Does non-critical AMP errors prevent you from being featured on Top Stories Carousel?
-
Consider site A which is a news publishing site that has valid AMP pages with non-critical AMP pages (as notified within Search Console). Also, Site A publishes news articles from site B (its partner site) and posts it on site A which have AMP pages too but most of them are not valid AMP pages with critical AMP errors.
For brand terms like Economic Times, it does show a top stories carousel for all articles published by Economic Times, however it doesn't look the same for site A (inspite of it having valid AMP pages).
Image link: http://tinypic.com/r/219bh9j/9
Now that there are valid AMP pages from site A and invalid AMP pages from site B on site A, there have been instances wherein a news article from site A features on the top stories carousel on Desktop for a certain query whereas it doesn't feature on the mobile SERPs in spite of the page being a valid AMP page. For example, as mentioned in the screenshot below: Business Today ranks on the Top Stories carousel for a term like “jio news” on Desktop, but on Mobile although the page is a valid AMP page, it doesn’t show as an AMP page within the Top Stories Carousel.
Image Link: http://tinypic.com/r/11sc8j6/9
There have been some cases where although the page is featured on the top carousel on desktop, the same article doesn't show up on the mobile version for the same query on the Top Stories Carousel.
What could be the reason behind this? Also, would it be necessary to solve both critical and non-critical errors on site A (including those published from site B on site A)?
-
Thanks for this!
2 things:
-
I'd suggest that if Site A republishes duplicate (syndicated) content from Site B and references Site B as the original source, you might want to consider simply blocking that content from search engines (on Site A). This will ensure that Google doesn't penalize for dupe content and also will prevent them from seeing the critical errors on the Site B AMP pages.
-
Overall I've tested your example page and couldn't find anything seriously wrong, but one thing I did notice was that in your structured data markup (NewsArticle) you have an error:
On the page: http://m.businesstoday.in/lite/story/reliance-jio-is-preparing-new-tariffs-and-exciting-offers-for-you/1/249662.html
You list "mainEntityOfPage" as "http://m.businesstoday.in/"
However, the Google guidelines state that "mainEntityOfPage" should be the canonical URL of the article page: https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/articles#type_definitions (in this case: http://www.businesstoday.in/sectors/telecom/reliance-jio-is-preparing-new-tariffs-and-exciting-offers-for-you/story/249662.html)
Although the markup does pass the structured data testing tool validation, it is possible that this is breaking the structured data and using NewsArticle markup is something that Google states you must have implemented to feature in the News Carousel.
If fixing this doesn't help, I'd suggest cleaning up the non-critical errors next to see if that fixes the issue.
-
-
1. Yes, Site A republishes content from Site B on a daily basis as Site A has an exclusive partnership with Site B for republication (with site B being the parent publisher). To address content duplication errors we use the original-source tag to point towards the articles present on site B.
2. Yes, it performed well a couple of months ago until the non-critical errors started building up recently. One of them being "Use of deprecated tags or attributes". Also, as mentioned previously, AMP pages site A has non-critical errors and AMP pages from site B have critical as well as non-critical errors.
3. Yes.
4. Yes. Site A has about 15,000+ Indexed AMP pages, 4000+ Critical AMP Errors and 22,000+ non-critical AMP errors.
-
Hey! I have a few questions first of all, just to clarify the situation.
-
has Site A always published the articles from Site B? How do you currently handle the duplicate content aspect?
-
Has Site A's valid AMP content previously performed as expected, and this is a new issue? Or have you always had this issue?
-
Are you verified in Google News?
-
Are you seeing errors in Google Search Console for any of these AMP pages?
-
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
-
Video Hosting & Embedding
Hi Does anyone have experience with Wistia and does it still hold try embedding a video from Wistia is better for SEO? Or is there no difference with this compared with YouTube if embedding a product video on your product page? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
Hreflang Tags & Canonicals Being Used
We have a site on which both hreflang tags and canonicals are being used. There are multiple languages, but for this I'll explain our problem using two. There are a ton of dupe page titles coming up in GSC, and we're not sure if we have an issue or not. First, the hreflang tags are implement properly. UK page pointing there, US page pointing there. Further down the page, there are canonical tags - except the UK canonical tag points to the UK page, and the US version points to the US page. I'm not sure if this will cause an issue in terms of SEO or indexing. Has anyone experienced this before or does anything have any insight into this? Thanks much! Matt
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Snaptech_Marketing0 -
Product Pages & Panda 4.0
Greeting MOZ Community: I operate a real estate web site in New York City (www.nyc-officespace-leader.com). Of the 600 pages, about 350 of the URLs are product pages, written about specific listings. The content on these pages is quite short, sometimes only 20 words. My ranking has dropped very much since mid-May, around the time of the new Panda update. I suspect it has something to do with the very short product pages, the 350 listing pages. What is the best way to deal with these pages so as to recover ranking. I am considering these options: 1. Setting them to "no-index". But I am concerned that removing product pages is sending the wrong message to Google. 2. Enhancing the content and making certain that each page has at least 150-200 words. Re-writing 350 listings would be a real project, but if necessary to recover I will bite the bullet. What is the best way to address this issue? I am very surprised that Google does not understand that product URLs can be very brief and yet have useful content. Information about a potential office rental that lists location, size, price per square foot is valuable to the visitor but can be very brief. Especially listings that change frequently. So I am surprised by the penalty. Would I be better off not having separate URLs for the listings, and for instance adding them as posts within building pages? Is having separate URLs for product pages with minimal content a bad idea from an SEO perspective? Does anyone have any suggestions as to how I can recover from this latest Panda penalty? Thanks, Alan
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan10 -
Non-www URL showing in Blog
Thanks to Sanket Patel in an earlier query I've now got non-www pages showing as www. pages on my www.nile-cruises-4u.co.uk website. But the Blog which is part of the site posts and pages still show as non-www pages. For example: http://nile-cruises-4u.co.uk/blog/makadi-palace-hotel-makadi-bay/ I wonder if anyone has come upon the same problem and what the solution might be? Thanks, Colin
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NileCruises1 -
Domain change - slow & easy, or rip off the bandaid?
We are laying the foundation for a domain change. I'm gathering all of the requirements listed from Google (301's, sign up the new domain with WMT, etc), customer communications, email system changes, social updates, etc. But through everything I've read, I'm not quite clear on one thing. We have the option of keeping our current domain and the new domain running off the same eCommerce database at the same time. This means that we have the option of running two exact duplicates simultaneously. The thought is that we would slowly, quietly turn on the new domain, start the link building and link domain changing processes, and generally give the new domain time to make sure it's not going to croak for some reason. Then, after a week or so, flip on a full 301 rewrite for the old domain. There are no concerns regarding order databases, as both domains would be running off of the same system. The only concern I have in the user experience is making sure I have internal links all set to relative, so visitors to the new domain aren't flipped over and freaked out by an absolute URL. I'm not confident that this co-existing strategy is the best approach, though. I'm wondering if it would be better from an SEO (and customer) perspective to Have the new domain active and performing a 302 redirect from the new domain to the corresponding page on the old domain When we're ready to flip the switch, implement the 301 redirect from old to new (removing the 302, of course) at switch time. Any thoughts or suggestions?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Goedekers0 -
Multiple sites - ownership & link structure
Hi All I am in the process of creating a number of sites within the garden products sector; each site will have unique, original content and there will be no cross over. So for example I will have one on lawn mowers, one on greenhouses, another on garden furniture etc. My original thinking was to create a single limited company that would own each of the domains, therefore all the registrant details will be identical. Is this a sensible thing to do? (I want to be totally white hat) And what, if any, are the linking opportunities between each of the sites? (16 in total). Not to increase ranking, more from an authoritative perspective. And finally, how should I link between each site? Should I no follow the links? Should I use keyword contextual links? Any advice ideas would be appreciated 🙂 Please note: It has been suggested that I just create one BIG site. I've decided against this as I want to use the keyword for each website in the domain name as I believe this still has value. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | danielparry0 -
Navigation - Balancing UX & SEO
I'm currently evaluating our navigation in the course of a site relaunch. From reading a number of articles and posts on seoMOZ, here are the elements I've found important to consider: Use CSS (not Javascript) for the primary drop-down navigation menu Get rid of two design elements from our earlier days: The 30 something site-wide category links in the footer, and many no-followed internal links (in an attempt to sculpt PR) Keep all pages within 3 clicks of the homepage, and have ample cross-links within internal pages. The one major problem I'm facing is how to balance UX and SEO in the primary navigation bar. To illustrate, let's assume I sell Tennis equipment. If one of the top-level categories on my navigation bar was "Rackets", if I was designing purely with SEO in mind the category names would be: Tennis Rackets -> Wilson Tennis Rackets Head Tennis Rackets Prince Tennis Rackets ....as the full, three word anchor text will be most specific and valuable to pass reputation to the category pages. However, from a UX perspective, writing "Tennis Rackets" after each category is unnecessary, and it would look MUCH cleaner to instead have: Tennis Rackets -> Wilson Head Prince ....but this would obviously be less beneficial from a SEO standpoint for each individual, manufacturer racquet page as the entire search term ("Wilson Tennis Rackets") is not in the anchor text. As these links will be on every page of the site, I'm struggling with which to choose - clean navigation or improved SEO. My Questions: I would love to hear the communities thoughts on how to weigh the balance of these two - clean UX navigation vs. SEO-rich specific anchor text - in navigation. Also, I'd appreciate hearing if any of my original 3 assumptions for the re-design are off-base or incorrect. Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AndrewY0