How the hell do you get microformat to show up on google serp?
-
Preface:
- I implemented Microformat aggregate review (http://data-vocabulary.org/Review-aggregate) for our e-commerce website and included only on the homepage. The vote and count are actually coming from real reviews we are getting from our customers, and in the homepage some reviews are shown prominently and a link points to the full list of all the reviews.
- Microformat markup is correct, validated in GWT.
- Have been online for a while (probably a couple of years).
- Our website: http://www.gomme-auto.it
The star rating never showed up. When checking competitors I could see their microformats where not showing up either.
But now things changed, if I check one competitor (the market leader www.gommadiretto.it) searching for it with their brand name “gommadiretto” no star rating is showing, but if I search for tires of a specific manufactured like “pneumatici barum” I can see their result in serp is showing the star rating for that specific internal page (the brand page) where they simply put the website overall aggregate review microformat mark up, they actually put it on every page.
And that make me scratch my head and start asking myself some questions:
- is google showing their microformats because they manually awarded them somehow? no other competitor seems to have got the star rating in serp
- is google showing their microformats because they have so much more reviews than I have? I have around 1700, they have around 11000.
- is google showing their microformats because their reviews are certified by TrustPilot?
- is google showing their microformats because they put it in the product page? well of course since I am not putting it there (in the brand page) it's a factor, but isn't it recommended to put the website aggregate reviews microformat only on one page? and shouldn't we show the brand reviews on the brand page?
- isn't it best practice/recommended to put the website aggregate review microformat only on one page?
- is google showing their microformats because of some other reasons I can't see?
What the hell is google criteria for showing the star rating? Does anyone know?
-
Good luck.
-
Right on! Thanks for the tip. Since most of my clients are service based, I'm wondering if it would work as "http://domain.com/services/specific-service..."
Working on it now and will let you know.
Dino
-
Hi Dino,
yes since I originally posted this question I discovered a couple of things.
First, google loves this schema http://schema.org/Product but stubbornly refuse to show star rating set for http://schema.org/Organization, my competitors where using Product schema on their home pages and landing pages with no relation to any product on the page and getting the stars, so I did the same, and the stars appeared.
So use http://schema.org/Product
Second, google refuse to show star rating for SERP where the search query is for generic common terms keywords, it's showing star rating for branded keywords, and for additional keywords but I have not been able to identify a path/rule, I only realized for branded keywords it show star rating, for common terms it does not.
So if you add star rating http://schema.org/Product markup in a page which is ranking for "Ford Focus" they will appear, but if you put the markup in a page which is ranking for "nice looking cars" google won't show any star.
Hope this helps.
-
Hey Max, did you ever get the stars to show in search? I'm trying to achieve the same thing for my clients, but so far have been unsuccessful. One client has a competitor who has stars for all their pages so been trying to figure it out. I think I have all the right markup, but so far nothing...what a mystery.
Regards, Dino
-
Hi Ken,
that's a very good point. And a big question mark in my head. Because:
- a trustpilot (https://www.trustpilot.com/) sales man repeatedly told me adding their review widget would have made the stars appear, but I can't get any confirmation on this from the web, and sales people from competitors to trustpilot told me that is not true. Trustpilot and others are google partners when it comes to Google Trusted Stores (https://support.google.com/ads/answer/3467841) which means stars showing in AdWords ads (the service is currently not available outside US).
- wherever google talk about rich snippets and stars rating in serp never mentions any 3rd party review authority.
- And here I come again to the Google guideline I mentioned to Everett (https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/146645), they state aggregate review and individual review markup should not be put on the same page, is that information outdated? Or anyone tested and verified in reality is adding SERP benefit like showing up the stars rating if added togheter?
If I may ask what kind of metrics improved using yotpo.com? Did you run a A/B test and found an increase in conversion rate? Or a relevant amount of additional traffic?
Thanks a lot for your time,
Max
-
Hi Max -
I beleive Everett is correct. The Facebook reviews are not marked up with rich snippet code for google, rather they have FB markup. In addition, the review data you have for the site in the footer is marked up as a product. It also probably doesn't help that the reviews are buried down at the bottom of the footer.
As an FYi, we recent;y switched over to a reviews service (Yotpo.com) and that has worked well for us.
Ken
-
Hi Everett, those review on the homepage are not product review, they are website/service review; in other words review from people who bought commenting on the buying process, not the product they bought.
We also have product review, but on product pages, like this one http://www.gomme-auto.it/pneumatici/estivi/riken/maystorm-2-b2/205/55/16/w/91
Also, according to this google guieline: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/146645 aggregate review and review should not go on the same page, either one or another. Which is why we put aggregate reviews markup on these pages instead of review markup.
In that guideline google is not saying it penalize you if you put both on the same page, but still recommend not to.
Are you suggesting the guideline is outdated and not relevant anymore?
-
The Facebook reviews don't appear to have any micro-data markup in the code. They're there, but not marked up. What is marked up is listing your website as the item reviewed instead of the product from what I can see, and the itemscope isn't filled out:
div class="sub-footer" itemscope="" itemtype="http://data-vocabulary.org/Review-aggregate">
gomme-auto.it|
votato
9.81
su
10
da
1704You should mark up each of the FB reviews with this schema:
And the aggregate of those reviews with this schema:
http://schema.org/AggregateRating
What they are reviewing is the product on the page, not the website itself. Therefore, you'll be using this schema to mark up the thing that is being reviewed:
You may want to hire a developer to do this. Schema can be kind of tricky sometimes. Let us know how it goes!
-
Hi Ken, thanks for your time.
those "facebook" reviews are "the" reviews, we ask customers for permissions to post on their facebook wall, and show their review along their picture and facebook profile to get additional trust.
Best,
Max
-
Hi-
Here are a coupe of quick thought for you:
-
I don't actually see the ratings on your home page. I can see that they are in the code but I didn't see them appearing on the page. The only reviews I see are the FB reviews.
-
I read somewhere that Google will sometimes not show the rich snippet data if they think you are light on content. I will find the reference and post it when I do, but that could be a problem for you as well.
Good Luck
Ken
-
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
-
Want to remove google font
hi this is my site https://alcouponest.com/
On-Page Optimization | | Moshako
and i want to remove google fonts and use system fonts
what is the best plugin to do that
thx0 -
How does Google handle read more tags in Wordpress
Hi Everyone I am wondering how Google handles the read more tag in Wordpress. I pasted the link to a blog post on Google and found nothing (domain.com/post#readmore). Then I paste the version without #readmore (domain.com/post) and found that Google indexed the page but with the option to click "read more" to read it. The full blog post is not in their index, just the version asking you to read more. Is this because Google hasn't gotten to it or is Google ignoring it. I am not sure but ideally I rather have the full blog post indexed, not the read more version. I am curious to whether this will cause duplicate content issues. What are your experience with this and is it advisable to use an alternate method for read more. Maybe with a Wordpress plugin. Thanks in advance.
On-Page Optimization | | gaben0 -
Google Webmaster Tools Not Showing Correct Data?
Hi, I am experience a weird issue. Google webmaster tools suggested me some HTML improvements a few weeks ago. The suggestions were about duplicate Title Tags and Short Meta Descriptions. I changed the Title Tags and Meta Descriptions. But after 3 Google Updates, webmaster still shows the same suggestion. Please advise Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | Kashif-Amin0 -
My site's articles seem to never show up in Google.
This is in regards to a previous post that was answered for me:
On-Page Optimization | | Ctrl-Alt-Success
http://moz.com/community/q/my-site-s-name-not-ranking-in-google I was talking to a friend and he suggested I try to type in an article in google with the exact name followed by my site's domain name without the .com For example, I have an article entitled: "MULTITASKING IS BAD FOR YOU, MKAY?" Obviously it's a title most would not word in that way. I typed it in and followed it up with my site's domain minus .com. So "MULTITASKING IS BAD FOR YOU, MKAY? ctrl-alt-success" But I'm not even getting listed in the search. There's got to be something I'm missing. I understand backlinks are important for ranking, but when I'm trying to find an exact match along with my site's url minus the .com? I just have this strong hunch that something is awry. NOTE: It seems this is only with google. If I use Bing or Yahoo, it comes up just fine.0 -
I have seen zero movement in my Google keyword rankings.
I have seen zero movement in my Google keyword rankings, but I have seen movement on the other search engines. I must be doing something wrong. Any tips?
On-Page Optimization | | LindaWolfe0 -
Does class and id names considered as text content by google
Does google and other search engines considers the class and id names as part of text content. Will it be included in the keyword density and treated as a content. For Example: <a <span="">href</a><a <span="">="http://xyz.com" title="xyz" class="topmargin_rightside_middlenavigation_home"></a> Will google considers the words "topmargin rightside middlenavigation home" as part of the text. Also If i am supposed to use this class as many times on a page, will the keyword density affects.
On-Page Optimization | | Sulekha0 -
Confirmation regarding canonical and syndication google tags
Hi, We are in the process of improving our CMS upstream to resolve our duplicate content issues. We were hit pretty hard by the Panda update. One of the steps we have taken is implementation of the canonical link tag across all domains in our site. You see, we are a news release service with muliple channels and websites to represent each. The problem is that a client will submit a release and in many cases the news item is relevant to multiple channels I.E. multiple websites under the same IP range. Site Examples:
On-Page Optimization | | jarrett.mackay
www.hotelnewsresource.com www.restaurantnewsresource.com
www.travelindustrywire.com From a user perspective, it makes sense that they should be able to access the article from the site they are browsing without being redirected to the site we feel carries the most relevance. We hope the canconical tag will resolve this issue for us. I have also read about the syndication tag and was looking for feedback or recommendations if we should implement that also, but it may be overkill as the two tags objectives seem to be similar. I guess my first question is if the syndication tag is only used by Google News. Secondly, and a little off topic is that we also offer an API and like many other sites, I have read, our content partners are now doing better in primary and long tail rankings even thought we are the original source. My assumption is that we should modify the API to force using both caconical and syndication tags as well. Lastly, I´m curious if anyone has tested the original source tag and if we should implement that as well. Thanks everyone. Jarrett0 -
Google place 7 -> 40, why??
Hi, my new site http://www.ie-mac.com/ just dropped 33 places from place 7 to place 40 on goolge.com , for the two word combo: ie mac Did I screw up? How? Background Info: 1 Two weeks ago I moved my whole site from my old domain http://ie4mac.com/ to http://www.ie-mac.com/ with the goal of obtaining a good ranking for the keyword combo: ie mac. Apparantly tis worked- The site showed up on place 7. 2. I changed the design of the site and put the video on the front page. Good so far, still place 7, but: The text that google was showing was half the ALT-Tag of the Video first-slide image and the other half was our trademark disclaimer. 3. I changed the ALT tag and the disclaimer to give users a more inviting text on google. THis worked, google now shows the text as intended, but: For the desired combo: ie mac the site dropped to palce 40!! My best guesses at this point: 1. I'm using wordpress as a CMS and the all-in-one-seo-pack plugin to set custom titles etc., and the google XML sitemap plugin to buid an XML sitemap and notify google. During the couple of days, I made a lot of chnages to the site. Could be that the plugin pinged google a lot of times. Could this be part of the problem? 2. The site is hosted at http://www.ixwebhosting.com/ , because they give users dedicated IPs and a good price. However, the loadlevel on the server I'm on is always very high (10 - 20). I'm using a CDN for images and a caching plugin so the site loads in less than 2 seconds according to http://tools.pingdom.com/ . Unless the cache is empty, then it's 9 seconds. This is not great, but it's also no new, so: What could have caused the sudden drop from 7 to 40?? Thank you and kind regards
On-Page Optimization | | ie4mac0