Forum Moderators: open

Message Too Old, No Replies

Invisible/hidden links

When do they become spamming?

         

surfgatinho

8:11 pm on Aug 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



I've recently become aware that using hidden links may be frowned upon. It kind of makes sense to me why this is the case.
I have however used this technique to make sure hard to get to parts of a site with important content are spidered.
What I'm wondering is when does this become a dubious practice?
For example if a . is used as a link is this spamming? What about an image that would not be assumed to be a link and then again how would an SE know?
Basically I'm completely anti-spamming but I do feel I have a legitimate reason for using an obscure link but don't want to find myself getting penalised for it

rogerd

8:21 pm on Aug 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 10+ Year Member



Those "." links could cause you a problem, surfgatinho. Earlier this week there was a post from a member who deduced that Google would spot a link like this and not transmit any PR to the linked content.

I'd examine your assumptions - why should a part of the site with "important content" be "hard to get to"? Google wants to see what human visitors see, not stuff that isn't fit for human consumption.

It's hard to say what Google can and can't detect automatically, but hidden links are a no-no. If the content is important, put a text link in, even if you put it someplace that isn't too obvious to the casual human visitor. The anchor text will help your rankings, and you'll be able to sleep at night.

Robert Charlton

5:59 am on Aug 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



What I'm wondering is when does this become a dubious practice?

Whenever the links are hidden or invisible.

I second what rogerd says. Additionally, if you look at Google's algo (or most any other search engine algo), it favors content that is featured prominently on the page, as well as content that has the "vote" of anchor text in a link from another page.

Anchor text is considered to be a strong representation of what the page receiving the link is about, because it's assumed that that's what human visitors choosing to go to the page will see. When you start hiding things, the engine considers your representation of the content at best irrelevant, and, at worst, deceptive and deserving of a penalty.

msr986

6:05 am on Aug 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



There is only one reason for hidden or invisible links; to allow bots to follow, yet hide the link from the users view.

Sounds like spam to me!

MonkeeSage

6:26 am on Aug 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Many pages with completely hidden links (which are not always spam--think of heir. menus for example), do very well on the SEs. DevEdge, for example--their "linkbar" has about 20 hidden links in total.

Jordan

msr986

6:40 am on Aug 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Links which can become visible based on user action (such as menus) are generally not considered "hidden links", and generally don't cause a problem in the SERP's. I'd say the basic test to figure out what is acceptable is whether or not the page will pass a manual review. If links are hidden to keep them hidden, then that is spam.

If you check around, you will find a lot of SEO's that have been penalized over hidden links. Some SEO's have been scared to implement dynamic menus for fear that they will be banned. So far, it appears that GG can distinguish between dynamic menus and "hidden links".

MonkeeSage

7:02 am on Aug 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



msr986:

Ahhh, no doubt about that. Sorry for the confusion. I just read the first post more carefully, about the "." thing and all. If the links are hidden just for the sake of being hidden, and are never exposed to the user, then judging from everything I've read around here, they'll be considered spam and the SEs will definitely frown on it.

Jordan

surfgatinho

10:12 am on Aug 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



My reson for having a hidden link is to make sure a dynamic part of the site containing searchable information is spidered.
The information is only reachable via a search form so I set up a page with listed all the enteries in the database by name which could be spidered. I don't particularly want people to see this page as it's not as pretty as the others but it is essential that all this information is visible to the SEs

dmorison

10:22 am on Aug 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Why risk "getting into trouble"?

Just have a discreet link in the footer at the bottom of the search page, for example:

Copyright (c) 2003 Us ¦ About ¦ Contact ¦ Search Index

Nobody will ever click on "Search Index", but if they do; so what - don't worry about it.

On the "Search Index" page, use letters to split the index down into manageable chunks (you don't really want more than 50-80 links on any one page), and use URL re-writing if necessary to make the pages spider-friendly; for example:

www.example.com/si/A/index.html
www.example.com/si/B/index.html

nakulgoyal

12:22 am on Aug 17, 2003 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Maybe you can even call it SITEMAP

This is what I do for some of my clients!

pmac

2:33 am on Aug 17, 2003 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



>Maybe you can even call it SITEMAP <

Problem solved.

surfgatinho

9:57 am on Aug 17, 2003 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Thanks
I may even do that!