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
-
Will google be able to crawl all of the pages given that the pages displayed or the info on a page varies according to the city of a user?
So the website I am working for asks for a location before displaying the product pages. There are two cities with multiple warehouses. Based on the users' location, the product pages available in the warehouse serving only in that area are shown. If the user skips location, default warehouse-related product pages are shown. The APIs are all location-based.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Airlift0 -
Google Indexing Stopped
Hello Team, A month ago, Google was indexing more than 2,35,000 pages, now has reduced to 11K. I have cross-checked almost everything including content, backlinks and schemas. Everything is looking fine, except the server response time, being a heavy website, or may be due to server issues, the website has an average loading time of 4 secs. Also, I would like to mention that I have been using same server since I have started working on the website, and as said above a month ago the indexing rate was more than 2.3 M, now reduced to 11K. nothing changed. As I have tried my level best on doing research for the same, so please if you had any such experiences, do share your valuable solutions to this problem.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jeffreyjohnson0 -
Is Google ignoring my canonicals?
Hi, We have rel=canonical set up on our ecommerce site but Google is still indexing pages that have rel=canonical. For example, http://www.britishbraces.co.uk/braces/novelty.html?colour=7883&p=3&size=599 http://www.britishbraces.co.uk/braces/novelty.html?p=4&size=599 http://www.britishbraces.co.uk/braces/children.html?colour=7886&mode=list These are all indexed but all have rel=canonical implemented. Can anyone explain why this has happened?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HappyJackJr0 -
Why will Google not remove a manual penalty against us?
Our site was placed under a manual penalty last year in June 2012 after penguin rolled out. We were advised by Google that we had unnatural links pointing to our site. We fought for months, running backlink checks and contacting webmasters where Google's WMT was showing the sites which had links. We have submitted numerous reconsideration requests with proof of our efforts in the form of huge well labeled spreadsheets, emails, and screen shots of online forms requesting link removal.When the disavow tool came out we thought it was a godsend and added all the sites who had either ignored us or refused to take down the links to the disavow.txt with the domain: tag. Then we submitted another reconsideration request, but to no avail.We have since had email correspondence with a member of the Google Quality Search Team who after reviewing the evidence of all our previous reconsideration requests and disavow.txt still advised us to make a genuine effort and listed sites which had inorganic links pointing to our site which were already included in the disavow.txt.Google has stated "In order for your site to have a successful reconsideration request, we will need to see a substantial, good-faith effort to remove the links, and this effort should result in a significant decrease in the number of bad links that we see."We have truly done everything we can and proven it too! Especially with all the sites in the disavow.txt there must be a decrease in links pointing to our site. What more can we do? Please help!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Benbug0 -
Multiple Google+ Local (Google Place) under one email address
As a automotive dealership group, we have 15+ business listings set up under one Google+ local account. Google+ Local (Google Places) offers the ability to upload a data file for 10+ listings, so we've kept all listings under one login for efficiency. Is there any specific local SEO benefit or any general benefit at all to having each business listing set up under their own separate email address?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | autoczar0 -
Why my blog ranks poorly on Google ?
Hi 🙂 I need help for my blog, my blog http://www.dota2club.com/ for many keywords it is not in first 50 results on google. What am i doing wrong ? Can you tell me what errors / mistakes i have made and what can i do to improve my blog ? Thank you !!!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | wolfinjo0 -
Rich Snippets Publisher errors
Hi all. Happen to do a bit of testing with some of our microformat and microdata markup when I noticed our linked Google+ Publisher markup has stopped working. It definitely was working, and nothings changed, but now we are flagging errors, and I've noticed some of our competitors also have the same problem. publisher linked Google+ page = https://plus.google.com/103929635387487847550
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | sjr4x4
Error: This page does not include verified publisher markup. Learn more. If I actually add a duplicate rel="publisher" then I get the following results: Extracted Author/Publisher for this page publisherlinked Google+ page = https://plus.google.com/103929635387487847550
Error: This page does not include verified publisher markup. Learn more. publisherlinked Google+ page = https://plus.google.com/103929635387487847550/ The second line doesn't seem to flag an error? I know this is still all pretty new, so is anyone else having problems or odd results, or is Google having some problems? All our other rich snippets such as reviews etc are working fine, just seems to be the publisher bit. cheers Steve0 -
Multiple Google Places Listings?
Hi everyone. While I have read answers regarding this on Mike Blumenthal's blog, I have not been able to get an exact clarification on having multiple Google Places listings. According to Mike Blumethal, Google accepts multiple listings in the Places area for specific industries. e.g. One listing for a Dental office, one listing for EACH dentist. This could include a separate website for each. If this is the case, how far away are we from having one maxed out business owning muiiple positions in the local listing space in the search engines. specifically Google? I would love a good explanation of what is and isn't allowed to have multiple listings.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dignan991