Rel author problems
-
anyone have expirance with google rel author and google profile.
I have set up my profile page on my site, and i have added a link to my google profile, this all seems to be working according to Rich Snippet tool.Other profiles, contributer to and recomended link but the tool reports the error below. any ideas?
I have aded a link to my prifile in all 3 areas,
Error: Google Profile does not link to article site
-
Thanks for providing the discovery Alan - good reminder that it can be the seemingly little things that bring us down!
-
OK found problem
in rich snippet tool, i had domain.com, this worled for all checks but the link back from profile, changed to http://domain.com and tool worled
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
-
Hide Cross Domain Rel=Canonical
Hi Guys I was just wondering what will be the best way to hide a rel=canonical on the server side, my sites rankings got switched exactly with my competitor and the problem is we use the same web designer/marketing people. so they have full access to both websites just found it weird for the rankings to switch so quickly.
Industry News | | johan80 -
Best Way to Promote Other Authors SEO?
Wanted to get the communities feedback on this. WDAC is designing a new section of our site. This new section is aimed at helping small businesses that want to get SEO help, but are not in a position financially/do not want to pay an agency for help. The page can be viewed here: http://www.webdesignandcompany.com/expert-seo-tips The page is called "Expert SEO Tips" and we are going to promote other authors content that focuses on high quality articles around SEO tactics, methods, tips, tricks, etc. There are a few articles listed on the page based around what we have shared in the past, but you can see that the page/section is still in its infancy and may change to a new layout/design in the near future. The section will summarize the article we are linking to , and provide a link to the authors Twitter/G+ profile, depending upon what they have setup. We have reached out to a few places in the Google+ communities asking for articles and submissions, but have had little success. Strange due to the fact that we are providing outgoing links without requesting one back...hmmm. Anyway, what do any of you think would be the best way to get people to respond? Also, does anyone see any issues with adding this type of content to our site using followed links, specifically since we are linking out to relevant articles related to our own services? Does anyone see any potential pitfalls? Does anyone have any articles they think would be a great addition or provide help to business owners? All input and insight is appreciated! Looking forward to hearing your input.
Industry News | | David-Kley1 -
How Google could quickly fix the whole Links problem...
A Thursday morning brainstorm that hopefully an important Google manager will see... Google could quickly end all the problems of link buying, spammy links, and negative SEO with one easy step: Only count the 100 best follow links to any domain. Ignore all the nofollows and everything beyond the 100 best. They can choose what "best" means. Suddenly links would be all about quality. Quantity would not matter. Fiverr links, comment links, and all the other mass-produced spam links would literally be ignored. Unless that's all a domain had, and then they would surely be stomped by any domain with 100 decent natural links. Would it be an improvement over today's situation?
Industry News | | GregB1230 -
100's of versions of the same page. Is rel=canonical the solution???
Hi, I am currently working with an eCommerce site that has a goofy set up for their contact form. Basically, their are hundreds of "contact us" pages that look exactly the same but have different URLs and are used to help the store owner determine which product the user contacted them about. So almost every product has it's own "contact us" URL. The obvious solution is to do away with this set up but if that is not an option, would a rel=canonical tag linked back to the actually "contact us" page be a possible solution? Or is the canonical tag only used to show the difference between www vs non-www? Thanks!
Industry News | | RossFruin0 -
Google Alert not working - anyone else have this problem?
I have a Google Alert that has stopped pulling in recent results even though a web search indicates that the pages are being indexed. None of the alert settings have changed. Anyone else have this happen recently and know how to remedy this problem?
Industry News | | BostonWright0 -
Huge website Search Quality Team problem
One of my clients, have a huge problem. His page which generate traffic over 3 milion unique users per month (GA) has been penalized in January / filtered by Google, reason is simple: incoming links from low quality pages... We try everything from reconsideration request to meeting Google Europe employees (But not directly with search quality team), reconsideration requests (over 10) in 6 month are bounced off we got automatic reply like "This website have still problem, read Google Webmasters FAQ etc." We contacted manually with webmasters which have websites with incoming link to us, some pepole delete with no problem, rest don't take any action to remove our links from webistes...A few days ago we use disavow tool links where we add all links which can be ignored by Google, so.. we make new recosideration data with specific information and yesterday we got the same reply like as beginning of the year.. Like this: "There are still some inorganic links to your site" What we can do? We lost a money, our client lost money, lost position, lost users... Anyone have any idea to contact with Google excluding reconsideration request form and forum?
Industry News | | thenaturat0 -
Problem with SOME Indian based SEO companies, HELP!
First of all I want to say that I hire 2 great Indian SEOs at my company and this question is in no way meant to offend, or single anyone out. However It's come to a point where the amount of emails we receive for "Ethical SEO, High PR Guaranteed Link building Services, SEO professionals etc" from Indian based companies is costing us a lot of time on a daily basis to filter out spam from real enquiries. Blocking their emails is not even working as they use gmail accounts and multiple domain emails so we can't keep up with them. I have even spoken to some of the owners of these 'companies' and they admit using different email accounts so as not to be blacklisted. They also seem to believe that the opt-out option (which is legally required when sending out promotional emails) is itself optional!!!!! Now when I asked how exactly they were getting my email they said that they get info from the, and I quote "first page of Google"!!!!! So my question is the following; is there anyway I can block my site from showing up in a particular country altogether? Again this is in no way attacking ALL Indian based SEO companies, my beef is with the 74 (we counted) different 'companies' that are flooding our email with offers P.S. Is anyone else having these issues?
Industry News | | MassivePrime0 -
Google+ profiles and Rel Author. Extensive question
A bit of a mammoth question for discussion here: With the launch of Google+ and profiles, coupled with the ability to link/verify authorship using rel=me to google+ profile - A few questions with respect to the long term use and impact. As an individual - I can have a Google+ Profile, and add links to author pages where I am featured. If rel=me is used back to my G+ profile - google can recognise me as the writer - no problem with that. However - if I write for a variety of different sites, and produce a variety of different content - site owners could arguably become reluctant to link back or accredit me with the rel=me tag on the account I might be writing for a competitor for example, or other content in a totally different vertical that is irrelevant. Additionally - if i write for a company as an employee, and the rel=me tag is linked to my G+ profile - my profile (I would assume) is gaining strength from the fact that my work is cited through the link (even if no link juice is passed - my profile link is going to appear in the search results on a query that matches something I have written, and hence possibly drain some "company traffic" to my profile). If I were to then leave the employment of that company - and begin writing for a direct competitor - is my profile still benefiting from the old company content I have written? Given that google is not allowing pseudonyms or ghost writer profiles - where do we stand with respect to outsourced content? For example: The company has news written for them by a news supplier - (each writer has a name obviously) - but they don't have or don't want to create a G+ profile for me to link to. Is it a case of wait for google to come up with the company profiles? or, use a ghost name and run the gauntlet on G+? Lastly, and I suppose the bottom line - as a website owner/company director/SEO; Is adding rel=me links to all your writers profiles (given that some might only write 1 or 2 articles, and staff will inevitably come and go) an overall positive for SEO? or, a SERP nightmare if a writer moves on to another company? In essence are site owners just improving the writers profile rather than gaining very much?
Industry News | | IPINGlobal541
