Google’s Latest Manual Action Penalty: Spammy Structured Markup
-
Anyone out there begin receiving this and or know when it started?
Google has recently began sending a new manual action spam notification to webmasters for “spammy structured markup” also known as rich snippet spam.
Your pal,
Chenzo
-
Hey,
Another Shock! Things are coming harder and harder. I am reading it out from last 2 hours. Here are all related sources
- http://www.seroundtable.com/google-spammy-structured-markup-notifications-18061.html
- http://www.seroundtable.com/google-rich-snippets-spam-14638.html
- https://productforums.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!category-topic/webmasters/xfRvnaiNZ_Q
- https://plus.google.com/+PierreFar/posts/HZJZ2kWyjVY
- http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4400099.htm
- https://productforums.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!category-topic/webmasters/xfRvnaiNZ_Q
This is going to hurt lots and lots of websites!
Regards
-
I have not heard of that until today.
http://www.seroundtable.com/google-spammy-structured-markup-notifications-18061.html
Looks like it is brand new.
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 use Google search console's 'Name change' tool?
Hi There, I'm having trouble performing a 'Name change' for a new website (rebrand and domain change) in Google Search console. Because the 301 redirects are in place (a requirement of the name change tool), Google can no longer verify the site, which means I can't complete the name change? To me, step two (301 redirect) conflicts with step there (site verification) - or is there a way to perform a 301 redirect and have the tool verify the old site? Any pointers in the right direction would be much appreciated. Cheers Ben
Technical SEO | | cmscss0 -
Structure Data Issue
HiI found few errors in Google webmaster tools under structure data. The error shows "Missing: name' but when I click 'Test Live Data' it shows 'All good'. Currently we are using Drupal CMS and please find attached error screenshot.Please advice on this issue.Thanks,SatlaqlGEyp7
Technical SEO | | TrulyTravel0 -
Structured markup for wordpress
Hello, I am having problems with marking up my WP posts. I used the All-in-One which seems to be the most user-friendly, except when I denote the aspects of the "article" and update, the markup shows up as a box at the bottom of the post (even though the info is in the text). How do I mark these up for Google without having the unseemly box at the bottom? Thanks so much in advance for any help! Btw, I am not altogether comfortable just yet on manual schematic markup (if you have a really basic manual markup that will let me do so across various platforms, I would also appreciate the recommendation). Thanks!
Technical SEO | | lfrazer1 -
Why is Google's cache preview showing different version of webpage (i.e. not displaying content)
My URL is: http://www.fslocal.comRecently, we discovered Google's cached snapshots of our business listings look different from what's displayed to users. The main issue? Our content isn't displayed in cached results (although while the content isn't visible on the front-end of cached pages, the text can be found when you view the page source of that cached result).These listings are structured so everything is coded and contained within 1 page (e.g. http://www.fslocal.com/toronto/auto-vault-canada/). But even though the URL stays the same, we've created separate "pages" of content (e.g. "About," "Additional Info," "Contact," etc.) for each listing, and only 1 "page" of content will ever be displayed to the user at a time. This is controlled by JavaScript and using display:none in CSS. Why do our cached results look different? Why would our content not show up in Google's cache preview, even though the text can be found in the page source? Does it have to do with the way we're using display:none? Are there negative SEO effects with regards to how we're using it (i.e. we're employing it strictly for aesthetics, but is it possible Google thinks we're trying to hide text)? Google's Technical Guidelines recommends against using "fancy features such as JavaScript, cookies, session IDs, frames, DHTML, or Flash." If we were to separate those business listing "pages" into actual separate URLs (e.g. http://www.fslocal.com/toronto/auto-vault-canada/contact/ would be the "Contact" page), and employ static HTML code instead of complicated JavaScript, would that solve the problem? Any insight would be greatly appreciated.Thanks!
Technical SEO | | fslocal0 -
Google Dancing?
Hello, I was wondering why my website for some keywords goes from 2nd 3rd page in Google to 7th or even more sometimes? This happens since a while. Any suggestion? Thanks. Eugenio
Technical SEO | | socialengaged0 -
Multilingual Structure
Hello fellow SEO fans, I've got a setup that I'm interested in some opinions on. I have a website which has the following setup: www.site.com (english version of the site) www.site.com/nl (dutch version of the site) Now, my experience tells me the dutch version would be written in dutch (not using Google Translate) and the meta data et al should also be in dutch. But my question is: If somebody in, say, Netherlands perform a search in english for a specific keyword, we would want the www.site.com page to appear in the SERPs, not the www.site.com/nl page, because the person has searched in english. However, because there's a www.site.com/nl page, purely the /nl page will be optimized and linked to in order to rank it higher in the SERPs for dutch searches and not english searches? But if that's the case, then the person in the Netherlands searching for the english version of the keyword, probably won't see www.site.com in the ranks because of targeting and keyword distribution? Bit of a tricky situation that I've been pondering over and can't quite put the nail on the head. Any assistance would be appreciated.
Technical SEO | | ChristopherM0 -
Do we need to manually submit a sitemap every time, or can we host it on our site as /sitemap and Google will see & crawl it?
I realized we don't have a sitemap in place, so we're going to get one built. Once we do, I'll submit it manually to Google via Webmaster tools. However, we have a very dynamic site with content constantly being added. Will I need to keep manually re-submitting the sitemap to Google? Or could we have the continually updating sitemap live on our site at /sitemap and the crawlers will just pick it up from there? I noticed this is what SEOmoz does at http://www.seomoz.org/sitemap.
Technical SEO | | askotzko0 -
Is this against google rules
Hi i am wanting to know if this is against google rules. I am building a website which will have lots of different sections and i wanted to know if you were allowed to have a new domain name pointing to a section of the site. so for example if i had a site with a domain name of manchester and then i wanted a section of the site to be called www.manchester.com/complimentary health I want to know if to help with traffic to the site and to have a better domain name, if it was allowed to have a new domain name pointing to that section of the site which could be called www.complimentaryhealth.com and have that pointing to the section. would love to hear your thoughts on this
Technical SEO | | ClaireH-1848860