Google Rich Snippet
-
So i have been implementing rich snippets for work and all has been good until now, As you can see below the meta description has all of a sudden included the review date.
The review date is the only date on the page. Any ideas what could be causing this?
Thanks
-
David,
I can see the frustration. It would appear to a searcher on Google that the page for this class hasn't been updated since 2013 because Google is using the Schema markup you have around the review, which is:
A quick fix that could help until you get this figured out would be to change the published date on the review to a more recent date in 2015.
I do see that you have placed the "datePublished" markup within the Schema.org/review container, but Google seems to be interpreting it not just that way, but also as if it was on it's own to describe the entire page. In other words, it seems to be treated like this: https://schema.org/datePublished .
I see that you have itemtypes for an offer, dates, reviews... but not one for the page itself. Perhaps just below the HTML header of that page you could define the web page's publish date using this itemtype: https://schema.org/WebPage.
It would would begin with:
itemscopeitemtype="http://schema.org/WebPage">And would contain:
<meta< span="">itemprop="datePublished"content="2015-01-01"> (or whatever the real publish date is)</meta<>And would cover the entire page down to:
Another option could be to go with JSON-LD instead.
-
Still no luck guys, 2 dates are still shown
-
Just realised i am using https://data-vocabulary.org/Review and not schema.org so i will have to change it all and wait and see thanks
-
Thanks I will give that a shot tomorrow and fetch and submit it and let you know my finding
Thanks
-
Hi there
My bad, I misread and didn't see the second date. That's a good question, for some reason it looks like the crawlers are considering that the date of the page itself.
I would try changing that line of code to **itemprop="datePublished" content="2013-12-12" **- this would be more in line with what Google/Schema puts forth as best practices.
Try that and see if the date changes on your snippet.
Hope this helps! Good luck!
-
Thanks for the reply
Yeah that date is the markup for the review my question is why is it showing 2 times in the organic add when the date is only for the review, it is showing in the meta description also
Thanks
-
Hi there
You have a markup on that date at line 519...
Is this what you wanted it to be? You can use the Structured Data Testing Tool using your URL to see what markup Google sees. Just click "Fetch URL", paste your URL, and click "Fetch & Validate". What Google finds will populate.
Hope this helps! Good luck!
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
-
Google ranking content for phrases that don't exist on-page
I am experiencing an issue with negative keywords, but the “negative” keyword in question isn’t truly negative and is required within the content – the problem is that Google is ranking pages for inaccurate phrases that don’t exist on the page. To explain, this product page (as one of many examples) - https://www.scamblermusic.com/albums/royalty-free-rock-music/ - is optimised for “Royalty free rock music” and it gets a Moz grade of 100. “Royalty free” is the most accurate description of the music (I optimised for “royalty free” instead of “royalty-free” (including a hyphen) because of improved search volume), and there is just one reference to the term “copyrighted” towards the foot of the page – this term is relevant because I need to make the point that the music is licensed, not sold, and the licensee pays for the right to use the music but does not own it (as it remains copyrighted). It turns out however that I appear to need to treat “copyrighted” almost as a negative term because Google isn’t accurately ranking the content. Despite excellent optimisation for “Royalty free rock music” and only one single reference of “copyrighted” within the copy, I am seeing this page (and other album genres) wrongly rank for the following search terms: “free rock music”
On-Page Optimization | | JCN-SBWD
“Copyright free rock music"
“Uncopyrighted rock music”
“Non copyrighted rock music” I understand that pages might rank for “free rock music” because it is part of the “Royalty free rock music” optimisation, what I can’t get my head around is why the page (and similar product pages) are ranking for “Copyright free”, “Uncopyrighted music” and “Non copyrighted music”. “Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted” don’t exist anywhere within the copy or source code – why would Google consider it helpful to rank a page for a search term that doesn’t exist as a complete phrase within the content? By the same logic the page should also wrongly rank for “Skylark rock music” or “Pretzel rock music” as the words “Skylark” and “Pretzel” also feature just once within the content and therefore should generate completely inaccurate results too. To me this demonstrates just how poor Google is when it comes to understanding relevant content and optimization - it's taking part of an optimized term and combining it with just one other single-use word and then inappropriately ranking the page for that completely made up phrase. It’s one thing to misinterpret one reference of the term “copyrighted” and something else entirely to rank a page for completely made up terms such as “Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted”. It almost makes me think that I’ve got a better chance of accurately ranking content if I buy a goat, shove a cigar up its backside, and sacrifice it in the name of the great god Google! Any advice (about wrongly attributed negative keywords, not goat sacrifice ) would be most welcome.0 -
Malware, Google Ranking and cleanup
Hi My website was infected with the malware. We have cleaned it and during the process we had to delete the cache. Now website is showing like this on the google. How can i fix this? 3e8e9111-eac7-4238-a691-9678542eb4cf-image.png Secondly, As i have lost all the ranking, how can i get back quickly? Please help Thanks in advance
On-Page Optimization | | fslpso0 -
Tag Clouds in Google Despite Canonical Links for Single Tags/Articles
I am frustrated to see a lot tag clouds in Google even though I programmed my tagged pages to display a canonical link to the linking article if the is only one result for the tag cloud. The goal to to make sure that the article, which is of better quality than the tag page, ends up in Google without a bunch of thin tag pages getting in there. For instance this article should be in Google and this tag should not be because that tag has a canonical URL for that article. I do not have a lot of experience with tag cloud SEO because I prefer to limit such pages to categories, but I have found tag clouds to be important for aggregating information for specific issues, people, or places that are not already a site category. Some tags I have used to power social media pages that update automatically from RSS feeds for their related tag archives. That is quite useful for pages like that. Should I start using Meta noindex for those instead of rel canonical? I have already done that for author profiles because author profiles get a lot of on site links compared to individual articles because my gridviews use javascript for paging. The same is true for the tags, so if a tag is tagged in 30 articles it will have links from 30 articles but if those articles are not in the latest 20 for that tag only the latest 20 will have links back from the tag archive. I also suspect having a lot of tag pages with little content to negatively impact my indexing rate. I will see a number of recent tag pages added before new articles.
On-Page Optimization | | CopBlaster.com0 -
The meta tags: Title and Description, showing unexpected results on google
When I type my company name on google "Navneet Gems", it shows a very different meta tag then what it actually is. How do I change this meta descrption when its non-existent on my homepage? The worst is, it is having a spelling mistake. We want to correct this.
On-Page Optimization | | Navneet.Agarwal20160 -
Google is NOT showing up the right META DESCRIPTION
Hi, Recently I changed titles and meta descriptions of some pages. The problem is that google have updated the titles but not the meta descriptions.. Ive also checekd the source code of the google cached version of the pages crawled and the meta description reflect the changes i did...but the changes don't appear in google. Do you have some solution/advice for the issue? Tx so Much
On-Page Optimization | | tourtravel0 -
Any idea how Google is doing this? Is it schematic? http://techcrunch.com/2014/02/28/google-adds-full-restaurant-menus-to-its-search-results-pages/
Google is now showing menus on select searches. Any idea how they are getting this information? I would like to make sure my clients get visibility this way.
On-Page Optimization | | Ron_McCabe0 -
Google Authorship for SEO Content Writers
I am interested to know the best way to go about about Google authorship on blog articles written for a client. For example is it a bad idea for an SEO content writer to publish articles under their own identity, what are the potential footprint downsides to this?
On-Page Optimization | | Clicksjim1 -
How can we get Google to offer postcard verification for our Place Page?
Most of the time, when we claim a Google Place Page, they give 2 choices to verify ownership: 1) phone verification and 2) postcard verification. But right now (and for several weeks), for our listing, they are only giving the phone verification choice, which unfortunately won't work with our automated phone system. How can we get our Place Page listing verified through a postcard sent to our address, when Google isn't presenting that as an option?
On-Page Optimization | | DenisL0