Has my Rich Snuppet attempt passed the test?
-
Good Morning from 16 degrees C still sunny Wetherby UK....
For the first time ive dived into Microformat,s schema.org Microdata call it what you will "Rich snippets"
On this http://www.barrettsteel.com/ site on the bottom left I tweeked the address into a rich nippet, here is what i did:
I then diligently tried to find out if it was valid by running it through http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets but I'm not 100% clear if its passed
So my question is please can anyone verify if the snippet data is valid.
Thanks in advance,
David
-
Thanks Martin
-
Lookms ok to me also, Martin makes a good point of keep consistant across the net
-
This is looking okay to me - with the only issue being that the +44 and (0) are outside of your Telephone Itemprop. You want to include one or both inside this.
What you're trying to achieve is a good rich snippet and consistency with other places your details are shown - e.g. Google Maps, local directories etc. And the area code is part of your local identity, so in the very least, put the zero inside the telephone itemprop.
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
-
Test site got indexed in Google - What's the best way of getting the pages removed from the SERP's?
Hi Mozzers, I'd like your feedback on the following: the test/development domain where our sitebuilder works on got indexed, despite all warnings and advice. The content on these pages is in active use by our new site. Thus to prevent duplicate content penalties we have put a noindex in our robots.txt. However off course the pages are currently visible in the SERP's. What's the best way of dealing with this? I did not find related questions although I think this is a mistake that is often made. Perhaps the answer will also be relevant for others beside me. Thank you in advance, greetings, Folko
Technical SEO | | Yarden_Uitvaartorganisatie0 -
Vimeo Rich Snippet correct?
Goodday MOZ-friends 😉 We added our video to Vimeo PRO and added it to our website. (http://www.sitetogo.nl/) We also added a XML (http://www.sitetogo.nl/sitemap-video.xml) I'm not sure if we done this correctly. Can anybody tell me this? Thanks & Greetings, Vincent / www.sitetogo.nl
Technical SEO | | Aquaster0 -
Paid links that are passing link equity from a blog?
We have a well-known blogger in our industry with whom we've had a long-standing relationship. We've had inbound links from his blog for many, many years. Today I noticed that we are running a banner ad listed on all pages of his blog under a heading that says "Sponsors." He has dedicated an entire page of his site giving full disclosure of all advertising. However, all of the links on his site pointing to us are passing link equity. To my knowledge they've been this way ever since they were first established years ago. I am fairly certain this fellow, with whom we have an excellent relationship, neither knows nor cares what a "nofollow" attribute is. I am afraid that if I contact him with a request that he add "nofollow" attributes to all of our links that it will damage our relationship by creating friction. To someone who knows nothing and cares nothing about SEO, asking them to put a "nofollow" on a link could either seem like a technical request they don't know how to handle, or something even potentially "shady" on our part. My question is this: Considering how long these links have been there, is this even worth worrying about? Should I just forget about it and move on to bigger fish, or, is this a potentially serious enough violation of Google Webmaster guidelines that we should pursue getting those links "nofollow" attributes added? I should add that we haven't received any "unnatural" link notifications from Google, ever, and haven't ever engaged in any questionable link-building tactics.
Technical SEO | | danatanseo1 -
Nofollow link passing link juice
Can a link which is nofollwed pass link juice ? Please see the discussion at - http://www.seomoz.org/q/if-multiple-links-on-a-page-point-to-the-same-url-and-one-of-them-is-no-followed-does-that-impact-the-one-that-isn-t
Technical SEO | | seoug_20050 -
Link Juice passing through a redirect of a disallowed URL
Hey guys! Suppose I disallow search bots from indexing anything on my secure server in my robots.txt, and 301 redirect all of my secure server traffic to my non-secure site. Will the search bots see the redirect before they realize that they're disallowed from accessing that page? Or will they see that page is disallowed and not follow the redirect? Should I change my robots.txt to allow search bots to crawl my secure site so they can find the redirects?
Technical SEO | | john4math0 -
False Negative Warnings with Crawl Diagnostic Test
Ok... I will try to explain as clear as possible. This issue is regarding close to 5000 'Warnings' from our most recent seomoz pro crawl diagnostic test. The top three warnings have about 6000 instances among them: : 1. Duplicate Page Title 2. Duplicate Page Content 3. 302 (Temporary Redirect) We understand that duplicate titles and content are "no-no's" and have made it top priority to avoid duplication on any level. Here is the issue lies... we are using the Volusion eCommerce solution and they have a variety of value add shopping features such as "Email A Friend" and "Email Me When Back In-Stock" on each product page. If one of these options is clicked, you are then directed to the appropriate page. Now each page has a different url with the sole variable of each individual product code. But with it being a part of Volusion's ingrained functionality... the META title is the same for each page. It takes from the title of our store homepage. Example below: Online Beauty Supply Store | Hair Care Products | Nail Care | Flat Irons http://www.beautystoponline.com/Email_Me_When_Back_In_Stock.asp?ProductCode=AN1PRO7130 Online Beauty Supply Store | Hair Care Products | Nail Care | Flat Irons http://www.beautystoponline.com/Email_Me_When_Back_In_Stock.asp?ProductCode=BI8BIOSI34 The same goes for the duplicate content warnings. If you click on one of these features, it directs you to a page with pretty much the same content except for different product. Basically each page has both duplicate content and duplicate title. SEOMOZ description is Duplicate Title: Content that is identical (or nearly identical) to content on other pages of your site forces your pages to unnecessarily compete with each other for rankings. Duplicate Page Content: You should use unique titles for your different pages to ensure that they describe each page uniquely and don't compete with each other for keyword relevance. Because I know SEO is not an exact science, the question here is does Google recognize that although they are duplicates, it actually is generated from a feature that makes us even more of a legitimate eCommerce site? Or, from seomoz description, if duplication is bad only because you do not want your pages to be competing with each other... should I not worry because i could care less if these pages don't get traffic. Or does it effect my domain authority as whole? Then as for a solution. I am still trying to work out with Volusion how we can change the META title of the pages. It's highly unlikely but we'll see. As for the duplicate content, there is no way to change one of these pages. It's hard coded. Solution... so if it is bad (even though it shouldn't be) would it be worth it to disable these features. I hope not. Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of Google trying to provide the most legitimate, value add sites to searchers? As for the 302 (Temporary Redirect) warning... this is only appearing on all of our shopping cart pages. Such as the "Email A Friend" feature, there is a page for every product. For example: http://www.beautystoponline.com/ShoppingCart.asp?ProductCode=AN1HOM8040 http://www.beautystoponline.com/ShoppingCart.asp?ProductCode=AN1HOM8050 The description semoz provides is: 302 (Temporary Redirect): Using a 302 redirect will cause search engine crawlers to treat the redirect as temporary and not pass any link juice (ranking power). We highly recommend that you replace 302 redirects with 301 redirects. So the probably solution... I do have the ability to change to a 301 redirect but do I want to do this for my shopping cart? Does Google realize the dead end is legitimate? Or... does it matter if link juice is passed through my shopping cart? And again, does it impact my site as a whole? It is greatly appreciated if anyone could help me out with this stuff 🙂 Thank you
Technical SEO | | anthonyjamesent1