How can I leverage Places/Yelp Reviews for Attorney Schema?
-
A little confused by this. We have some on site reviews, is all I need is to reference that? What if we don't have "products", only "services"......should i be leveraging Places/Yelp reviews for this? Anyone add review schema for services?
-
Hi Vistage SEO!
Okay, I'm glad I understood. Now, this might be easiest for you, if your website happens to be WordPress based. It's a WP plugin for schema encoded reviews:http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/review-schema-markup/
If your site isn't WordPress based, Search Engine Watch coincidentally just published a really good piece on this topic today:
I think you will find that article answers pretty much all questions you might have on this. If anything isn't clear after looking over these two resources, please come back and ask. Good luck!
-
Hi Vistage SEO! Okay, I'm glad I understood. Now, this might be easiest for you, if your website happens to be WordPress based. It's a WP plugin for schema encoded reviews: http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/review-schema-markup/ If your site isn't WordPress based, Search Engine Watch coincidentally just published a really good piece on this topic today: http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2223886/How-to-Add-Reviews-to-Your-Site-Using-Schema-Structured-Data-Markup I think you will find that article answers pretty much all questions you might have on this. If anything isn't clear after looking over these two resources, please come back and ask. Good luck!
-
I think you got it just right Miriam! Thanks.
We also have a page on the site with about 20 client testimonials. Would it be appropriate to somehow place review schema on that page instead of republishing the Yelp and Google Reviews?
Just a little confused with the "rating scale maximum" and "rating scale minimum" fields in schema and how you would properly use those....
I guess there are a few questions wrapped up in this one.
Thank you!
-
Hi Vistage, I'm not totally certain I understand your questions. Are you saying you have reviews on Google+ and Yelp asking whether you should republish Yelp and Google based reviews on your website using schema? If so, the answer is no. Do not republish reviews on your website. You can certainly link from your website to your review profiles, but you should not take the content and reprint it on your site, using schema or anything else. Does this answer your question, or am I not understanding what you're hoping to know? Please, just let me know!
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
-
How to find correct schema type
Dear Moz members, I m currently working on schema optimizations of my website casinobesty.com which review online casino websites. I have a doubt which schema itemReviewed type I have to use in the review pages. Currently I m using type as "Game" but I m not sure it is correct. "description": "",
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CongthanhThe
"itemReviewed": {
"@type": "Game",
"name": "LeoVegas Casino",
"url": "https://casinobesty.com/casino/leovegas-casino/"
}, Thank you1 -
Could I set a Cruise as an Event in Schema mark up?
Hi there, We are now in the process of implementing a JSON-LD mark-up solution and are building cruises as an event. Will this work and can we get away with this without penalty? Previously they have been marking their cruises as events using the data highlighter and this has displayed correctly in the SERP. The ideal schema would be Trip but this is not supported by Google Rich Results yet, hopefully they will support this in the future. Another alternative would be product but this does not display rich-results as we would like. Event has the best result in terms of how the information is displayed. For example someone might search "Cruises to Spain" and the landing page would display the next 3 cruises that go to Spain, with dates & prices. The event location would be the cruise terminal, the offer would be the starting price and the start & end date would be the cruise duration, these are fixed dates. I am interested to hear the communities opinion and experience with this problem.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NoWayAsh1 -
Can I add external links to my sitemap?
Hi, I'm integrating with a service that adds 3rd-party images/videos (owned by them, hosted on their server) to my site. For instance, the service might have tons of pictures/videos of cars; and then when I integrate, I can show my users these pictures/videos about cars I might be selling. But I'm wondering how to build out the sitemap--I would like to include reference to these images/videos, so Google knows I'm using lots of multimedia. How's the most white-hat way to do that? Can I add external links to my sitemap pointing to these images/videos hosted on a different server, or is that frowned upon? Thanks in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SEOdub0 -
Google + and Schema
I've noticed with a few of the restaurant clients I work with that Schema isn't contributing at all to their SERP -- their Google + page is. Is there any way to have more control over what Google is pulling to help make UX better? I.e. showing photos of the restaurant without a logo, etc.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Anti-Alex0 -
How can I optimize pages in an index stack
I have created an index stack. My home page is http://www.southernwhitewater.com My home page (if your look at it through moz bat for chrome bar} incorporates all the pages in the index. Is this Bad? I would prefer to index each page separately. As per my site index in the footer What is the best way to optimize all these pages individually and still have the customers arrive at the top and links directed to the home page ( which is actually the 1st page). I feel I am going to need a rel=coniacal might be needed somewhere. Any help would be great!!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | VelocityWebsites0 -
Keyword Targeting / Cannibalisation
Hi Guys We're about to launch a very large website for a flooring company and would like to find out more about _key word _cannibalisation - to put my mind at rest. I know Rand posted a Whiteboard Friday early last year about this topic and mentioned using part of the same keyword was ok to use. All our keywords are specifically geared for "user intent" meaning each keyword has relevance and the content to back up the keyword. We've ensured the keywords are located within each url, placed at the start of the page title, h1 etc.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GaryVictory1 -
Can Google read content/see links on subscription sites?
If an article is published on The Times (for example), can Google by-pass the subscription sign-in to read the content and index the links in the article? Example: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/life/property/overseas/article4245346.ece In the above article there is a link to the resort's website but you can't see this unless you subscribe. I checked the source code of the page with the subscription prompt present and the link isn't there. Is there a way that these sites deal with search engines differently to other user agents to allow the content to be crawled and indexed?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CustardOnlineMarketing0 -
Indexing/Sitemap - I must be wrong
Hi All, I would guess that a great number of us new to SEO (or not) share some simple beliefs in relation to Google indexing and Sitemaps, and as such get confused by what Web master tools shows us. It would be great if somone with experience/knowledge could clear this up for once and all 🙂 Common beliefs: Google will crawl your site from the top down, following each link and recursively repeating the process until it bottoms out/becomes cyclic. A Sitemap can be provided that outlines the definitive structure of the site, and is especially useful for links that may not be easily discovered via crawling. In Google’s webmaster tools in the sitemap section the number of pages indexed shows the number of pages in your sitemap that Google considers to be worthwhile indexing. If you place a rel="canonical" tag on every page pointing to the definitive version you will avoid duplicate content and aid Google in its indexing endeavour. These preconceptions seem fair, but must be flawed. Our site has 1,417 pages as listed in our Sitemap. Google’s tools tell us there are no issues with this sitemap but a mere 44 are indexed! We submit 2,716 images (because we create all our own images for products) and a disappointing zero are indexed. Under Health->Index status in WM tools, we apparently have 4,169 pages indexed. I tend to assume these are old pages that now yield a 404 if they are visited. It could be that Google’s Indexed quotient of 44 could mean “Pages indexed by virtue of your sitemap, i.e. we didn’t find them by crawling – so thanks for that”, but despite trawling through Google’s help, I don’t really get that feeling. This is basic stuff, but I suspect a great number of us struggle to understand the disparity between our expectations and what WM Tools yields, and we go on to either ignore an important problem, or waste time on non-issues. Can anyone shine a light on this for once and all? If you are interested, our map looks like this : http://www.1010direct.com/Sitemap.xml Many thanks Paul
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fretts0
