Optimal number of meta keywords

What is generally the maximum recomended length....when is it generally thought that the Crawler will start getting "bored" (if at all)?

I mean we all want to get our pages in all of the relevant categories but we cant just take the aardvark through to zebra approach. I am just getting paranoid that certain pages I have to work with have too many.

Its just to give the topic of the page, no more, no less, do not even consider spamming it. It would give you no benefit and could even hurt you.

0 or 100 makes no difference to the search engines.

With a length of 0 you waste less time on a point less act than you do with a length of 100.

If have made the decision to stop include meta data on my sites. I has not effected rankings at all. It less wasted code on a page IMO.

Conjecture, or just rhetoric?

simply adding meta keywords to your site will not raise you any positions. It will not offer keyword boosts to even the longest tails or misspellings. Search engines just dont read them

I'd say it helps the range of the site...it helps it get categorised and appear for a wider array of terms. It mightn't be the most important part of an SEO campaign but I'd never ignore it.

yes but in some way,, it can..ive done this to my site.. so i think.. it can be a good help...

Can you prove, or maybe, cite any credible sources to back this?










Didn't think so.

What does that actually mean?



How EXACTLY? Surely if this is the case you can explain in detail your vast observations [that are not atttributed to other variables]



The problem isn't that you do it or use it... you can pick your nose if you think it helps get you ranked... but advising others to do so based only on "I do it"... isn't useful advice.

...what more... just because you never ignore them - do search engines take their cues from you?

Google calls up: "RoyalBlueStuey we need some ranking tips to base our algorithms on... can you help?"

...smart like rock, thick like tree!

Here is a suggestion for a great use for key word tags...
Adding key words is a great way to practice your typing and spelling skills. Add 100 keywords to one of your pages. Time it. Then add 100 to the next page and time that. Keep a score. You could even graph it to show your progress. After hundreds of pages you should see some great progress in your typing speed.

addition:

And now remove them all

I've seen sites rank for terms that were only in my meta data. More specifically it helped cross reference the main information the page contained with locations contained in the mata data. I didn't say "It helped me achieve position one for the keyword 'Internet' within 2 days"

No need to get all precious & bitchy about it. Title tags & meta data are good practice....what's the big deal?

I have seen sites rank for obscure terms with no meta data. The thing is you cant, unless you provide examples attribute the rankings to meta keywords desc or whatever...

<title>tags are very important!</title>

other meta data is not. People who really do SEO get very perturbed because it seems that when most people start with SEO or get a pitch from an SEO company the first thing they always focus on is META KEYWORDS and DESCRIPTIONS. A useless practice...

The big deal is that it fosters a MYTH that you need to put meta tags on your sites (or even that they help a little), in other words it further encourages people to focus on "methods" which produce no results thereby hurting our industry as a whole.

No matter the extremes either way there is no way to prove taht results are because of meta tags and if you remove them you wont drop a slot for your keywords...

I have too; back in the late 90s.

The big deal is that posts like: Make no sense and are just pure misinformation. I didn't give you -ve rep on the post (not that it matters, but) because I know you probably haven't done a lot of research on the topic, and are posting based only on your misconceptions.

So if I'm not using meta keywords, my pages are going to rank for a smaller range of keywords, is that what you're saying?