Why is Moz's Schema so bare
-
I use to use Moz as an example by looking at their site using Google's Rich snippet tool, Today I checked and it is so bare with errors
https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/u/0/#url=moz.com
What happen?Why the sudden change?
-
From what I've encountered Johnathan, one of the easiest successful websites I have made in which it was completely thriving and I was succeeding in obtaining about 2-4 thousand unique visitors a day. I maintained this with reddit and a massive sized tumblr, Google had 0 involvement with me for a couple months.
After my Twitter profile was ranking in the top 5 of my target keyword twice, that second time for almost a week juiced up on celebrity engagement, they finally did something on my behlaf. It wasn't anything like hand extended, or a cold beer in hand. more like, they stopped blocking the doorway, how kind.
What I'm getting at is for some reason none of my lacking schema seemed to matter whatsoever or popunder script, the popup on the videos, the lack of adding nofollow tags to my questionable affiliates, and minus using yoast and making everything have 2 green dots, my site was highly questionable on several on site issues. But at the end of the day it seems if you make Google money, that's what matters apparently.
-
More likely than not, schematic markups aren't a high priority for Moz at this point. With a thousand and one other items to address and work on, prioritization and allocation of resources kicks in and schematic markups might not be as important for Moz. I also think that Google does a pretty good job of marking up Moz's content without active intervention on the part of Moz's staff, so they've de-prioritized that.
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
-
How do I hide comment reply's from google? Do I need to?
Reason for asking is Moz reports them as URL too long. Should these even be indexed by google if not, how do I hide them? Example URL : https://www.tansleyphotography.co.uk/farnham-castle-wedding-claire-chris/?reply-to=1876 This really doesn't need indexing, as it's just a comment on a blog post. Does it matter?
On-Page Optimization | | paultansley1 -
Should I remove 'local' landing pages? Could these be the cause of traffic drop (duplicate content)?
I have a site that has most of it's traffic from reasonably competitive keywords each with their own landing page. In order to gain more traffic I also created landing pages for counties in the UK and then towns within each county. Each county has around 12 towns landing pages within the county. This has meant I've added around 200 extra pages to my site in order to try and generate more traffic from long tail keywords. I think this may have caused an issue in that it's impossible for me to create unique content for each town/country and therefore I took a 'shortcut' buy creating unique content for each county and used the same content for the towns within it meaning I have lots of pages with the same content just slightly different page titles with a variation on town name. I've duplicated this over about 15 counties meaning I have around 200 pages with only about 15 actual unique pages within them. I think this may actually be harming my site. These pages have been indexed for about a year an I noticed about 6 months ago a drop in traffic by about 50%. Having looked at my analytics this town and county pages actually only account for about 10% of traffic. My question is should I remove these pages and by doing so should I expect an increase in traffic again?
On-Page Optimization | | SamCUK0 -
What's better for SEO a page per review or a page with all reviews?
Was wondering what's better for SEO. We have a platform where consumers can read and write reviews. But the question is: is it better to give one page per company with all the reviews on it? Or should we have different pages for the specific company? Example: Itunes has a company page with all reviews on the page, but not the whole review. You have to click further to view the whole review (new page), at the moment this the current situation. What if we place the whole reviews on the company page, so you don't have specific pages for the reviews? Hopefully can someone help us out. Contact me if it's not clear or you want more extended information. Kind regards
On-Page Optimization | | MozzieJr0 -
Internal Linking Question(s)
Is it unwise to link internally to a page more than once on the homepage. I am reading that it is considered spammy. I am also reading that it passes PR twice to the internal page instead of just once... Which is it? Is there a way to stop passing PR to the "contact us" page. I watched an older video that Matt Cutts suggested a nofollow. Now I read that this strategy is a no no? Which is it? Thanks! 🙂
On-Page Optimization | | JML11790 -
Schema.org for news websites?
So as of late I have been on something of a mission to mark up my news website with as much accurate and detailed Schema and Open Graph data as possible, in order to not only allow the search engines to understand my content properly, but also to ensure everything appears in the most ideal fashion when linked to from Facebook, Google+, etc. Here is an example of a typical article page: http://www.nerdscoop.net/technology/video-games-459 As you'll see I currently have news posts marked up as article because that is essentially exactly what they are, but is there a better way to emphasise that they are news rather than just generic articles? My second question is regarding the category pages and the home page. How would be best to mark these up? With OG the task is fairly simple, because I can specify the homepage as being a website, but not so with Schema from what I can see. Either way, this is an interesting subject to me and I look forward to any discussion as a result. Thanks for looking.
On-Page Optimization | | HalogenDigital0 -
Duplicat page content issue I don't know how to solve
I've got a few pages (click here to see the fist on with the others as side bar links). They are all thumbnail pages of different products. The tiles are pretty different but the page content is virtually the same for all of them as is the meta description tag. I'm getting error's on the SEOmoz crawl for those pages. I know the meta tag shouldn't be a problem in SEO but is the content of the page going to cause me issues? Are the error messages from SEOmoz a result of the page content or the meta description? The pages are very similar but they are different enough that I want to separate them onto different pages. There would be too many links on that single page as well if all the thumbs where on the same page. Should I just ignore the error messages?
On-Page Optimization | | JAARON0 -
How to avoid product's lists from making your site's content duplicated?
Hi there! We at Outitude, recently launched an outdoor activities marketplace and to make it easy for users to compare activities we show a list of available activities in each activity view. The problem is that though the content is different, the first half is practically identical. Example:
On-Page Optimization | | alexmc
Sailing for a full day: http://outitude.com/en/sailing/world/sailing-full-day and sailing for half a day: http://outitude.com/en/sailing/world/sailing-half-day both URL's are different, their content is different but most of it is not (first half of the page), so that the user can compare the activity it is currently seing with others. Questions: How can we show the activities list without it ruining the page rank? Do you advise the use of "", "" surrounding the duplicated content aka activities lists? Thanks in advance.0 -
Keyword cannabilization ... I just cant face 301'ing good, well aged pages
Hi Mozzers Ive read a little about your views on cannabilization and would like to run my situation by you. I have 2 pages lets say (a) and (b) that rank ok for a main keyword. However (a) desite being nice and old is not ageing well and is starting to slip a little - its getting harder to spread the link juice so Ive been thinking should I ditch page (a) and focus solely on page (b) for this keyword. Page (b) seems to be getting better serp value right now. What I find hard is that page (a) has been around a while (6 years) and I cant bring myself to 301 it assuming thats what you would normally do to avoid cannabilization. But at the end of the day its a business page and if its failing - yet could inject even more bounce into page (b) it must be worth considering. What is the best way forward here..? Im not sure how quick any transition of link juice would take ? Also what to do with the unique content on page (a)? Seems such a shame to just ditch it. Cheers fella's Morch
On-Page Optimization | | Morch0