of 301’ing a page, than that is not good practice.

  59. Pierre B says:

    Great article Mikek, you put me into a new world of Metas :-p

    My 2 cents : I’ve been digging the Twitter card a bit, and there’s a lot more you can do with them. Make sure to have a look at their documentation for some fine tuning : https://dev.twitter.com/docs/cards

  60. Schnitzelboy says:

    Very nice. Reading this article reinforces old habits. But in light of all the algo updates Google has pushed on us in 2013 after your article was pubed, how much still applies or need to be refined.

  61. awesome info, thank you!

  62. Spook SEO says:

    Meta tags are indeed still one of the most important SEO ingredients, I appreciate your hard work of putting them all together in this one helpful post.

  63. Shaify says:

    Very informative, Thank you.

  64. Nice article, well written!
    Thanks for settling down the debate around Social meta × obsolete Keywords.

  65. ahmed miski says:

    Thanks for useful information

  66. Алексей Калошин says:

    Thinks, userful information about google

  67. Gary Watson says:

    Great article, very helpful

  68. GB Jenkins says:

    Brilliant piece – good SEO as well (this is exactly what I was looking for). I’ve bookmarked and will be sharing this with colleagues.

    The insight into the Facebook Insights tag is particularly appreciated.

  69. itechaleart says:

    Good information.. learn something today… feeling happy ty author.

  70. Jay says:

    I’m skeptical about the “meta keywords” issue. A client I have worked with has a website without this tag, but all of its competitors – who appear at the top of Google results – have the meta keywords tag with keywords. Perhaps this is a coincidence, or Google isn’t telling us something?

    • Hi Jay – the really great thing about Meta Keywords on the competitors site is that you can go an see what they think are important for their business. Other than that, Google and the other major search engines do not even look at them and Google announced that officially back in 2009. If the competitors are higher placed it will be because of other factors – linking from other sites being probably the main one, but also page content and so on.

  71. مهدی پیشگوی says:

    thats very nice article. thanks sir

  72. Great article! Particularly the section on Social Meta Tags … not something you hear about often.

  73. penworks says:

    Dude, great page! Do you have any opinion on stuff like Dublin Core, or it is all pants?

  74. Anrich Brummer says:

    Great post, I love the detail and the write up. One thing I wasn’t sure about was your point that Bing does not care about rel=canonical. The article you linked to is more about redirecting properly using 301’s and not rel=canonical, its not suggesting bing does not care about rel=canonical tags.

  75. Ravi Kumar says:

    Thanks for this information.

  76. Suraj Rai says:

    Mike good list of meta tags. I am going to use tags that I missed earlier.

  77. Alice Lafox says:

    thank you

  78. Paul Malessa says:

    Two thumbs up!

  79. Nice work here!

  80. Mayuraa Sivalingham says:

    Thanks Mike, it’s very helpful.

  81. Eric L. Smith says:

    Thank Mike. Great info!

  82. Khrisna Gunanasurya says:

    Thanks for the info mike ! great blog you have here. it helps a lots of people

  83. Vikash singh says:

    Thanks mike for gr8t post

  84. Thanks for the Post 🙂

  85. ketul says:

    Thank you so much for great advice about different types of meta tag and how it works.

  86. Jason says:

    Nice post. One thing though, when I copy and paste some of your examples such as the meta “description”. The double quotes get pasted as a fancy version and not the correct ASCII value for an HTML double quote. I know it’s to make it look nicer (and it certainly does), but it might mess some people up. I caught it right away out of luck, but I could see this as being a very hard-to-find bug for some people since the quotes are barely distinguishable.

  87. johnwboyd says:

    Do you need to put in a different description for meta description, og description etc?

    • αmjαth says:

      Facebook shows your SERPs meta description and page title when OG is not available. On the other hand Google+ only shows the title while Twitter will not show anything other than the URL.

      Also you should remember that the character limit is different between the SERPs meta description and Twitter/Facebook. You should utilize the extra character limits by adding more engaging words.

      You should have one description for SERPs where the character limit should be between 142-148 whereas for Twitter & Facebook 200 character long.

      So, obviously there will be two meta descriptions on each of your page; one for SERPs and another for FB, Twitter and Google+. Because both Twitter and Google+ respects OG and use them as fallback.

  88. Alex Summers says:

    Hey Mike, thanks for this 🙂 I know the article is a bit old, but it’s very useful. You think you might do an update for the coming 2015 changes?

  89. Louis Otto says:

    Good news everyone! I made a tool to speed up meta tag generation because I was tired of doing it for every single project I worked on, you can freely use it here: http://www.groovymeta.com

    It includes social tags for Facebook, Twitter and Google+ so there’s no need to go off to loads of different sites to acquire the right tags and formats, it’s all done for you already 🙂

  90. Celeste says:

    Thanks for the detailed, well researched informative post. Any suggestions how to use og when you have dynamic content?

  91. Amazing content. Thanks Mike.

  92. Lauren Shildmyer says:

    Does anyone have any insight into the ability to manipulate the auto-description on a Google+ page given by Google? For example if you go to the Habit Burger El Segundo Google+ page there is a description supplied by Google: “Charbroiled burgers star at this fast-food chain also offering deli-type sandwiches, salads & fries.” This description is separate from the tagline and intro I supplied. Do metadata descriptions play into this or is there no way to change or influence this specific description/tag? Any thought or insights appreciated!

    • Hi Lauren,

      I’m not sure why you aren’t able to change that. I assume it’s being pulled from a combination of the information you supplied and reviews left about the business. Are you positive that wasn’t written somewhere on the website at some point? It is likely that the tag itself doesn’t play a part in the ranking of your website or the page, but merely serves as a point of reference for a visitor. Hope that helps in some way!

  93. Authorship has no relevance in Google search rankings anymore.

  94. James Hobson says:

    A bit of a side road but it’s wise to use Google Tag Manager to affect lower page load times. All your pages need are a small bit of script provided via Tags Manager. If you’re going to go in and manage the you should take time to add this also. (Notes that this script does not go inside the head, but just outside.)

  95. John Allred says:

    Wow. Nice information. This is totally new to me. Really a great job you have performed in this blog. Thanks for sharing with us.

  96. Golden Age says:

    Wow. Nice info. This can be wholly unaccustomed Maine. extremely an excellent job you’ve got performed during this web
    log. Thanks for sharing with us.

  97. Chennai Dental Centre says:

    welcome to Chennai’s Best Dental clinic with Chennai’s best dentist as consultants treating all dental problem. The dental Hospital Provides root canal treatment,implant dentistry,crown fixing,orthodontics,endodontics,child dental care,elderly dental care ,laser dental treatments,sedation dentistry,microscope dentistry and all maxillo facial surgical cases like trauma etc.hbi

  98. Good interesting article, still learning about SEO and clearly not there yet but information like this makes a difference

  99. pixelFLYTE says:

    Interesting article, but as I understand it Google has discontinued using authorship markup.

  100. very good thanks Mike

  101. Hi Mike, great article but needs to be updated. Because some of them already outdated such as authorship etc…

  102. SEO is like an arms race!

  103. Miq Moham says:

    Good information. You can generate meta tags free using this tool www(.)claimseo(.)com/meta-tags-generator

  104. Glory Fred says:


    Hello my name is GLORY FRED from USA, My life is back!!! After 8 years of marriage, my husband left me and left me with our three kids. I felt like my life was about to end, and was falling apart. I contacted you and after I explained you my problem. In just 3 days, my husband came back to us and show me and my kids much love and apologize for all the pain he have bring to the family. We solaed our issues, and we are even happier than before you are the best spell caster Dr OGUMEN i really appreciate the love spell you castes for me to get the man back to my life i will keep sharing more testimonies to people about your good work Thank you once again at (ogumensolutioncenter@yahoo.com ). in case you are in any problem you can contact this man for help he is always there in his temple to help you solve your problem Contact Email is (ogumensolutioncenter@yahoo.com ).,,,

  105. I’m a huge fan of bookmarklets, but the ones above don’t seem to be working. Maybe try pastebin if WordPress is mangling the code?

  106. Zach Painter says:

    Good article but this site’s navigation header is terrible…

  107. Prabha Yadav says:

    Really very Useful post for meta tags update.

  108. wael arawy says:

    How to add Meta code to blogger

  109. MR Right says:

    My question to Mike and everyone on the comment section is this. Do you place meta tags only on the main or front page or all the webpage for your website??????

  110. syd shah says:

    Really helpful, thank you.. Do anyone know tutorial video for this meta tags? how is this working.

  111. Dr.Varun says:

    Meta keyword tag cannot be set, and it’s totally incorrect to say its of no value. Indeed it’s one of the moat critical part in getting better serp. Google sets meta tag=keywords by reading your page and getting keywords automatically which repeated the most. Repetition of words is hypothetical though, but thats what i see.

  112. Santosh Kuttuwa says:

    thankyou , That was a nice list of important meta tags

  113. DubaiPoster says:

    so if you want a real rich snippets results in serps then you have to learn all about og meta tags or structured markup language.

  114. I Completely agree with this post…………..Nice and informative for me prospective.

    Thanks for sharing this with us

  115. Exactly, what I m looking for.. really helpful article.Thanks for sharing!

  116. TechBeamers says:

    So many comments, I decided to add mine. 🙂 I think what you’ve mentioned in your post, many of the plugin developers took notes and used the concepts in their plugins. Whatever you elaborated is quite pertinent in the current context. I would’ve to say that Blogging is alive because of the enriched content as the one you’ve published.

    Great work!

  117. Arpana Phillip says:

    can you pl suggest what tags are required in 2016 as this blog is from 2013

  118. may be now this is important. It changes the color of tab in chrome

  119. zorexbrother says:

    its really help me…cheers

  120. UMESH SHEJOLE says:

    Very Useful info shared……

  121. Soham Kamani says:

    Very useful post! Thanks 🙂
    Although, it would be useful for copy-pasters such as my self if quotes on the html tags could be changed from ” to “

  122. Emre G. says:

    Mayk Aslanım benim! çok güzel olmuş.. Adamsın adam..

  123. tenoch89 says:

    You forget the meta viewport tag. In the world of responsive design, this can be very very very important and most sites today are responsive. I know this is a 3 year old article, but responsive design was around then and is here to stay.

  124. Muhammad Penisulillah says:

    You nigger. You are better off picking cotton.