Received A Notice Regarding Spammy Structured Data. But we don't have any structured data or do we?
-
Got a message that we have spammy structured data on our site via webmaster tools and have no idea what they are referring to. We do not use any structured data using schema.org mark up. Could they be referring to something else?
The message was:
To: Webmaster of <a>http://www.lulus.com/</a>,
Google has detected structured markup on some of your pages that violates our structured data quality guidelines. In order to ensure quality search results for users, we display rich search results only for content that uses markup that conforms to our quality guidelines. This manual action has been applied to lulus.com/ . We suggest that you fix your markup and file a reconsideration request. Once we determine that the markup on the pages is compliant with our guidelines, we will remove this manual action.
What could we be showing them that would be interpreted as structured data, and or spammy structured data?
-
It's highly unlikely you'd get a manual penalty for incorrect Open Graph markup (especially since Google itslef doesn't use it for anything.)
Instead of trying to test one-off pages with the data testing tool, have a look in your Google Search Console under the Search Appearance > Structured Data report. Here you'll see what Google's crawler thinks about the structured markup on all the pages of your site it is able to crawl. Much better chance that the crawler has caught and reported it than that you'll find it checking one page at a time.
One of the really common types of markup that earned manual penalties recently was recipes (due to certain plugins not implementing it correctly.) Since your site doesn't include recipes, the other area to check closely is reviews/ratings. If Google thinks you're trying to use these manipulatively, they'll slap you hard, since these actually generate rich snippets in SERPS.
In the brief look I had at your site, it didn't appear your reviews/rating were using markup, but that's where an exhaustive check using the GSC report would be vastly more effective than my cursory check.
Hope that all makes sense? Good luck!
Paul
-
Thank you for your insight the data testing tool is very helpful.
https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/u/0/
- Kent
-
Hello,
I think whatever opengraph plugin you are using on your pages might be causing the issue. Take a look at: https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/u/0/#url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lulus.com%2Fcategories%2F13%2Fdresses.html
On a semi-related note, your og:image tag is missing 'og:image:width' and 'og:image:height'.
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
-
Doubts about the technical URL structure
Hello, first we had this structure Categorie: https://www.stoneart-design.de/armaturen/ Subcategory: https://www.stoneart-design.de/armaturen/waschtischarmaturen/ Oft i see this https://www.xxxxxxxx.de/badewelt/badmoebel/ But i have heard it has something to do with layers so google can index it better, is that true ? "Badewelt" is an extra layer ? So i thought maybe we can better change this to: https://www.stoneart-design.de/badewelt/armaturen/ https://www.stoneart-design.de/badewelt/armaturen/waschtischarmaturen/ and after seeing that i thought we can do it also like this so the keyword is on the left, and make instead "badewelt" just a "c" and put it on the back https://www.stoneart-design.de/armaturen/c/ https://www.stoneart-design.de/armaturen/waschtischarmaturen/c/ I dont understand it anymomre which is the best one, to me its seems to be the last one The reason was about this: this looks to me keyword stuffing: Attached picture Google indexed not the same time the same url, so i thougt with this we can solve it Also we can use only the word "whirlpools" in de main category and the subs only the type without "whirlpools" in text thanks Regards, Marcel SC9vi60
Technical SEO | | HolgerL0 -
'duplicate content' on several different pages
Hi, I've a website with 6 pages identified as 'duplicate content' because they are very similar. This pages looks similar because are the same but it show some pictures, a few, about the product category that's why every page look alike each to each other but they are not 'exactly' the same. So, it's any way to indicate to Google that the content is not duplicated? I guess it's been marked as duplicate because the code is 90% or more the same on 6 pages. I've been reviewing the 'canonical' method but I think is not appropriated here as the content is not the same. Any advice (that is not add more content)?
Technical SEO | | jcobo0 -
Moving wordpress to it's own server
Our company wants to remove wordpress from our current windows OS server at provider 1 and move it to a new server at provider 2. Godaddy handles our DNS. I would like to have it on the same domain without masking. I would like to make a DNS entry on godaddy so that our current server and our new server can use the same URL (ie sellstuff.com). But I only want the DNS to direct traffic to our current server. The goal here is to have the new server using the same URL as the old server so nothing needs to be masked once traffic is redirected with a 301 rule in the htaccess file. But no traffic outside of the 301 rule will end up going to the new server. I would then like to edit the htaccess file on our current server to redirect to the new servers IP address when someone goes to sellstuff.com/blog. Does this make since and is it possible?
Technical SEO | | larsonElectronics0 -
Help!!! Website won't index after taking it over from another IT Company
Hi, A while back we took over a website that was built in Wordpress. We rebuilt it on another platform and switched the servers over whilst retaining the same domain.I had access to the old GA Account however so did the old IT company. Therefore I created a new GA account and used that in the new website pages.Recently we found the website had been blacklisted (previous to us taking it over) and now after being crawled a lot, only 2 pages have been indexed (over a 2month period).We have submitted a request for revision (to relist the website) buthave had no movement.**Just wondering if having a old, active account that was still linked to their old website would affect our Google listing?****Will dropping the old GA Tracking code/script into the site and deleting the new account enable Google to index?**Also, there is ample content, metadata and descriptions on the site.I welcome any help on this please!
Technical SEO | | nimblerdigital0 -
Google Webmaster Tools : no data available
Hi guys I have a website which is 2 years old. Since 03/01/2013 I have no data in Google Webmaster Tools > Trafic > Search queries. The queries, the impressions and the clics dropped suddenly from one day to the next. I checked the rank of my keywords and the traffic of my site. They are stable and didn't move which means that they don't cause the problem. Has anybody had the same problem ? Is it Google Webmaster Tools bug ? Many thanks.
Technical SEO | | PFX1110 -
Junk/ Spammy Links Help
I am trying to get rid of all of the junk/spammy links from a site. Problem I am running into is OSE is only showing 7 links and there are way more than that. Is there a reason for only a few links are showing? How would I go about seeing all the links so I can get rid of them? Thank you in advance, Scott
Technical SEO | | scottdrost0 -
Notice - canonical tag
I've got several errors pointing to canonical tag, but do not know how to solve.Any help? Rel Canonical Found 6 days ago <dl> <dt>Tag value</dt> <dd>http://www.yougraph.com/</dd> <dt>Description</dt> <dd>Using rel=canonical suggests to search engines which URL should be seen as canonical.</dd> </dl> <a class="more expanded">Minimize</a>
Technical SEO | | nlopes1 -
Sitemap for pages that aren't on menus
I have a site that has pages that has a large number, about 3,000, pages that have static URLs, but no internal links and are not connected to the menu. The pages are pulled up through a user-initiated selection process that builds the URL as they make their selections, but,as I said, the pages already exist with static URLs. The question: should the sitemap for this site include these 3,000 static URLs? There is very little opportunity to optimize the pages in any serious kind of way, if you feel that makes a difference. There is also no chance that a crawler is going to find its way to these pages through the natural flow of the site. There isn't a single link to any of these pages anywhere on the site. Help?
Technical SEO | | RockitSEO0
