Rich Snippet Date Removal
-
Hey Mozzers,
I'm having a real problem getting some rich snippet data to go away! Normally i'm all for it, but in this case it's giving our department page a video rich snippet and also a really super old date (i'm not sure if this is connected with the video rich snippet, but it showed up at the same time).
The SERP is here: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=pool+table&pws=0&hl=en&num=10
We are 3rd for our page http://www.libertygames.co.uk/store/pool_tables/
I can't find the date Google is using anywhere on the page, in the headers or file dates or anything. I've even removed the video markup and removed the page from the video sitemap, the rich snippet testing tool confirms this : http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.libertygames.co.uk%2Fstore%2Fpool_tables%2F
Does anyone have any ideas why this might be showing up or if there is a way to speed up getting it off there and our old meta description back? I'm pretty sure it's killing our click-throughs.
Thanks in advance,
Stuart
-
Hi Phil,
Yeah fair point re the publisher tag, but like you say there is a lot of debate about exactly how to implement it, but i'll definitely try and refine it's use if I can.
Cheers for the video advice, i'll keep working on it.
Stu
-
Hi Stu,
Apologies - I assumed this was author and didn't check for the publisher mark-up.
I appreciate this is a bit of a hot topic and truly nobody has a great answer right now - but I don't think rel="publisher" should be used for anything that isn't in some sense journalistic. Category pages, product pages, home pages etc aren't really authored by an organisation - but, for example, "the beginners guide to SEO" on Moz absolutely is and should have the rel="publisher" mark-up attributed. Essentially - I'd define it as "collaborative content" where there's more than one author.
However, I'll back track on my previous point - I don't think your implementation here will be causing you issues, though all the video points remain.
Cheers,
Phil
-
Hi Phil,
Thanks for your response - and also your awesome talk at BrightonSEO - as far as the authorship markup is concerned we shouldn't have authorship markup on that page but we should have publisher markup, should that really only be on the homepage then? I've read a few different things about it (we put it on all pages as technically we are the publishers of all the pages on the site).
As for the video, i'll try what you suggested, I don't mind the video itself being there it's more the date in 2007 that makes the content look way older than it actually is! But yeah thanks for the advice, i'll keep at it!
Stu
-
First thing to say is that this might be really tricky. I've previous come across several instances of Google basically not removing video snippets - even when videos are removed from the page and the content is completely refreshed.. it seems like, right now, once you've got a video indexed, it's hard to get that removed.
The other thing to suggest is that your authorship mark-up is pretty spammy and not appropriate. "Liberty Games" are not an author and shouldn't be getting that snippet - so I can imagine image recognition seeing that your thumbnail isn't a human face and therefore choosing to ignore this implementation and provide the video instead consistently.
In terms of removing the video result - you basically want to refresh and resubmit everything so Google recrawls and reindexes. Resubmit your Video sitemap, make some adjustments on the page (including removing the video) then resubmit that via GWMT. No guarantees though unfortunately, as I mentioned - this can be a tough one!
-
Hey,
We do have a video sitemap, but that video isn't listed in it
Maybe i'll change the code and rename the video, see if that does it and then give the obfuscator a go...
-
Hmm odd. You don't have a video sitemap set up do you?
You can try encrypting or obfuscating the code that displays the video in order to hide it from G.
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 to remove 302 redirects in Magento?
We're seeing a couple of temporary redirects. One for the http pointing to https. Another for /checkout pointing to/checkout/cart. We don't have an internal dev so not sure how to remove these. Would anyone know? I've set up the 301s but they're not overriding and I'm still seeing the issues in the crawl. Thanks in advance for your help!
Technical SEO | | LASClients0 -
Some Old date showing in SERP
I see some old date Jan 21 2013 showing up for some categories in Google search results. These are category pages and I do not see the date in view source. This is not a wordpress site or a blog page. We keep changing this page by removing/adding items so it is not outdated.
Technical SEO | | rbai0 -
Using the Google Remove URL Tool to remove https pages
I have found a way to get a list of 'some' of my 180,000+ garbage URLs now, and I'm going through the tedious task of using the URL removal tool to put them in one at a time. Between that and my robots.txt file and the URL Parameters, I'm hoping to see some change each week. I have noticed when I put URL's starting with https:// in to the removal tool, it adds the http:// main URL at the front. For example, I add to the removal tool:- https://www.mydomain.com/blah.html?search_garbage_url_addition On the confirmation page, the URL actually shows as:- http://www.mydomain.com/https://www.mydomain.com/blah.html?search_garbage_url_addition I don't want to accidentally remove my main URL or cause problems. Is this the right way this should look? AND PART 2 OF MY QUESTION If you see the search description in Google for a page you want removed that says the following in the SERP results, should I still go to the trouble of putting in the removal request? www.domain.com/url.html?xsearch_... A description for this result is not available because of this site's robots.txt – learn more.
Technical SEO | | sparrowdog1 -
Why has my site cached date gone backwards
hi, something very unusual is happening with my site. a few months ago before we updated our site, i mean upgraded it, we would be indexed every day, now it seems we are getting indexed every four days, and now today i have noticed something very strange, this morning when i checked my site www.in2town.co.uk it was cached 31st july, but this afternoon it is showing 25th july. can anyone please let me know why this has happened many thanks
Technical SEO | | ClaireH-1848860 -
Should a 301 from a penalised domain to a new domain be removed?
A business traded on a domain let's say example.COM which was heavily penalised due to non-removable spammy back links. Their previous SEO advised them to set up on example.CO.UK but redirected example.COM to example.CO.UK. Example.CO.UK ranks very poorly, presumably due to being 'tarred with the same brush' i.e. attributed with the ills of example.COM. Will it do any good to remove the redirect or is example.CO.UK now doomed as well?
Technical SEO | | Ewan.Kennedy1 -
Removal request for entire catalog. Can be done without blocking in robots?
Bunch of thin content (catalog) pages modified with "follow, noindex" few weeks ago. Site completely re-crawled and related cache shows that these pages were not indexed again. So it's good I suppose 🙂 But all of them are still in main Google index and shows up from time to time in SERPs. Will they eventually disappear or we need to submit removal request?Problem is we really don't want to add this pages into robots.txt (they are passing link juice down below to product pages)Thanks!
Technical SEO | | LocalLocal0 -
Remove Site from Google
How can I get my website out of google? I want all pages completely gone. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | tylerfraser0 -
Should I create mini-sites with keyword rich domain names pointing to my main site?
Hi, I'm new to seomoz (and seo in general) and loving it so far. My main domain name is more of a brandname than a search engine friendly list of keywords. I rank well for some keywords I optimized for, and less so for the more competitive keywords. I was wondering if making one page minisites hosted on keyword rich domain names could help in this respect? What I want to do is just have a single page with a few paragraphs of content and links to the main site. I am not looking for links to boost the main site, just for the minisites to do better for several keywords. Will this help? Is this ok, or against some Google policy? Can this hurt the main site rankings? Thank you! **Edit: **I noticed that sites ranking above me on the first page for some keywords have much less on-page elements than my page, have about the same domain trust and also very little inbound links. The only factor I can see is the exact match of keywords in the domain name.
Technical SEO | | Eladla1