Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I think when first launched some were getting away with it and possibly still now, although i wouldn't reccommend trying since is definately misleading and not what authorships about. It doesnt make sense for an author to have a logo since an author is a person and the image should therefore be the persons picture and nothing else

Thanks for your response Wesley !

The way i understand it If you put the 'rel=publisher' in the head tags then it should show on every major page shouldnt it ?

cheers

dan

Hi

Since rel=publisher code should be added to the head tags of a website surely this means that would then show up on every main page of a site but i'm looking at a few sites using the rich snippet testing tool and its only showing for home page - how come ?

Cheers

Dan

HI Lynn

In this particular case it is not actually although thats great info thanks very much for sharing, Everett is great i always refer to his posts/advice whenever i have an ecommerce project.

In this case my client i'm talking about is a music education establishment with many different courses and the site is in Wordpress, any ideas if possible to edit breadcrumbs in wordpress ?

Cheers

Dan

Hi Jarno & Lynn,

Thank you both for taking the time to respond !

Yes i agree i think this logical structure is best since helps search engines AND the users better understand the content since its associated with other immediately related content too both in terms of semantic relationship & close architectural proximity.  This is also reinforced by good internal linking provided by breadcrumbs (which do help contribute to rankings in part since contributes to setting relevance of the pages content and its context).

I think in the case of a single item of content needing to be in more than one folder then maybe in that kind of scenario its better to have the content page 'off the root' and canonicalised to avoid duplicate content issues from displaying it in the 2 different category folders it will also be displayed in. Then so long as you have breadcrumbs (which from Lynns comments looks like you can edit/customise for the 2 different paths) you still benefit from the logical hierarchy and internal linking beneficial for both users and engines.

Although i must confess since i'm not that technical i don't know this for a fact and welcome the view of others to clarify/confirm.  So does having the canonicalised page off the root stop engines seeing the silo structure therby defeating the purpose of this suggested solution OR would they still see the other page instances & associate it with the path but just not penalise it for being duplicate (since the page 'off the root' is the canonical version) hence is a good solution ??

All Best

Dan

Hi Jarno & Lynn,

Thank you both for taking the time to respond !

Yes i agree i think this logical structure is best since helps search engines AND the users better understand the content since its associated with other immediately related content too both in terms of semantic relationship & close architectural proximity.  This is also reinforced by good internal linking provided by breadcrumbs (which do help contribute to rankings in part since contributes to setting relevance of the pages content and its context).

I think in the case of a single item of content needing to be in more than one folder then maybe in that kind of scenario its better to have the content page 'off the root' and canonicalised to avoid duplicate content issues from displaying it in the 2 different category folders it will also be displayed in. Then so long as you have breadcrumbs (which from Lynns comments looks like you can edit/customise for the 2 different paths) you still benefit from the logical hierarchy and internal linking beneficial for both users and engines.

Although i must confess since i'm not that technical i don't know this for a fact and welcome the view of others to clarify/confirm.  So does having the canonicalised page off the root stop engines seeing the silo structure therby defeating the purpose of this suggested solution OR would they still see the other page instances & associate it with the path but just not penalise it for being duplicate (since the page 'off the root' is the canonical version) hence is a good solution ??

All Best

Dan

Hi

A client hasn't structured site architecture in a silo type format so breadcrumbs are not predicating in a topical hierarchy as one would desire (or at least i think one would prefer)

For example: say the site is called www.fruit.com and it has a category called 'types of fruit' and then sub/content pages called things like 'apples' and 'pears'. So in terms of architecture that should be: www.fruit.com/types-of-fruit/apples  and  www.fruit.com/types-of-fruit/pears etc etc

The client has kept it all flat so instead architecture is:  www.fruit.com/types-of-fruit  and www.fruit.com/apples  and www.fruit.com/pears

As a result breadcrumbs follow suit and hence since also not employing logical predication dont reflect the topical & sub-topical hierarchy

I have seen that some seo's at least used to think this was better for seo since kept the page/s nearer the root but surely its better to structure site architecture in a logical topical hierarchy so long as dont go beyond say 3 or 4 directories/forward slashes in the url's?

Also is it theoretically possible to keep url structure as is (flat) and just edit/customise the breadcrumbs to reflect a topical hierarchy in a silo structure rather than change the entire site architecture & required 301'ing etc in order to do this (or is that misleading or just not possible?)

Cheers

Dan

Many thanks Moosa !

Cool many thanks

Thanks Mihai

i thought microsites are well out the window these days, unless fully developing as a high quality site (which budget wont allow)

To confirm then, no bad can come from forwarding kw rich domains to main domain ?

cheers

dan

Hi

My client has a clutch of kw rich domains that want to point to main domain, apart from being good for promotional reasons is there any seo benefit for doing so (i know there used to be years ago but under impression hasn't been any benefit for a long while)

Most importantly though can any bad come from doing this ?

Best Rgds

Dan

ok thanks Chris but its not something to do with Yoast (platforms wordpress) ?

the instruction would just be that getting warning signs in rich snippet testing tool and needs to be fixed !

Also just to confirm this is nothing to do with authorship (since that tested fine) & its just other structured date detected on the page ?

cheers

dan

thanks Chris

so does that mean its a prob with how the website was set up and should just send these instructions to the developer or something i (the seo) can/should be able to do via Yoast plugin ?

Cheers

Dan

Hi

I've just successfully set up authorship for a client according to the rich snippet testing tool although bit perplexed since underneath the results theres a section called 'Extracted Structured Data'. The first section is marked hatom feed and under that it says under the field saying 'Author' it says in red:

Warning: At least one field must be set for Hcard.Warning: Missing required field "name (fn)".And then under the URL field & the URL it says:Warning: Missing required field "entry-title".Any ideas what this means or even if its important ? I would have thought the tool wouldnt acknowledge authorship as being set up correctly if this was an issue but that does beg the question what is it doing there and what does it mean ?Theres another section after that called rdfa node which seems all fineAlso says page does not contain publisher mark up although i know publisher has been added to the home page, is it best to add publisher to head section in every page (as i have heard some people say) or just the home page ?Many ThanksDan

Thanks Tom , so just to clarify re 301's, link building/growth to the promoted domain should still have a beneficial effect pass on to the primary hosted domain ?

cheers

dan

Havnt had a detailed look but all looks good from a quickly scanning it, i would suggest adding an 'about' section including mission statement etc and/or a 'contact us' section with physical address for more trust

Hi

Is it ok or bad practice to domain forward shorter more memorable snappier domains used for promoting a website to a longer domain where the website actually lives, such as:

Promoting in social media profiles, emails and offline literature a domain with forwarding set up like:

www.brand.com

To the main website:

www.brandincludingprimaryproductrelatedkeyword.com

And if ok (not bad practice), since its the forwarded domains that are being promoted they are hence the links most likely to be shared on social media and other websites so will they be treated like 301's and 'link building' for those will pretty much equate to link building for the main domain (or not) ?

Many Thanks

Dan

Hi Aleyda

Sorry 1 more question:

Ive noticed that the new pages have started to rank well already.

In this case is it still advisable to 'fetch as google' in GWT the old redirected urls or, since the new pages have been found and ranking well, best to not fetch the old urls ?

Best Rgds

Dan

Hi

I have a client who has set up Facebook fan page for their physically located local business and they have 'checkedin' to it but not showing on FB page as having been checked in i.e. '0 were here' when i would have thought it should show at least 1

Does anybody know how best to set up FB fan page for a local business so is checkin'able ? or rather just get the checking in aspect of existing page working properly ?

(Have followed FB help guidelines)

Cheers

Dan

ok great many thanks Aleyda !!