Spammy Structured Data Markup Removal
-
Hi There,
I'm in a weird situation and I am wondering if you can help me.
Here we go, We had some of our developers implement structured data markup on our site, and they obviously did not know what they were doing. They messed up our results in the SERP big time and we wound up getting manually penalized for it. We removed those markups and got rid of that penalty (phew), however now we are still stuck with two issues.
We had some pages that we changed their URLs, so the old URLs are now dead pages getting redirected to the newer version of the same old page, however, two things now happened:
a) for some reason two of the old dead pages still come up in the Google SERP, even though it's over six weeks since we changed the URLs. We made sure that we aren't linking to the old version of the url anywhere from our site.
b) those two old URLs are showing up in the SERP with the old spammy markup. We don't have anywhere to remove the markup from cause there are no such pages anymore so obviously there isn't this markup code anywhere anymore.
We need a solution for getting the markup out of the SERP.
We thought of one idea that might help - create new pages for those old URLs, and make sure that there is nothing spammy in there, and we should tell google not to index these pages - hopefully, that will get Google to de-index those pages.
Is this a good idea, if yes, is there anything I should know about, or watch out for? Or do you have a better one for me?
Thanks so much
-
Thanks so much
I'll try that right away
-
yes just create one you can call 301-sitemap.xml and submit it to google webmaster tools. This is a separate one from your full sitemap as when you ll get those pages removed from google seeps you can just delete it without affecting your normal sitemap.
-
thanks for your answer,
Should I create a sitemap with only dead pages? and then have two sitemaps?
let me know, please.
-
Hi Yosepgr,
one thing I would like to clarify IMO is that dev needs SEO guidance on how to implement schema. Sometimes people just request schema implementation and then wait for dev to do it. I'm not saying is your case but we, as SEO, should provide technical guidance on how to correctly implement that.
That being said I had a similar case in the past and what I did was creating a sitemap including just the dead URLs. I this way I was forcing google to crawl them and see that they now redirect to the new version.
After doing so, ensure that your redirect is actually a permanent redirect (301). You can check that easily with screaming frog by crawling those URLs in list mode or get the ayima plugin for chrome and visit the URL so you can see what the header response look like. Ensure that the redirect is 301 and with just 1 step (if possible).
It may take a while for google to digest the but you shouldn't be worried about schema as if google is penalizing your site for spammy markup, it will penalize only pages containing that markup which are now dead and removed from the site.
I hope this helps!
e
-
Hey there,
It's definitely not that good of an idea to re-do the old url's. Have you submitted the site to be reindexed? Make sure you update your sitemap if needed (and/or robots) and reupload these to google. Then wait. Any additional changes might confuse G even more. Make sure to 301 the old pages to the new ones.
If you still need help with the schema code drop me a PM.
Have a great day
Andy
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
-
Schema Markup Warning "Missing field "url" (optional)"
Hello Moz Team, I hope everyone is doing well & good, I need bit help regarding Schema Markup, I am facing issue in my schema markup specifically with my blog posts, In my majority of the posts I find error "Missing field "url" (optional)"
Technical SEO | | JoeySolicitor
As this schema is generated by Yoast plugin, I haven't applied any custom steps. Recently I published a post https://dailycontributors.com/kisscartoon-alternatives-and-complete-review/ and I tested it at two platforms of schema test 1, Validator.Schema.org
2. Search.google.com/test/rich-results So the validator generate results as follows and shows no error
Schema without error.PNG It shows no error But where as Schema with error.PNG in search central results it gives me a warning "Missing field "url" (optional)". So is this really be going to issue for my ranking ? Please help thanks!6 -
Structured Data - How frequent does Google update?
Hi all, I recently updated some markup on my site about a week ago. However, when using the structured data testing tool and inserting the URL of the page that was updated with the schema, I see that the schema being recognized does not reflect the updated markup. However, when I use the structured data testing tool again and insert the code I used for the schema, I see no errors and all info was implemented properly. Any idea why my updates (which seem to be correct based on my code) are not reflecting when testing the URL of my site via structured data testing tool? Is there some delay for this data to update? Any insight would be much appreciated. Thanks all in advance! Best,
Technical SEO | | hdeg
Sung0 -
Remove a page after redirection
Hi, I had page eg. www.example.com/page1 and I redirect 302 it to > www.example.com/page2 After that I fatch this page (page2) with GSC and this page was index in serp. Can I remove this old redirect page > www.example.com/page1 now? Will this remove harm my page?
Technical SEO | | Tormar0 -
URL Structure - Is this correct? Programming Advice Needed
Hello My father is having a website built called www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk. The site consists of different product categories as set out below 1.Engineered Wood, 2. Parquet & Reclaimed and 3. Prefinished Wood filtering further into colours 1. /lights-greys/, 2. /beiges/, 3, /browns/ and 4. /darks-blacks and then the brand name for example Vicenza. Example of a clean url **http://www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-wood/lights-greys/vicenza/ ** Each and every url is unique Our programmer has put in place 301 redirects - http://www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-wood/lights-greys-engineered-wood/vicenza/ - Is this really needed? It does not look clean and will appear like this is Google. This is a completely new site, a new start up business. I'm very confused as to why he has done this and concerned this method of programming does now follow "best practice". Can any programmer offer any advice? To get a better idea how the url structure is set out, I have attached a jpg image. Thank you Faye W09qswW.jpg
Technical SEO | | Faye2341 -
Toxic Link Removal
Greetings Moz Community: Recently I received an site audit from a MOZ certified SEO firm. The audit concluded that technically the site did not have major problems (unique content, good architecture). But the audit identified a high number of toxic links. Out of 1,300 links approximately 40% were classified as suspicious, 55% as toxic and 5% as healthy. After identifying the specific toxic links, the SEO firm wants to make a Google disavow request, then manually request that the links be removed, and then make final disavow request of Google for the removal of remaining bad links. They believe that they can get about 60% of the bad links removed. Only after the removal process is complete do they think it would be appropriate to start building new links. Is there a risk that this strategy will result in a drop of traffic with so many links removed (even if they are bad)? For me (and I am a novice) it would seem more prudent to build links at the same time that toxic links are being removed. According to the SEO firm, the value of the new links in the eyes of Google would be reduced if there were many toxic links to the site; that this approach would be a waste of resources. While I want to move forward efficiently I absolutely want to avoid a risk of a drop of traffic. I might add that I have not received any messages from Google regarding bad links. But my firm did engage in link building in several instances and our traffic did drop after the Penguin update of April 2012. Also, is there value in having a professional SEO firm remove the links and build new ones? Or is this something I can do on my own? I like the idea of having a pro take care of this, but the costs (Audit, coding, design, content strategy, local SEO, link removal, link building, copywriting) are really adding up. Any thoughts??? THANKS,
Technical SEO | | Kingalan1
Alan0 -
How to remove all sandbox test site link indexed by google?
When develop site, I have a test domain is sandbox.abc.com, this site contents are same as abc.com. But, now I search site:sandbox.abc.com and aware of content duplicate with main site abc.com My question is how to remove all this link from goolge. p/s: I have just add robots.txt to sandbox and disallow all pages. Thanks,
Technical SEO | | JohnHuynh0 -
How to remove a sub domain from Google Index!
Hello, I have a website having many subdomains having same copy of content i think its harming my SEO for that site since abc and xyz sub domains do have same contents. Thus i require to know i have already deleted required subdomain DNS RECORDS now how to have those pages removed from Google index as well ? The DNS Records no more exists for those subdomains already.
Technical SEO | | anand20100 -
Is there any issue with using the same structured data property multiple times on the same page?
Im working on implementing structured data properties into my product detail pages. (http://schema.org/Book) My site sells books and many books have both a 13 digit ISBN # and a 10 Digit ISBN. Should I apply the itemprop "isbn" to both of them or just the one with higher search volume? Some books also have multiple authors, how should I handle that?
Technical SEO | | myork07240