I am a beginner in Structure Data Markup and I want to know if I did it well
-
message removed.
-
Hi Leebi,
As you probably noticed by running the Schema.org snippet in the Structured Data Testing Tool is that the code doesn't verify. You're currently using an array for the sameAs property. But you can't use a @type SocialMediaPosting in there. Basically what it's expecting is an array of strings with the values of your sameAs properties. If you would change that it would likely verify.
Martijn.
-
The easiest way to test this is to go to https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool. Just taking a glance at it, it definitely looks like normal Schema code, I would use the tool to be sure though.
-
Super smart idea to be doing this. The best way to make sure this is pixel perfect is to use the Google Webmaster structured data tool: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/2650907?hl=en
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
-
Issue with Google Structured Data Testing Toll asking for "logo" - ld+json
Hi I am trying to get schema set up for a number of articles we are putting on our site (eg:https://www.plasticpipeshop.co.uk/temporary-KB-page_ep_88-1.html) the mark up I think I should use is : Google structured data testing tool keeps insisting I have "publisher" and then "logo" but doesn't seem to want accept anything for the "logo" entry no matter how I seem to code it. Any assistance would be much appreciated as after three hours on this I am pulling what little hair I have left out! Bob
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BobBawden10 -
Best-practice URL structures with multiple filter combinations
Hello, We're putting together a large piece of content that will have some interactive filtering elements. There are two types of filters, topics and object types. The architecture under the hood constrains us so that everything needs to be in URL parameters. If someone selects a single filter, this can look pretty clean: www.domain.com/project?topic=firstTopic
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | digitalcrc
or
www.domain.com/project?object=typeOne The problems arise when people select multiple topics, potentially across two different filter types: www.domain.com/project?topic=firstTopic-secondTopic-thirdTopic&object=typeOne-typeTwo I've raised concerns around the structure in general, but it seems to be too late at this point so now I'm scratching my head thinking of how best to get these indexed. I have two main concerns: A ton of near-duplicate content and hundreds of URLs being created and indexed with various filter combinations added Over-reacting to the first point above and over-canonicalizing/no-indexing combination pages to the detriment of the content as a whole Would the best approach be to index each single topic filter individually, and canonicalize any combinations to the 'view all' page? I don't have much experience with e-commerce SEO (which this problem seems to have the most in common with) so any advice is greatly appreciated. Thanks!0 -
Can someone help me understand why this page is ranking so well?
Hi everyone, EDIT: I'm going to link to the actual page, please remove if there are any issues with confidentiality. Here is the page: https://www.legalzoom.com/knowledge/llc/topic/advantages-and-disadvantages-overview It's ranking #2 on Google for "LLC" This page is a couple months old and is substantially heavy in content, but not much more so than all the dozens of other pages online that are competing with it. This is a highly competitive industry and this particular domain is an extremely huge player in this industry. This new page is suddenly ranking #2 for an extremely competitive head term, arguably the most important/high volume keyword being targeted by the entire site. The page is outranking the home page, as well as the service page that exactly targets the query - the one that you would think would be the ranking page for this head term. However, this new page is somewhat of a spin-off with some additional related content about the subject, some videos, resources, a lot of internal links, etc. The first word of the title tag exactly matches the head term. I did observe that almost no other pages on the site have the exact keyword as the first word of the title tag, but that couldn't be sufficient to bring it up so high in the ranks, could it? Another bizarre thing that is happening is that Google is ignoring the Title Tag in the actual HTML (which is a specific question that is accurate to the content on the page), and re-assigning a title tag that basically looks like this: "Head Term | Brand." Why would it do this on this page? Doesn't it usually prefer more descriptive title tags? There are no external links coming up on Moz or Majestic pointing to this page. It has just a couple social shares. It's not being linked to from the home page or top nav bar on the main site. Can anyone explain how this particular page would outrank the main service page targeting this keyword, as well as other highly authoritative, older pages online targeting the same keyword? Thanks for your help!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | FPD_NYC1 -
Flash site ranking well for a competitive keyword
Hello Mozzers, Thought we'd get the group's opinion on this: This site (power lead generation) is ranking for the keyword "lead generation" on Google.ca at the 5th position organically . It's performing even better than some of the better optimized sites with more content related to this keyword. Any input would be appreciated. Cheers, SEO5..
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SEO5Team0 -
We are moving one website to a different domain and would like to know what is the best way to do it without hurting SEO
The website we want to move, let's say www.olddomain.com has a low quality back links profile, in fact it received a manual notification from google of unnatural links detected; but the home page has a PR 3. We want to move it to a different domain let's say www.newdomain.com. We would like to know if it's better to do a 301 redirect to the new domain, in order to transfer the link juice or if it would be better to do a 302, taking into account that this redirect won't pass any link juice, so it would be like start from scratch with this new domain. Thanks for your help.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DoitWiser0 -
Question about best approach to site structure
I am curious if anyone can share some advice. I am working on planning architecture for a tour company. The key piece of the content strategy will be providing details on each of the tour destinations, with associated profiles for each city within those destinations. Lots of content, which should be great for the SEO strategy. With regards to the architecture, I have a ‘destinations’ section on the Website where users can access each of the key destinations served by the tour company. My question is – from a planning perspective I can organize my folder structure in a few different ways. http://www.companyurl.com/destinations/touring-regions/cities/ or http://www.companyurl.com/destinations/ http://www.companyurl.com/touring-regionA/ http://www.companyurl.com/touring-regionB/cities-profile/ I am curious if anyone has an opinion on what might perform best in terms of the site structure from an SEO perspective. My fear is taking all of this rich content and placing it so many tiers down in the architecture of the site. Any advice that could be offered would be appreciated. Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | VERBInteractive0 -
Unsure where Google has sourced this inaccurate Product Data
Hi, This is a slightly odd one I was hoping someone could shed some light on. One of our staff just did a Google search and located these listings on Google UK Product Search: http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=ink+cartridges&hl=en&sa=X&biw=1074&bih=499&tbm=shop&prmd=imvns#q=ink+cartridges&hl=en&sa=X&tbs=store:3287803270081455254&tbm=shop&prmd=imvns&ei=xp5pUP6uN8i_0QXUuoHADQ&ved=0CI0BEMcMMAE&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=333b49ec245f6031&biw=1074&bih=499 Do you happen to have any idea where Google is getting this regionalised data from and in particular the pricing which is incorrect? We have a Google (UK) Product Feed however the prices given are different than those being displayed in this localised search. Additionally the product feed that we supply relates to our main website and not a specific store. If you click through to compare prices from multiple merchants you'll see our prices being listed correctly under our company name and website rather than the incorrect pricing attributed to a specific store. I have checked our Google Places Account and our Google Product Feed Account but I just can't figure out where this data and incorrect pricing is coming from and indeed why it only affects our physical stores and not the more generalised website pricing. If someone could point me in the right direction so I can get this corrected I’d appreciate it! Many thanks Chris
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ChrisHolgate0 -
Pages and Keyword Structures, what do you think?
Hi, So I think the best way to do this would be to layout a fictitious example so here it is. Lets say you offer plumbing and painting services and want to start targeting 3 more locations near by. 'Plumber +Location' and 'Painter +Location' both get the exact same search so are equal. I would personally create a new page called '/plumber-and-painter-location/' Then have the title tag contain both keywords 'Plumber and Painter +Location'. BUT... maybe it would be better to have a page for each as this would then be more relevant SEO wise and the customer looking for a painter wouldn't be presented with non-relevant plumbing content. But this does mean now instead of 3 pages you need 6. And if you bolted on another services such as Plastering instead of the 3 pages you need 9. Basically If you offered Plumbing, Painting & Plastering in 3 different locations how would you structure it? Cheers
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | activitysuper0