Will Google display rich snippet photos for People?
-
I know that photos have been discontinued for Authorship. Someone told me that they had been discontinued for People (which has always been separate from Authorship, as I understand it) as well, but they're still listed here[1] . However, I can't find an example of them working. Can someone enlighten me? Thanks!
-
No, I believe we no longer see 'people' photos in the SERPs. The microdata is still recommended, but it's recommended so that Google can understand the full semantic implications of the content on your website, not to display the photo in the SERPs.
John M. on Google Authorship: https://plus.google.com/+JohnMueller/posts/HZf3KDP1Dm8
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
-
Displaying Vanity URL in Google Search Result
Hi Moz! Not sure if this has been asked before, but is there any way to tell Google to display a vanity URL (that has been 301d) instead of the actual URL in the SERP? Example: www.domainA.com is a vanity URL (bought specifically for Brand Identity reasons) that redirects to www.domainB.com. Is it possible to have the domainA Url show up in Google for a Branded search query? Thanks in advance! Arjun
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Lauriedechaseaux0 -
How to use Rich Snippets?
Hi there! I have been hearing a lot about Rich Snippets lately but I don't really know how they work. Are they a very important factor to consider for SEO? I would love to know your thoughts about this. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lucywrites0 -
Reclaiming Ranking positions in Google
We have a website we are working on that was ranking well in Google but since having a hosting upgrade has completely dropped in rankings. When a hosting upgrade was made, the developer added an incorrect robots.txt file that restricted the site from being found, hence resulting in lost rankings. We have since sorted out that issue so the robots.txt is OK. However, ranking results have yet to be reclaimed. We are unsure why these rankings haven't rebounded back, as it has been a while now. The site is https://www.brightonpanelworks.com.au. We have since also attempted to add a sitemap however to help the site be better crawled and to regain rankings, however, it appears that sitemap generators are having problems creating a sitemap for this site and we are not sure why. And we are not sure whether this may relate to why Google has not picked up on pages and ranking results have not be restored. If you have any ideas as to how we can reclaim rankings to the strong positions they were in previously, that would be much appreciated. We believe we may be missing something here that is not allowing webpages to be picked up and ranked by Google.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Gavo0 -
Is it possible that Google is pulling description from third party websites and displaying in the description section in organic result?
Hi all, I have come across the most weird situation ever in my SEO career. Google is displaying description in organic results for brand term under the website URL that doesnt exist on the website ANYWHERE but this description does appear on some directory sites created back in 2002 or so. Is there a possibility that Google is pulling info from directory sites and displaying as a description in the organic results? I am super confused! Help needed! Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Malika10 -
Rich Snippets Not Displaying - Price Error?
We recently implemented Schema.org/product on our site (www.evo.com). In the Google Webmaster Tools Structured Data report we’re getting lots of errors: http://screencast.com/t/Z3QJBctjUvP which I believe is preventing our rich snippets (price, availability, ratings) from showing in search results. When I click into the “Product” data type on the Structured Data report I see that there’s 2 errors: missing price and missing best or worst rating: http://screencast.com/t/SuHVYFLFO5D We are adding the itemprop=“bestRating” code which should take care of the ‘missing best or worst rating’ error. The missing price error is what I want to ask about. There’s a couple strange things here (using this URL as example : http://www.evo.com/skis/line-sir-francis-bacon.aspx - which has been indexed since the code was added): 1) The Webmaster Tools report is finding the schema.org/offer data type and is recognizing the InStock and OutOfStock property of this: http://screencast.com/t/xtHouzeL37q BUT price is not being detected. 2) When I enter the URL into the Structured Data Testing Tool it does detect price: https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets?url=http://www.evo.com/skis/line-sir-francis-bacon.aspx 3) When I fetch the page as GoogleBot itemprop=“price”is present: http://screencast.com/t/Hnqda95N My hunch is that the reason our Rich Snippets are not showing is because of the “price” error. The “?” by the error in WMT says: “This property is missing in the html markup or was not properly highlighted in the Data Highlighter. This can prevent the rich snippet from appearing” Does anyone have an idea why we’re getting the “price” error – or anything else that could prevent our Rich Snippets from displaying? Thanks so much! http://screencast.com/t/SuHVYFLFO5D
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | evoNick0 -
Google + pages and SEO results...
Hi, Can anyone give me insight into how people are getting away with naming their business by the SEO search term, creating a BS Google + page, then having that page rank high in the search results. I am speaking specifically about the results you get when you Google: "Los Angeles DUI Lawyer". As you can see from my attached screenshot (I'm doing the search in Los Angeles), the FIRST listing is a Google + business. Strangely, the phone number listed doesn't actually take you to a DUI attorney, but rather to some marketing group that never answers the phone. Can anyone give me insight into why Google even allows this? I just find it odd that Google cares so much about the user experience, but have the first result be something completely misleading. I know it sounds like I'm just jealous (which I am, a little), but I find it disheartening that we work so hard on SEO, and someone takes the top spot with an obvious BS page. UupqBU9
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mrodriguez14400 -
Generating Rich Snippets without Structured Data
I noticed something in Google search results today that I can't explain. Any help would be appreciated. I performed a real estate based search and the top result featured a rich snippet showcasing the following... Address Price Bd/Ba
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RyanOD
912 Garden District Dr #17. Charlotte, NC 28202 $179,990 3 / 2
222 S Caldwell St #1602. Charlotte, NC 28202 $389,238 2 / 2&1/2 However, when I visit the page associated with this information, there is no Schema to be found. In fact, the page is, for the most part, just a large table listing homes on the market. The table headings are Address, Price, and Bd/Ba. Is it common for Google to use table based data to generate rich snippets? What is the best way to influence this? In the absence of Schema (as the page we are talking about has no Schema implementation), does Google default to table data? Has anyone seen this behavior before and, if so, can you point me to it? EDIT: I've now come across a few other examples where the information is not in a table, but rather in divs. Why are such sites (you can find some by searching for "[ZIPCODE] real estate") getting this treatment?0 -
Will blocking google and SE's from indexing images hurt SEO?
Hi, We have a bit of a problem where on a website we are managing, there are thousands of "Dynamically" re-sized images. These are stressing out the server as on any page there could be upto 100 dynamically re-sized images. Google alone is indexing 50,000 pages a day, so multiply that by the number of images and it is a huge drag on the server. I was wondering if it maybe an idea to blog Robots (in robots.txt) from indexing all the images in the image file, to reduce the server load until we have a proper fix in place. We don't get any real value from having our website images in "Google Images" so I am wondering if this could be a safe way of reducing server load? Are there any other potential SEO issues this could cause?? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | James770