Google Violation

Is this against Google webmaster guidelines? I found this from one of my competitors and if I am correct this is pure spam and the reason this site is probably ranked # 1.

If you view(http://www.greatlasvegashomes.com/las_vegas_new_homes_index.htm)

and right click at the top of the page and then view properties you will see this url http://www.greatlasvegashomes.com/top.htm when you go to that url and view source and use the find tool and then type in hidden you will see this within the source code.

><SPAN style="visibility: hidden"> with keyword rich links pointing to the sites homepage. This header is on almost every page in the site. Also I noticed that this site is using a non framed and frame version of every page, wouldnt this be considered spam?

I would like please some of you experts opinions on this please as if what I am thinking is true then I understand why this site has been # 1 for almost 3 years.

If it was you would you report this to the search engines?

 

At the first glance i thought someone fizically violated Google. That would've been weird

As for your competitor's website, sure, that's spam.

Do them , and mention Bigdaddy in your message.

Be sure to check "Hidden text or links"

 

expertu,
sorry, but what is "Bigdaddy in your message."?? I mean who is bigddady?

 

Read this

 

Either this guy:


...or the name of some update or other.

 

I say report them.

Google recently removed the German BMW website from their index for doing similar things.

 

You bad man

 

Thanks Expertu but I dont believe Google pays any attention to those reports. I now know why this site has been number 1 for the last 3 years and hasnt moved from that spot. On a scale of 1-10 what would you rate that as far as spam?

 

I would be surprised if this is helping them. Google should be smart enough to spot that any text in a span tag using visibility:hidden will be hidden text.

If google is not spotting this then they deserve to be overwhelmed with spam until their search engine dies.

 

Strange that there is only one occurrence of the hidden keyword. You would think if they were using this technique they would have absolutely stuffed the <span> with keywords. It's almost like it's something they forgot to take out.

I doubt that one (hidden) occurrence of the keyword is going to put them at #1.

Still spam though.

 

5 (five)....

 

Its not one occurrence, this is the banner for almost the whole site, so these hidden links, along with hidden text on some pages I have not shown, spans on about 200 plus pages all pointing back to the homepage.

They are getting by with this by creating framed and non framed pages with the same content.

 

Google isnt smart enough to spot this. The site has been # 1 in Google for 3 years for almost every major phrase you can think of. I agree with you however if Google cant spot this then they will deserve what they get if people use this technique.

In your opinion of webmaster guidelines is it not also a violation by creating duplicate pages one framed and the other non framed? I believe it is but why hasnt google caught this or do they not care. I posted this on Cutts blog just to see what response I get. I have been called a spammer by this sites owner and her linking partners but yet no proof has been offered by them.

I think with these hidden links for major keyword for our industry and the hidden text on over 200 plus pages is enough to manipulate the serps for our primary key phrase.

 

It isn't.

That arena is too competitive to be moved only by internal links. Want to know why that site is #1?

First reason: Registered in 2000... the site is old with old links pointing in. Doesn't matter if it is stale.
Second reason: They are part of a realty link network... thousands of themed inbound links from other realtor's home pages

 

I agree that site has age and that massive link farm. Since you brought up that link farm, if you look at their partners, you will see most of them have multiple sites created for nothing more tha to increase their link value with the search engines, mainly Google. Most of those sites dont do well in Yahoo, which doesnt like interlinking of sites or link farms.

IMHO the site being discussed here also has those framed and non framed versions of the same content. This is increasing the enriched theme of the site as well as offer more internal keyword rich links.

The navigation structure is being benefited by having those framed and non framed pages as well by increasing the incoming PR values from internal pages. Once again IMHO I dont think this site would be # 1, if it wasnt for the hidden links, hidden text, duplicate content from framed and non framed pages and the massive link farm being used to only manipulate the serps.

I am no expert but, this is the way I see it and I am trying to be unbias.

 

It seems the site owner has seen this post and changed the source code to remove those hidden links.

 

As the owner of the site being critiqued (which though "old" is updated almost daily), I would like to submit the following - amazingly Hooperman actually almost hit the nail exactly on the head just by looking at the page with no knowledge of its background:

This is an old frames site and when it was originally built, the web designer added navigation links at the bottom of every single page. The navigation links went back to the home page so that if the non-framed pages of the site were ever found first (which happens regularly as they do come up in relevant searches) viewers were guided back to the properly framed version of the site with the left hand navigation links. All the rest of the pages of the site still contain these bottom-of-the-page navigation links.

The page referred to above is one of the two frames pages on the site. One frames page has the left hand navigation for the site and the other is the top frame which is merely the site’s logo to “brand” it and make all the pages look the same. As this page has never had any content, no one has ever had a reason to even look at it before - those links were added site-wide enmasse after the pages were done, and it never dawned on the designer to remove it from the top frame. As Hooperman pointed out, there was no keyword stuffing whatsoever, and it is clear that these were navigation links and that they were not intended for spamming.

Mad4 is also correct - there is also no way that this would have helped the site rank. This top frame does not even appear on the home page which is the page that ranks for the most important keywords. And of course as soon as this oversight was brought to our attention it was immediately fixed - thanks for that anyway.

More to the point would be the question of why an "amateur" would be looking so hard at a rival's site that they could come up with something so obscure that other "professional" SEOs that have done maintenance on the site have completely missed. It might be of interest to know that in May of 2004 "Las Vegas Homes" was contacted and asked to remove 18 pages of verbatim text that had been copied from this same site - obviously he must have thought the content quite good. He asked for, and received, a 30 day grace period to remove the copied text as he claimed to be in the process of moving.

After the 30 grace period had expired he still refused to remove the text. At that point, for fear of receiving a duplicate content penalty, we were forced to report him to his server who took down his site entirely. Shortly after that the site was banned in Google for undisclosed reasons.

So which is the real violation - a minor coding oversight or a deliberate copyright infringement involving 18 pages of stolen text? Would love to hear your responses.

 

SPAM for search engines. A hidden Div stuffed with keywords, is NOT a minor coding oversight DUDE. Get a life.

SPAM for search engines.

 

The point is it was the same navigation (just a few links and not stuffed) as is still used on all the rest of the pages and was not intentional - was not meant as a spam technique and does not even appear on the home page which is the page that ranks for the keywords. It would be pretty stupid to do something so supposedly "smart" when it doesn't even help?!! It was also promptly removed when pointed out.

Do you not have any thoughts on copyright infringement and content "borrowing?"

 

Sorry, but that's BS. The next time you dial a wrong number on your phone, let's see you do court battle for telephone harassment.

Spam is only spam if it's deliberate. Whatever little bit of crap that was left on that Vegas website was as obscure as the mole on the back of your head...and as deliberate as the last time you threw up. The owner had no idea it was on there, and it was NOT stuffed with keywords.

On the other hand, copying someone's text is plagiarism. When I find someone doing that with my websites, they get 24 hours to remove it, and I CC the emails to Google and Yahoo at the time I notify them. There's no excuse for it.