Hidden Text in Style Sheet
-
I have read Eric Enge's Comprehensive Guide To Hidden Text but I'm no coder so I would appreciate some clarification.
Am I assuming correctly that the following is hidden text coded within a style sheet:
here I am!
Thanks!
-
I agree, just stay away from this all together
-
That is a one of the main things you shouldn't do. So forget about this trick. Make pages for users not for the search engines. Then search engines will find it for them.
Regards
Prasad
-
I know that anything with the word 'hidden' can't be good. Maybe I didn't explain myself properly but i'm just trying to understand the code in this example.
How bad is it? Can Google read this? I ask because it has been ranking within SERPs for a long time for a super competitive term. Overall, their SEO is good with minor tweaks/modifications to clean house. This is the first glaring issue I've come across.
So, really, how good is Google at reading hidden text? Not saying that if you can get away with it then go for it but maybe all it is, is an interesting observation.
Cheers
-
I would read this from Google before implementing any type of "hidden text". Just a heads up from a SEO consultant. I would never recommend using any type of hidden text.
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=66353
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
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
-
Unlisted (hidden) pages
I just had a client say they were advised by a friend to use 'a bunch of unlisted (hidden) pages'. Isn't this seriously black hat?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | muzzmoz0 -
Managing Inbound Anchor Texts
Hey all, I have a web-shop selling server hosting and my home page has over 5000 inbound links from my customers. My question is that most of these have the same anchor text to my homepage which links to my homepage META tags and a few keywords there. Is this good practice? Should the anchor text vary per customer and if so how? I would say no as this is too difficult to manage and doesn't add to the 'user experience' if it does vary but always good to ask others!! Also, as the customers aren't totally relevant to my own product (although the anchor text is) would this also be hurting my ranking? Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | darrenbooy0 -
Difference between anchor text pointing to an article in our section pages and the title of our article
My concern is described more in details in the following hypothetic scenario(basically this is the same method that CNN site applies to its site): In one page i have a specific anchor text e.g. "A firefighter rescued a young boy" and this one is linked to an article which if you enter you will see that it has a different title than the anchor text/short title that i mentioned above. So the internal titlte of the article is "A firefighte rescued a young boy in Philippines while it was rainy". I want to know whether this is a good SEO practice or not. Regards, Christos
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | DPG_Media0 -
Hidden text for Mobile
How do search engines respond to text that is hidden on mobile settings online. I have a
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Mike.NW0 -
Can a hidden menu damage a website page?
Website (A) - has a landing page offering courses Website (B) - ( A different organisation) has a link to Website A. The goal landing page when you click on he link takes you to Website A's Courses page which is already a popular page with visitors who search for or come directly into Website A. Owners of Website A want to ADD an Extra Menu Item to the MENU BAR on their Courses page to offer some specific courses to visitors who come from Website (B) to Website (A) - BUT the additional MENU ITEM is ONLY TO BE DISPLAYED if you come from having clicked on the link at Website (B). This link both parties are intending to track However, if you come to the Courses landing page on Website (A) directly from a search engine or directly typing in the URL address of the landing page - you will not see this EXTRA Menu Item with its link to courses, it only appears should you visit Website (A) having come from Website (B). The above approach is making me twitch as to what the programmer wants to do as to me this looks like a form of 'cloaking'. What I am not understanding that Website (A) URL ADDRESS landing page is demonstrating outwardly to Google a Menu Bar that appears normal, but I come to the same URL ADDRESS from Website (B) and I end up seeing an ADDITIONAL MENU ITEM How will Google look at this LANDING PAGE? Surely it must see the CODING INSTRUCTIONS sitting there behind this page to assist it in serving up in effect TWO VERSIONS of the page when actually the URL itself does not change. What should I advise the developer as I don't want the landing page of Website (A) which is doing fine right now, end up with some sort of penalty from the search engines through this exercise. Many thanks in advance of answers from the community.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | ICTADVIS0 -
Sure, but what about non-keyword rich anchor text links?
Could spammy non-keyword rich anchor text liks help your website rank? Of course, there's been a lot of discussion around Google's update of its link scheme. Specifically, they target press releases with do-follow links on keyword-rich anchor text and "Large-scale article marketing or guest posting campaigns with keyword-rich anchor text links". Well, that leaves the question unanswered, what if you're doing these spammy linking techniques, but on non-keyword rich anchor text, such as "click here", "find information", and "click here". Will you still get smacked down by Google then? Given that links on non-keyword anchor text can still help increase domain authority, it seems like Google left a door open here for large scale publication of a certain class of spammy links that can still assist rank, no? Also, in answering, please distinguish between best practice, and effective. For instance, purchasing links isn't a good practice, but it can still be an effective technique. While spammy links on non-keyword rich anchor text is certainly not a good practice, is it nonetheless effective?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | ExploreConsulting0 -
I am still confused about anchor text and penalties
As I understand in order to rank well for the page in google, the page/site has to have a lot of back links that have an anchor text with the keywords that you want to rank for. At the same time if google finds that your anchor text contains kewords that are in your title or h1 tag, it may penalize your site. So what do i do to rank well for my chosen keywords. Lets say I am only interested in keywords San Francisco widget and Oakland widget The title of my webpage says San Francisco | Oakland widget The anchor text that I usually pick is either San Francisco widget or Oakland widget. I also have plenty of links that have anchor text like "website" or "click here" What should I use for my anchor text in my backlinks?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SirMax0 -
Too many nofollowed blog comments with exact anchor text
Back in my dumb days, I decided to use Fiver to get 25 backlinks from .edu sites. Well, they were all nofollowed, and they share space with hundreds of other sites spamming them. Top top it off, all the spam links for my site are exact-match anchor text: embroidered patches. If you look at my link profile in OSE, it looks so polluted with these. I'm just looking for post-Penguin opinions about this--if it has the potential to hurt. Since Penguin, I have moved to the #1 position for the KW embroidered patches, but I am still scared that future algorithm tweaks will incorporate this blog comment spam. What do you think?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | UnderRugSwept0