Structured data, microdata and rich results

Hi All,

What google write about that https://developers.google.com/search...tructured-data:

Quote:

---

• Eventbrite leveraged event structured data and saw 100% increase in the typical YOY growth of traffic from search.
• Jobrapido integrated with the job experience on Google Search and saw 115% increase in organic traffic, 270% increase of new user registrations from organic traffic, and 15% lower bounce rate for Google visitors to job pages.
• Rakuten used the recipe search experience and saw a 2.7X increase in traffic from search engines and a 1.5X increase in session duration.

---

:pray:

I implemented on my page: articles, logo and carousel.

Currently I have approved only logo in my Google search console.

Do you have experience with these things ? Is it true to have that kind of increase in organic traffic ?

They are talking about schema here....and schema is a massive (and sometimes complicated and often misunderstood) subject (especially for someone completely new to it).

So, what I will say here is very high level and the strong advice would be to really study it in (more) depth to get to understand it properly. It would be impossible to cover all the nuances of the subject here, but there is a lot of info online (some of it very good, some of it OK, some of it misleading)



"Google supports three different formats of in-page markup: JSON-LD (recommended), Microdata, and RDFa. "

You have implemented JSON. Specifically 'Corporation' schema. (you can test it here........https://validator.schema.org/ )

There are many types of schema. Most websites (in our industry and many others) would normally tend to use 'Organisation' schema instead of 'Corporation'. In fact, until now, I don't think I've seen anyone using 'Corporation' although no doubt there would be some. And....I'm making an assumption here that 'corporation' is an alternative option to 'organisation'. That seems logical to me but I would have to go read up to be absolutely sure.

Note, if I'm right, that does not necessarily mean 'Corporation' schema would (or might) hurt you. From experience (and it's possible it's flawed experience, but I don't think so) if you get schema wrong or have an error in it in some way, I believe it's just ignored rather than it impacts you negatively).

So schema can help in the ways described, yes. If implemented properly... as examples.......it could help get you the featured snippet position for a search term (position zero...but also note you could still get a featured snippet position - at least until recently - without any schema) and/or it could show things like star ratings or FAQs off the page in the SERPs results.

So, the appearance/manifestation of those in the SERPs would/might clearly get you more visitors/clickthroughs.

But..........

1. the schema you have implemented won't help with either of those types of examples, you would need 'FAQ' or 'Review' schema (and/or one or more of many other types).
2. your page(s) won't necessarily rank (and therefore attract more traffic) just because schema is implemented (the content still needs to be high value/high quality).
3. Even an ultra high quality page may not rank higher just because it has valid schema.
4. Schema won't (on all known evidence) improve the ranking of a page just by the fact of it being there.


So...those pages/sites used as examples are probably true, yes. But they would have done a lot more with their schema implementations than you have (so far).



Now...at a site level (rather than a page level) schema does (or can do) other things that are beneficial. I won't go into that here..and even when you get to that stage, any beneficial outcomes are hard to actually quantify.


For your two sites specifically, at this stage, I would heavily suggest you focus more on building/improving/enhancing the content and overall structures. Sure, you could investigate schema deeper alongside that, and having (good) schema would be desirable, but (to be blunt) I don't think it will do you any good unless you have made those site improvements. In which case, you have to look at it as a 'balance of time/effort' exercise.......

Your best balance of time/effort (right now) is to build up the sites and improve them (from a visible content perspective + implementing/overcoming various other forms of underlying format/structure improvements or fixes - if any are needed). If you can do that and learn/build schema alongside then go for it. If you can't, then work on the other enhancements first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chaumi

They are talking about schema here....and schema is a massive (and sometimes complicated and often misunderstood) subject (especially for someone completely new to it).

So, what I will say here is very high level and the strong advice would be to really study it in (more) depth to get to understand it properly. It would be impossible to cover all the nuances of the subject here, but there is a lot of info online (some of it very good, some of it OK, some of it misleading)



"Google supports three different formats of in-page markup: JSON-LD (recommended), Microdata, and RDFa. "

You have implemented JSON. Specifically 'Corporation' schema. (you can test it here........https://validator.schema.org/ )

There are many types of schema. Most websites (in our industry and many others) would normally tend to use 'Organisation' schema instead of 'Corporation'. In fact, until now, I don't think I've seen anyone using 'Corporation' although no doubt there would be some. And....I'm making an assumption here that 'corporation' is an alternative option to 'organisation'. That seems logical to me but I would have to go read up to be absolutely sure.

Note, if I'm right, that does not necessarily mean 'Corporation' schema would (or might) hurt you. From experience (and it's possible it's flawed experience, but I don't think so) if you get schema wrong or have an error in it in some way, I believe it's just ignored rather than it impacts you negatively).

So schema can help in the ways described, yes. If implemented properly... as examples.......it could help get you the featured snippet position for a search term (position zero...but also note you could still get a featured snippet position - at least until recently - without any schema) and/or it could show things like star ratings or FAQs off the page in the SERPs results.

So, the appearance/manifestation of those in the SERPs would/might clearly get you more visitors/clickthroughs.

But..........

1. the schema you have implemented won't help with either of those types of examples, you would need 'FAQ' or 'Review' schema (and/or one or more of many other types).
2. your page(s) won't necessarily rank (and therefore attract more traffic) just because schema is implemented (the content still needs to be high value/high quality).
3. Even an ultra high quality page may not rank higher just because it has valid schema.
4. Schema won't (on all known evidence) improve the ranking of a page just by the fact of it being there.


So...those pages/sites used as examples are probably true, yes. But they would have done a lot more with their schema implementations than you have (so far).



Now...at a site level (rather than a page level) schema does (or can do) other things that are beneficial. I won't go into that here..and even when you get to that stage, any beneficial outcomes are hard to actually quantify.


For your two sites specifically, at this stage, I would heavily suggest you focus more on building/improving/enhancing the content and overall structures. Sure, you could investigate schema deeper alongside that, and having (good) schema would be desirable, but (to be blunt) I don't think it will do you any good unless you have made those site improvements. In which case, you have to look at it as a 'balance of time/effort' exercise.......

Your best balance of time/effort (right now) is to build up the sites and improve them (from a visible content perspective + implementing/overcoming various other forms of underlying format/structure improvements or fixes - if any are needed). If you can do that and learn/build schema alongside then go for it. If you can't, then work on the other enhancements first.

---

I was following this SEMRUSH manual: https://www.semrush.com/blog/schema-...-corporations/
It's written there: companies should use Corporation and not the more general Organization.

In the bottom of my slovak page I have also implemented: NewsArticle where I was able to say this peace of content is article with date, image, content ...

And in articles I have implemented Article with also filled everything.

Sure you are right about content but when I am doing content I can mark it with these tags ...

Who knows maybe search engine will follow and show it as rich results ...

Ah OK, I see now. I was just looking at home page. So, it's pretty basic schema you have on those article pages. Maybe it will do some good, monitor and see. Possibly a lot depends on your competition, I'm fairly sure that on English pages that level of schema would do nothing, competition is too great.

PS You may find that when they were referring to corporation, they really do mean corporations (like the BBC, Entain, Bloomberg, media companies etc etc etc etc). You could argue you're a corporation, but I doubt Google would see it that way if you sat in front of them and said 'tell me what you think I am'. It may still be OK though.

That old Semrush article by Jason Barnard was made to drive traffic to his website Calicube where he offers paid courses on a variety of topics.

As far as i know, if you use "Corporation" instead of "Company" in your schema, you'll have a greater chance to trigger the Google knowledge panel. But it doesn't matter for a regular website, and you can have it without any schemas as it won't make any difference anyway.

There are a quite few high-profile websites on google.com where you must appear in order for the knowledge panel to show up. But for google.sk it must be way fewer, so you can give it a try.

What you need to do is type in your keywords and look for Slovakian gambling related websites that have the panel, then extract their schema, edit it, add more info, make it better and upload it to your website. Once it is done, try to get your "Corporation" on the same websites along with the site you pulled the schema from. Bear in mind, no self promotion! I know sites on ENG SERP where they will ban you for such and never let you back. Here should be similar, i guess.

You are right. That Semrush article is wrong. I checked top 20 local companies who are able to show up knowledge panel and found that 19 are using "@type":"Organization" and 1 is using "@type":"LocalBusiness". So because they are 100-1000x bigger then me I degraded my Corporation to Organization :eyebrow:. I will see what will happened. At least I know that logo is extracted from that schema, where I will find it I will see ;)

Try adding "sameAs", i think this is the best option, and maybe/possibly helps google to determine what group or category it belongs to.

Add also "knowsAbout". There you can add a lot of gambling entities, if you want.

......and don't be surprised/disappointed when none of this makes any discernible difference at a page level.

There is lots of evidence that it won't....other than maybe (in the right circumstances) getting you a featured snippet (which of course is highly desirable)....or maybe getting some fancy stuff to show in the SERPs where it's debatable whether that makes any difference (although I suspect there are plenty that would disagree with me on that last point).

some aspects will only show once you have built authority, some can also be penalised ( reviews etc) though basic markups usually show