Schema.org problems (still)
-
Hey Mozzers,
I've been working at this for a while now, and I can't figure out why the rich snippet data is not getting pulled for our reviews and product rating. I've included a sample URL where we have reduced the schema.org markup:
http://www.tripcentral.ca/vacations-packages_00_03_JN_gran-bahia-principe-coba.html
| } |
Any thoughts? I was told not to list multiple reviews, so I took them out. But it's still not being picked up in the SERPs, and we would really like the star rating data to appear.
Any useful advice would be appreciated!
-
I haven't had any trouble using JSON-LD for organizations and people. I have only used in-line product schema so far for products. You could try adding the in-line markup if you haven't already, and leaving the JSON-LD script up.
-
I've corrected the brackets with our dev, but it's still not pulling up.
Here is the change we made to the code:
| "@context": "http://schema.org", |
| | "@type": "BreadcrumbList", |
| | "itemListElement": [ |
| | { |
| | "@type": "ListItem", |
| | "position": 1, |
| | "item": { |
| | "@id": "http://www.tripcentral.ca", |
| | "name": "Home" |
| | } |
| | },{ |
| | "@type": "ListItem", |
| | "position": 2, |
| | "item": { |
| | "@id": "http://www.tripcentral.ca/vacations-packages_index.html", |
| | "name": "Vacations Packages" |
| | } |
| | },{ |
| | "@type": "ListItem", |
| | "position": 3, |
| | "item": { |
| | "@id": "http://www.tripcentral.ca/vacations-packages_mexico.html", |
| | "name": "Mexico" |
| | } |
| | },{ |
| | "@type": "ListItem", |
| | "position": 4, |
| | "item": { |
| | "@id": "http://www.tripcentral.ca/vacations-packages_mayan-riviera-maya.html", |
| | "name": "Mayan Riviera-Maya" |
| | } |
| | }] |
| | } |I went through with the dev team and its passing the testing tool.
Is there anything else I could be missing?
-
Are you including the itemprop="aggregateRating" itemscope="" itemtype="http://schema.org/AggregateRating" somewhere else?
Also, I think with products you need to wrap it all in a div with itemtype="http://schema.org/Product"
-
Could it be because we are using JSON that the rich snippet data is not being pulled?
-
Right now I am just focusing on getting the product rating up. Here is the code I am going to try:
Dreams Tulum
A beautiful resort, dream weddings and amazing staff.
Hotel rating:
5 out of
5 with
8 ratingsI am trying to go to the basics here- I think this looks correct?
-
Have a look at: https://developers.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/
Your page only has "hotel, product, and breadcrumb list", this should help you: https://developers.google.com/structured-data/rich-snippets/reviews
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
-
Right schema markup for wallpapers website?
I own a phone wallpapers website . I'm trying to find the right schema markup for my website. I'm planning to implant schema on home page and categories pages. What type and properties should I use?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Bren-Moss0 -
Can't support IE 7,8,9, 10\. Can we redirect them to another page that's optimized for those browsers so that we can have our site work on modern browers while still providing a destination of IE browsers?
Hi, Our site can't support IE 7,8,9, 10. Can we redirect them to another page that's optimized for those browsers so that we can have our site work on modern broswers while still providing a destination of IE browsers? Would their be an SEO penalty? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dspete0 -
Problems with US site being prioritized in Google UK
Our US version (.com) of our site is appearing above the UK version (co.uk) when using Google UK. I know Google has been giving US more priority in the UK market over the last couple years... What is protocol for fixing/dealing with this? Also, and probably more importantly, how do we handle users who are looking for the UK site right now? Majority of our users are coming from the US so we don't want to cause them any inconvenience, but the UK users need an easy way to get to the UK version quickly. Input is much appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | chrisvogel0 -
Old pages STILL indexed...
Our new website has been live for around 3 months and the URL structure has completely changed. We weren't able to dynamically create 301 redirects for over 5,000 of our products because of how different the URL's were so we've been redirecting them as and when. 3 months on and we're still getting hundreds of 404 errors daily in our Webmaster Tools account. I've checked the server logs and it looks like Bing Bot still seems to want to crawl our old /product/ URL's. Also, if I perform a "site:example.co.uk/product" on Google or Bing - lots of results are still returned, indicating the both still haven't dropped them from their index. Should I ignore the 404 errors and continue to wait for them to drop off or should I just block /product/ in my robots.txt? After 3 months I'd have thought they'd have naturally dropped off by now! I'm half-debating this: User-agent: *
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | LiamMcArthur
Disallow: /some-directory-for-all/* User-agent: Bingbot
User-agent: MSNBot
Disallow: /product/ Sitemap: http://www.example.co.uk/sitemap.xml0 -
Is it a problem that Google's index shows paginated page urls, even with canonical tags in place?
Since Google shows more pages indexed than makes sense, I used Google's API and some other means to get everything Google has in its index for a site I'm working on. The results bring up a couple of oddities. It shows a lot of urls to the same page, but with different tracking code.The url with tracking code always follows a question mark and could look like: http://www.MozExampleURL.com?tracking-example http://www.MozExampleURL.com?another-tracking-examle http://www.MozExampleURL.com?tracking-example-3 etc So, the only thing that distinguishes one url from the next is a tracking url. On these pages, canonical tags are in place as: <link rel="canonical<a class="attribute-value">l</a>" href="http://www.MozExampleURL.com" /> So, why does the index have urls that are only different in terms of tracking urls? I would think it would ignore everything, starting with the question mark. The index also shows paginated pages. I would think it should show the one canonical url and leave it at that. Is this a problem about which something should be done? Best... Darcy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
Acceptable use of availability attribute 'preorder' value in rich snippets schema markup and Google Shopping feed?
Hello all, Could someone please advise on acceptable use of the availability attribute 'preorder' value in rich snippets schema markup for our websites and the Google Shopping feed? Currently all of our products are either 'in stock' or 'out of stock', also mentioned was 'available for order' but I found that in the 2014 Google Shopping update, this value will be merged with 'in stock' here 'We are simplifying the ‘availability’ attribute by merging ‘in stock’ with ‘available for order’ and removing ‘available for order’. The products which we would like to mark as 'preorder' have been in stock and then sold out, however we have a due date for when they will come back into stock, so therefore the customer can preorder the product on our website i.e. pay in advance to secure their purchase and then they are provided with a due date for the products. Is this the correct use of the 'preorder' value, or does the product literally have to never have been released before? The guidance we have is: 'You are taking orders for this product, but it’s not yet been released.' Is this set in stone? Many thanks in advance and kind regards.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jeffwhitfield0 -
We're currently not using schemas on our website. How important is it? And are websites across the globe using it?
Schemas looks like an important thing when it comes to structuring your website and ensuring the crawl bots get all the details. I've been reading a lot of articles around the web and most of them are saying that schemas are important but very few websites are using it. Why so? Are the schemas on schema.org there to stay or am I wasting my time?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Shreyans920 -
How hard would it be to take a well-linked site, completely change the subject matter & still retain link authority?
So, this would be taking a domain with a domain authority of 50 (200 root domains, 3500 total links) and, for fictitious example, going from a subject matter like "Online Deals" to "The History Of Dentistry"... just totally unrelated new subject for the old/re-purposed domain. The old content goes away entirely. The domain name itself is a super vague .com name and has no exact match to anything either way. I'm wondering, if the DNS changed to different servers, it went from 1000 pages to a blog, ownership/contacts stayed the same, the missing pages were 301'd to the homepage, how would that fare in Google for the new homepage focus and over what time frame? Assume the new terms are a reasonable match to the old domain authority and compete U.S.-wide... not local or international. Bonus points for answers from folks who have actually done this. Thanks... Darcy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010