Skip to main content
Tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackWebmasters/status/291485484759261184
edited title
Link
Su'
  • 19.3k
  • 3
  • 41
  • 65

SEO cost ogfof garbage text

forFor SEO, "Content is King". I wonder what would be the SEO cost of garbage text inserted between descriptive content.

The case I have in mind concerns ascii art. Such page would contain consecutive blocks containing a description of the ascii art, followed by the ascii art itself.

Example:

here is an hideous kitty  

   (%(//    (6%(
   /%7%CCGG66%%C
   (%7%%G#QO%C%(
  /%7%%%OOGC777%/
   77(%G6C6GQ%(%/
   C67%%776%7%%%
    (O%OGQQ#GCC
    (77%G6CGQG%(
    7%%%%%GQ%%C%/
   (%77%%GQ6%%%%(
  /#O((%GQGGG%%7(
   O%7%%%OOGC%%%%(
  (%%77%CGQ@Q%%%(%%/
 /C%766OQQ#OQG6C777%(
 7%C7%%6GGQGQO6%%%%7%
(7%77%OQ@Q#@#QC%((%%%/
(7%7%%GG(%OQ#Q#QGC%77/
 7%77%6OOGQ@#%O6%(7%%/
 /77%%6GQ@#QCOQGCO%%(
   /(%C6G##@@QOO%%%/
      ///(O@#@(/(/
           /#@6/
             (GG#/
              /@@O
               /@@6
                Q@O
        (      /O@O
        @@6 /(QQ@@
          (@@6@#<div class='asciiart'>
  <div class='description'>here is an hideous kitty</div>
  <div class='ascii'><pre>
   (%(//    (6%(
   /%7%CCGG66%%C
   (%7%%G#QO%C%(
  /%7%%%OOGC777%/
   77(%G6C6GQ%(%/
   C67%%776%7%%%
    (O%OGQQ#GCC
    (77%G6CGQG%(
    7%%%%%GQ%%C%/
   (%77%%GQ6%%%%(
  /#O((%GQGGG%%7(
   O%7%%%OOGC%%%%(
  (%%77%CGQ@Q%%%(%%/
 /C%766OQQ#OQG6C777%(
 7%C7%%6GGQGQO6%%%%7%
(7%77%OQ@Q#@#QC%((%%%/
(7%7%%GG(%OQ#Q#QGC%77/
 7%77%6OOGQ@#%O6%(7%%/
 /77%%6GQ@#QCOQGCO%%(
   /(%C6G##@@QOO%%%/
      ///(O@#@(/(/
           /#@6/
             (GG#/
              /@@O
               /@@6
                Q@O
        (      /O@O
        @@6 /(QQ@@
          (@@6@#</pre>
  </div>
</div>
  

or maybe worse, instead of element<pre> element, the ascii art can be composed of consecutive in in<span> in <div> in order to set different colors to each part of the art.

In both case, the page is full of textual data that are non-sense for a search engine. If this implies a negative impact on SEO, is there a way to tell the search engine to ignore these garbage parts  ?

thanks

for SEO, "Content is King". I wonder what would be the SEO cost of garbage text inserted between descriptive content.

The case I have in mind concerns ascii art. Such page would contain consecutive blocks containing a description of the ascii art, followed by the ascii art itself.

Example:

here is an hideous kitty

   (%(//    (6%(
   /%7%CCGG66%%C
   (%7%%G#QO%C%(
  /%7%%%OOGC777%/
   77(%G6C6GQ%(%/
   C67%%776%7%%%
    (O%OGQQ#GCC
    (77%G6CGQG%(
    7%%%%%GQ%%C%/
   (%77%%GQ6%%%%(
  /#O((%GQGGG%%7(
   O%7%%%OOGC%%%%(
  (%%77%CGQ@Q%%%(%%/
 /C%766OQQ#OQG6C777%(
 7%C7%%6GGQGQO6%%%%7%
(7%77%OQ@Q#@#QC%((%%%/
(7%7%%GG(%OQ#Q#QGC%77/
 7%77%6OOGQ@#%O6%(7%%/
 /77%%6GQ@#QCOQGCO%%(
   /(%C6G##@@QOO%%%/
      ///(O@#@(/(/
           /#@6/
             (GG#/
              /@@O
               /@@6
                Q@O
        (      /O@O
        @@6 /(QQ@@
          (@@6@#
 

or maybe worse, instead of element, the ascii art can be composed of consecutive in in order to set different colors to each part of the art.

In both case, the page is full of textual data that are non-sense for a search engine. If this implies a negative impact on SEO, is there a way to tell the search engine to ignore these garbage parts  ?

thanks

For SEO, "Content is King". I wonder what would be the SEO cost of garbage text inserted between descriptive content.

The case I have in mind concerns ascii art. Such page would contain consecutive blocks containing a description of the ascii art, followed by the ascii art itself.

Example:

 
<div class='asciiart'>
  <div class='description'>here is an hideous kitty</div>
  <div class='ascii'><pre>
   (%(//    (6%(
   /%7%CCGG66%%C
   (%7%%G#QO%C%(
  /%7%%%OOGC777%/
   77(%G6C6GQ%(%/
   C67%%776%7%%%
    (O%OGQQ#GCC
    (77%G6CGQG%(
    7%%%%%GQ%%C%/
   (%77%%GQ6%%%%(
  /#O((%GQGGG%%7(
   O%7%%%OOGC%%%%(
  (%%77%CGQ@Q%%%(%%/
 /C%766OQQ#OQG6C777%(
 7%C7%%6GGQGQO6%%%%7%
(7%77%OQ@Q#@#QC%((%%%/
(7%7%%GG(%OQ#Q#QGC%77/
 7%77%6OOGQ@#%O6%(7%%/
 /77%%6GQ@#QCOQGCO%%(
   /(%C6G##@@QOO%%%/
      ///(O@#@(/(/
           /#@6/
             (GG#/
              /@@O
               /@@6
                Q@O
        (      /O@O
        @@6 /(QQ@@
          (@@6@#</pre>
  </div>
</div>
 

or maybe worse, instead of <pre> element, the ascii art can be composed of consecutive <span> in <div> in order to set different colors to each part of the art.

In both case, the page is full of textual data that are non-sense for a search engine. If this implies a negative impact on SEO, is there a way to tell the search engine to ignore these garbage parts?

Source Link

SEO cost ogf garbage text

for SEO, "Content is King". I wonder what would be the SEO cost of garbage text inserted between descriptive content.

The case I have in mind concerns ascii art. Such page would contain consecutive blocks containing a description of the ascii art, followed by the ascii art itself.

Example:

here is an hideous kitty
   (%(//    (6%(
   /%7%CCGG66%%C
   (%7%%G#QO%C%(
  /%7%%%OOGC777%/
   77(%G6C6GQ%(%/
   C67%%776%7%%%
    (O%OGQQ#GCC
    (77%G6CGQG%(
    7%%%%%GQ%%C%/
   (%77%%GQ6%%%%(
  /#O((%GQGGG%%7(
   O%7%%%OOGC%%%%(
  (%%77%CGQ@Q%%%(%%/
 /C%766OQQ#OQG6C777%(
 7%C7%%6GGQGQO6%%%%7%
(7%77%OQ@Q#@#QC%((%%%/
(7%7%%GG(%OQ#Q#QGC%77/
 7%77%6OOGQ@#%O6%(7%%/
 /77%%6GQ@#QCOQGCO%%(
   /(%C6G##@@QOO%%%/
      ///(O@#@(/(/
           /#@6/
             (GG#/
              /@@O
               /@@6
                Q@O
        (      /O@O
        @@6 /(QQ@@
          (@@6@#

or maybe worse, instead of element, the ascii art can be composed of consecutive in in order to set different colors to each part of the art.

In both case, the page is full of textual data that are non-sense for a search engine. If this implies a negative impact on SEO, is there a way to tell the search engine to ignore these garbage parts ?

thanks