Why do some reputable publishers have problems with their microdata?
-
I'm using the Google Structured Data Testing Tool to test: https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool
NY Times and Women's Health being two good examples.
These two reputable publishers don't seem to have the microdata they've implemented recognized. Are they doing something wrong or is there a problem with the tool?
-
Haven't tried that, but that's not a bad idea, thanks. I assumed I wouldn't hear back.
-
Basically what I mean is if the validator made by Google isn't validating, that would indicate that the code should be cleaned up right?
-
Interesting. Could this mean that the structured data is somehow being blocked. Should the Google Structured Data tool be the gold standard? What does it mean if it can't read the structured data?
-
Sure, this is a typical example: https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool#url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.womenshealthmag.com%2Flife%2Fthis-bride-walked-down-the-aisle-with-the-man-who-got-her-fathers-donor-heart
This link won't even get validated in the tool: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/08/10/sports/olympics/gymnastics-parents.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=image&module=photo-spot-region
ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0This one is using schema.org markup but its not being recognized in the structured data testing tool: http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/olympics/hope-solos-mistake-helps-colombia-tie-usa/ar-BBvsb4J?li=BBnb7Kz
Hell, check SI.com, it doesn't even use RDF, microdata, or JSON. I don't get it.
-
It looks like Women's Health is using RDFa. Why they would be using this instead of JSON-LD or microdata I don't know...
They're not even doing it right according to the google structured data testing tool.
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
-
Huge problem : All our Internal Links Dropped from 9.000 to 0.What happened?
Hi, I just noticed a huge large problem in our rankings. Our rankings suddenly dropped for more than 50 %. Of course, I immediately started to research the issue. And under Links, I found that we somehow lost all of our internal links! They have dropped from 9k to 0. Now, I am sure that we do have some internal links on our site ( since I put them there myself). Could you please tell me what is going on and how I can fix this issue? Our site is 1solarsolution.com and I will also attach screenshots bellow from Link Explorer, thank you. Fr08UGe
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | alisamana0 -
Publishing content in two or more places?
I've been thinking about publishing an article on LinkedIn and then posting the same article to the news page on the website. It would be high quality informative and useful but is that likely to cause any duplicate content issues?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoman100 -
Having problems resolving duplicate meta descriptions
Recently, I’ve recommended to the team running one of our websites that we remove duplicate meta descriptions. The site currently has a large number of these and we’d like to conform to SEO best practice. I’ve seen Matt Cutt’s recent video entitled, ‘Is it necessary for every page to have a meta description’, where he suggests that webmasters use meta descriptions for their most tactically important pages, but that it is better to have no meta description than duplicates. The website currently has one meta description that is duplicated across the entire site. This seemed like a relatively straight forward suggestion but it is proving much more challenging to implement over a large website. The site’s developer has tried to resolve the meta descriptions, but says that the current meta description is a site wide value. It is possible to create 18 distinct replacements for 18 ‘template’ pages, but any sub-pages of these will inherit the value and create more duplicates. Would it be better to: Have no meta descriptions at all across the site? Stick with the status quo and have one meta description site-wide? Make 18 separate meta descriptions for the 18 most important pages, but still have 18 sets of duplicates across the sub-pages of the site. Or…is there a solution to this problem which would allow us to follow the best practice in Matt’s video? Any help would be much appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RG_SEO0 -
Recovering from index problem (Take two)
Hi all. This is my second pass at the problem. Thank you for your responses before, I think I'm narrowing it down! Below is my original message. Afterwards, I've added some update info. For a while, we've been working on http://thewilddeckcompany.co.uk/. Everything was going swimmingly, and we had a top 5 ranking for the term 'bird hides' for this page - http://thewilddeckcompany.co.uk/products/bird-hides. Then disaster struck! The client added a link with a faulty parameter in the Joomla back end that caused a bunch of duplicate content issues. Before this happened, all the site's 19 pages were indexed. Now it's just a handful, including the faulty URL (thewilddeckcompany.co.uk/index.php?id=13) This shows the issue pretty clearly. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site%3Athewilddeckcompany.co.uk&oq=site%3Athewilddeckcompany.co.uk&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i58.2178j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 I've removed the link, redirected the bad URL, updated the site map and got some new links pointing at the site to resolve the problem. Yet almost two month later, the bad URL is still showing in the SERPs and the indexing problem is still there. UPDATE OK, since then I've blocked the faulty parameter in the robots.txt file. Now that page has disappeared, but the right one - http://thewilddeckcompany.co.uk/products/bird-hides - has not been indexed. It's been like this for several week. Any ideas would be much appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Blink-SEO0 -
Are menu links with the same anchor text but different destinations a problem?
My website uses the same anchor text to go to different pages, with section headers indicating where they go. Is this a problem? f so, why? Here is an example of what I mean: Women Shoes - link to women shoes Clothes - link to women clothes Accessories - link to women accessories Men Shoes - link to men shoes Clothes - link to men clothes Accessories - link to men accessories Kids Shoes - link to kids shoes Clothes - link to kids clothes Accessories - link to kids accessories
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | theLotter0 -
Indexed non existent pages, problem appeared after we 301d the url/index to the url.
I recently read that if a site has 2 pages that are live such as: http://www.url.com/index and http://www.url.com/ will come up as duplicate if they are both live... I read that it's best to 301 redirect the http://www.url.com/index and http://www.url.com/. I read that this helps avoid duplicate content and keep all the link juice on one page. We did the 301 for one of our clients and we got about 20,000 errors that did not exist. The errors are of pages that are indexed but do not exist on the server. We are assuming that these indexed (nonexistent) pages are somehow linked to the http://www.url.com/index The links are showing 200 OK. We took off the 301 redirect from the http://www.url.com/index page however now we still have 2 exaact pages, www.url.com/index and http://www.url.com/. What is the best way to solve this issue?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Bryan_Loconto0 -
Nuanced duplicate content problem.
Hi guys, I am working on a recently rebuilt website, which has some duplicate content issues that are more nuanced than usual. I have a plan of action (which I will describe further), so please let me know if it's a valid plan or if I am missing something. Situation: The client is targeting two types of users: business leads (Type A) and potential employees (Type B), so for each of their 22 locations, they have 2 pages - one speaking to Type A and another to Type B. Type A location page contains a description of the location. In terms of importance, Type A location pages are secondary because to the Type A user, locations are not of primary importance. Type B location page contains the same description of the location plus additional lifestyle description. These pages carry more importance, since they are attempting to attract applicants to work in specific places. So I am planning to rank these pages eventually for a combination of Location Name + Keyword. Plan: New content is not an option at this point, so I am planning to set up canonical tags on both location Types and make Type B, the canonical URL, since it carries more importance and more SEO potential. The main nuance is that while Type A and Type B location pages contain some of the same content (about 75%-80%), they are not exactly the same. That is why I am not 100% sure that I should canonicalize them, but still most of the wording on the page is identical, so... Any professional opinion would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | naymark.biz0 -
How long a domain's bad reputation last?
I catched a dropped domain with a nice keyword, but poor reputation. It used to have some malware on the site and WOT (site review tool available at Chrome among others) has very negative reviews tied to the site. I guess that Google has to have records about that as well, because Chrome used to prompt a warning when I entered the site. My question is: how long will the bad reputation last if I build a legitimate website there?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | zapalka0