While looking at the code of a site competiting with a client, I saw this:
<body>
<!-- <H1>KEYPHRASE HERE</H1> -->
I found it quite interesting, the attempt to fool the engines with an invisible H1 tag, hidden within a comment tag, as the first thing after the body tag.
This competing site is in Google position 1 for the keyphrase in question.
Anybody ever seen this? What do you think? Is this doing anything for the site's ranking, or are the engines not fooled by this comment tag?
Thanks!
Subscribe to HRA Now!
Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
Share and download Custom Google Analytics Reports, dashboards and advanced segments--for FREE!
www.CustomReportSharing.com
From the folks who brought you High Rankings!
More SEO Content
International SEM | Social Media | Search Friendly Design | SEO | Paid Search / PPC | Seminars | Forum Threads | Q&A | Copywriting | Keyword Research | Web Analytics / Conversions | Blogging | Dynamic Sites | Linking | SEO Services | Site Architecture | Search Engine Spam | Wrap-ups | Business Issues | HRA Questions | Online Courses
Sponsored Content
H1 Hidden In Comment Tag
Started by
arteworks
, Oct 21 2006 07:35 AM
36 replies to this topic
#2
Randy
-
- Moderator
-
- 17,540 posts
Convert Me!
Posted 22 October 2006 - 03:09 PM
Completely useless for ranking purposes.
The engines have been ignoring comment tags where any positive ranking effects are concerned for long, long time now.
The engines have been ignoring comment tags where any positive ranking effects are concerned for long, long time now.
#3
Jill
-
- Admin
-
- 32,313 posts
High Rankings Advisor
Posted 22 October 2006 - 04:24 PM
That's awesome!
The morons probably think it's actually helping them.
The morons probably think it's actually helping them.
#4
mcanerin
-
- Active Members
-
- 2,242 posts
HR 7
- Location:Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Posted 22 October 2006 - 09:43 PM
Technically, it's useless, though it would likely make someone looking for spam look that much harder, and thus invite unwanted attention.
To be fair, I suppose it's possible that it was actually in the code for a legitimate reason and was commented out as part of a redesign or something, though from what you describe it's seems pretty unlikely - especially in view of the H1.
Comments should be comments. I think more webmasters should use them, honestly. But they are useless for SEO, and just make the person using them look more clueless and desparate than normal.
I'd love to see their metatags...
Ian
To be fair, I suppose it's possible that it was actually in the code for a legitimate reason and was commented out as part of a redesign or something, though from what you describe it's seems pretty unlikely - especially in view of the H1.
Comments should be comments. I think more webmasters should use them, honestly. But they are useless for SEO, and just make the person using them look more clueless and desparate than normal.
I'd love to see their metatags...
Ian
#5
foamcow
-
- Active Members
-
- 88 posts
HR 3
Posted 23 October 2006 - 03:54 AM
Maybe they rank at No 1 for that phrase because it was once on the page in an H1 tag?
Now they've commented it out, perhaps they will slip from No 1? Perhaps they are testing?
Just because something is commented out I don't quite understand how that can be interpreted as an attempt to spam a search engine. I often comment out bits of HTML when I'm not certain the client really wanted the change they just asked me to do or if I know I will be reverting the code to its original state in the 'near' future. It also acts as a memory jog so I remember what I did.
Now they've commented it out, perhaps they will slip from No 1? Perhaps they are testing?
Just because something is commented out I don't quite understand how that can be interpreted as an attempt to spam a search engine. I often comment out bits of HTML when I'm not certain the client really wanted the change they just asked me to do or if I know I will be reverting the code to its original state in the 'near' future. It also acts as a memory jog so I remember what I did.
#6
Jill
-
- Admin
-
- 32,313 posts
High Rankings Advisor
Posted 23 October 2006 - 06:56 AM
QUOTE
Just because something is commented out I don't quite understand how that can be interpreted as an attempt to spam a search engine.
It's not. Since they don't read comments, it isn't spam or an attempt to spam.
However, it's just amusing if they think it is helping their rankings.
QUOTE
I often comment out bits of HTML when I'm not certain the client really wanted the change they just asked me to do or if I know I will be reverting the code to its original state in the 'near' future. It also acts as a memory jog so I remember what I did.
Yep, me too. I have tons of commented out stuff on my site. But it of course has nothing to do with the search engines since it's invisible to them.
#7
St0n3y
-
- Active Members
-
- 202 posts
HR 4
- Location:Reno, NV
Posted 23 October 2006 - 09:08 AM
I think its unfair to make assumptions as to why they are commenting out the h1 tag, especially when, as noted above, there are legitimate reasons to doing so. It could be part of an effort to change the way a page looks. Maybe someone decided not to use it, they commented out and forgot about it, as unlikely as that may be. I think we should be careful about making assumptions about the intentions of others, without some additional and consistent evidence against the site/individual that support the assumption being made.
#8
foamcow
-
- Active Members
-
- 88 posts
HR 3
Posted 23 October 2006 - 10:47 AM
QUOTE
It's not. Since they don't read comments, it isn't spam or an attempt to spam.
If the person doing the commenting out thinks that SEs do take note of comments then that seems like they may be attempting to spam. Spam in the sense that they are attempting to deceive a search engine. Hence the word 'attempt' in my post.
It's just as likely that it's simply a completely innocent comment though.Of course, we know it will do no good, or bad, but at least 1 person (the OP) thinks that it might be a contributing factor to the page's ranking.
#9
qwerty
-
- Moderator
-
- 8,287 posts
HR 10
- Location:Somerville, MA
Posted 23 October 2006 - 11:04 AM
I think it's ok to call something like this an "attempt" to spam if you believe that they've put the comment there in order to deceive the SE. Just because it's useless doesn't mean they're not trying to trick the engines. Of course, you then have to ask whether it's text that's only been temporarily commented out, but I agree with foamcow on the attempted spam idea.
I got an email this morning from a client who so hates the fact that his competitors are studying his site and copying some of the methods we've used on it that he wants me to put a link in his source code in such a way that the only way to see it would be by looking at the source (so he's basically asking for a comment). The link would go to another domain of his, where'd he'd put up a page that said [edited to protect those who've just had breakfast]
I got an email this morning from a client who so hates the fact that his competitors are studying his site and copying some of the methods we've used on it that he wants me to put a link in his source code in such a way that the only way to see it would be by looking at the source (so he's basically asking for a comment). The link would go to another domain of his, where'd he'd put up a page that said [edited to protect those who've just had breakfast]
QUOTE
If you found this link it is because you were digging through my source code in an effort to anylize and steal ideas from my website. If that is the case I want to tell you that I think that you're a ****-sucking low-life piece of **** and you should be ashamed that you are so utterly stupid that you cannot come up with your own original ideas.
Eat a bag of ***** you low-life ****-pile.
Eat a bag of ***** you low-life ****-pile.
#10
arteworks
-
- Active Members
-
- 210 posts
HR 4
- Location:Austin, TX
Posted 23 October 2006 - 11:05 AM
I don't think it's html that has just been innocently "commented out". The page has been the same for quite awhile. I think its an attempt to fool the search engines with hidden H1 text. So I would call it spam, falling under a deliberate attempt to deliver content to the search engines that is not visible to the human user.
Either way I guess it doesn't matter, since the comment tag is ignored. It is pretty funny though. I do think they actually think it's helping them. I guess they are doing something right, however, as they are #1 on Google. But not for long....muahahahahaha.
Either way I guess it doesn't matter, since the comment tag is ignored. It is pretty funny though. I do think they actually think it's helping them. I guess they are doing something right, however, as they are #1 on Google. But not for long....muahahahahaha.
#11
arteworks
-
- Active Members
-
- 210 posts
HR 4
- Location:Austin, TX
Posted 23 October 2006 - 11:08 AM
Well Qwerty don't leave us hanging! Finish the story for chrissakes! You gonna do it or not?
#12
qwerty
-
- Moderator
-
- 8,287 posts
HR 10
- Location:Somerville, MA
Posted 23 October 2006 - 11:11 AM
I haven't decided yet. I don't like that he has this other domain in the first place, and I don't like the idea of pointing that out to his competitors, even if they are ****-sucking low-life pieces of ****.
#13
torka
-
- Moderator
-
- 4,392 posts
Vintage Babe
- Location:Triangle area, NC, USA, Earth (usually)
Posted 23 October 2006 - 11:18 AM
Domains and hosting are cheap. If he's determined to do this, you could always have him simply register (yet) another domain he could use strictly for the purpose of taunting and insulting anybody he wanted to. You could see if something along the lines of ****-sucking-low-life-pieces-of-****.com is available (presumably the high number of hyphens wouldn't be an issue in this case ).
BTW, he used "low-life" twice. Maybe he could benefit from having a professional content writer help him out with this new page.
--Torka
).BTW, he used "low-life" twice. Maybe he could benefit from having a professional content writer help him out with this new page.
--Torka
#14
Jill
-
- Admin
-
- 32,313 posts
High Rankings Advisor
Posted 23 October 2006 - 11:52 AM
QUOTE
I think it's ok to call something like this an "attempt" to spam if you believe that they've put the comment there in order to deceive the SE.
Yeah, but it's more accurate to say "lame attempt" to spam!
#15
arteworks
-
- Active Members
-
- 210 posts
HR 4
- Location:Austin, TX
Posted 23 October 2006 - 01:56 PM
Yes! Sell him some copywriting services to assist in his mudslinging efforts!
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
