Testing the new arsenkin.ru tool – “Selection of the semantic core for the site and URL”

Testing the new arsenkin.ru tool – “Selection of the semantic core for the site and URL”

In November, a new tool “Selection of a semantic core for a site and URL” from Sasha Arsenkin’s service arsenkin.ru was released to the public. I participated in active UX/UI testing as a user of the service.

*At the time of publication of this conclusion about testing the service, most of the bugs have already been fixed.

I will not describe the service itself, in short, it is not an expensive analogue of Keys.so for collecting semantics.

Conclusion

  • Spent limits 3600, which is equal to 12 calls to the tool.

  • Non-obvious work results and interface solutions of the tool are defined.

  • As of November 2023, this is one of the most useful, affordable and budget-friendly tools for collecting semantics from a ready-made database, provided that the cost of tariffs does not change with the release of this tool to the public.

When testing the tool, a total of 3.6 thousand limits were spent.

The purpose of the project is to describe the problem

  1. Test the operation of the semantic core collection tool.

  2. TSA: business, marketing, SEO specialists. Identify non-obvious results, problems, describe the algorithm for finding such artifacts.

Job task:

Wednesday

Browsers: Opera One (version: 103.0.4928.34), Microsoft Edge Version 118.0.2088.57

Sites for which the test was conducted: https://onkostrahovanie.ru, https://www.rosagroleasing.ru/, https://studyspain.eu, https://gameofhabits.ru

Setting tasks

Tool: Semantics for Domain.

In addition to the default “Remove porn requests from the semantic core” and “Remove implicit duplicates” options:

  • Requests are in the TOP = 50

  • Delete phrases if [!WS] below = 5

The operation of the tool is adjusted to the task through additional settings.

Do – testing

When inserting several URLs, the process of gathering semantics is started – the expected result is a warning to the user to change the URL to domains, or automatic “trimming” of the URL to the domain name.

Semantics collection is triggered by multiple URLs, not domains. A warning about replacing URLs with domains is required.

Conclusion:

Starts the process of gathering semantics from multiple URLs instead of domains

Decision:

Make a warning to the user to change the URL to domains, or automatic “trimming” of the URL to the domain name

URL: https://journal.open-broker.ru/strahovanie/strahovaya-zashita-ot-onkologii/

Conclusion:

not “friendly” names of semantics download files, provided that the selection is more than one domain and different GEO and search engine

Decision:

name the download file by domain, for example, as in a similar service: “rosagroleasing.ru.organic.keys.msk.csv”

The upload test was performed on a domain with good search visibility.

Check results

The number of key phrases declared: 5542 pcs.

As a result, the service found 5542 phrases. Downloading is possible in xlsx or csv format (two types of encoding). The download was made in xlsx.

Unloading – number of key phrases: 5002 pcs. – 540 phrases were lost.

There are fewer phrases in unloading than in the verification results: a difference of 540 phrases.

The same check with minus words

Checked with “minus words”.

The results of checking and uploading did not distinguish “minus words”, the expected result – semantics without specified “minus words”.

The result exactly coincided with that without the added “minus words”.

Conclusion:

xlsx does not download all the declared phrases

“minus words” are not filtered

Decision:

backend analysis is required

The tool was tested on a domain with a high % of requests in the TOP-10 Google (Moscow) with additional options.

During the work of the body, the task hung.

The tool “hangs” when entering additional parameters.

Similar selection without specifying additional parameters

  • Requests are in the TOP = 50

  • Delete phrases if [!WS] below = 5

worked as expected with full keyword loading.

At the output, 2138 phrases were obtained, which corresponds to the expected volume of semantics.

Conclusion:

in the process of working with additional parameters, the process froze

Decision:

backend analysis is required

The Yandex (Moscow) check was carried out on the same domain with a high % of requests in the TOP.

The result is not obvious – semantics are expected in the “Key phrase” field, but there are no “keys” in the unloading.

In the “Keyphrase” field of the download file, numbers instead of keys.

the expected result from the screenshot of the service below

This is what the domain download should look like.

Conclusion:

xlsx downloads data without key phrases

Decision:

backend analysis is required

  • Tool: Semantics for Domain. Not an obvious result for young or unoptimized domains/sites.

Add a tool tip/info block to the first screen explaining in which case the result declared by the tool should be expected. The information in the lower screen is not visible and does not emphasize the features of the tool, it is necessary to highlight the key points in “bold” font, or move the description to the first screen below.

“The main task of the tool is to collect a semantic core for a site or page using a ready-made database of key phrases. If you have a low visibility site or a new site, offload a competitor’s semantic core. An example of what an Excel file with data looks like – Screenshot. “

For example, “Selection of the semantic core for the site and URL” for a non-optimized and young site (for example, the site “Study in Spain – help in entering and moving to Spain”, domain https://studyspain.eu) will give a zero result, but such a result from the service when setting the task is not obvious, the user will expect a result in the form of a ready/semi-ready declared “semantic core”.

Perhaps for an experienced specialist this tool and its use is clear, but for marketing, business, a beginner in SEO, it will most likely not be obvious that the URL or site should be minimally prepared for such an analysis and have, albeit small, visibility in the search.

For “young” domains without search visibility, the tool may not produce the expected results.

As a result of the selection on the .eu domain and the young site, the task hung at 98%

An hour later, the task still hung with the status “hung”

On the domain with low visibility, the tul hung for an hour.

After a few hours, a result of zero hung – which in principle corresponds to reality, but when setting a task, for example, for business, it is not obvious.

The result is reflected in the download and is obvious to an experienced SEO specialist, but not to a newbie or “non-seoshnik”.

Conclusion:

long-term “hanging” on the .eu domain

not an obvious result for untrained specialists when they will be selected for their unoptimized and young site

Decision:

backend analysis is required, additional testing on domains from other domain zones is possible

it is necessary to refine the content in the form of a message on the first screen about the features of collection by this method

For a user who is not familiar with the tool, or the collection of semantics and SEO, it will be much more convenient to use the tool if the parameters have an explanation in the form of a tooltip, which means this or that parameter, the result of its selection and setting in this task.

Additional options do not contain explanations.

Explanations would be useful for a new user of the tool – it will simplify the selection of parameters.

Conclusion:

An additional explanation of the parameters of the tools, their principle of operation, the calculation method or the expected result

Decision:

add tooltips to each parameter, a hint pops up when you point and click

When collecting semantics for more than one domain and then uploading the result as an xlsx file, further determination of which domain, GEO, and search engine belongs to the download is difficult because all files are named the same.

The names of the download files do not identify the domain and the phrase selection parameters.

Conclusion:

not “friendly” names of semantics download files, provided that the selection is more than one domain and different GEO and search engine

Decision:

name the download file by domain, for example, as in a similar service: “rosagroleasing.ru.organic.keys.msk.csv”

Thank you! See you in the search results! 🤗

If you look events in Mykolaiv – https://city-afisha.com/afisha/

Related posts