When someone like me( who is creative but absolutely ignorant whe it comes to HTML or computer languages) meets one of the best SEO experts on +Google+ like +Mark Traphagen a great discussion can spark, and this is only possible because we are on G+. A World apart in real life (and knowledge) but still in the same "container", the Web 2.0 with a little help from G+.
+CircleCount started the thread and then
+Mark Traphagen +Max Huijgen and I followed in, attracted by this subject that is capturing the attention of millions on the Internet: rel=author; the possibility of showing your authorship on the ranking system, based on the interaction and the cntent you provide, given that you have a +Google+ profile Here is the link to the ORIGINAL THREAD on Google plus
HERE IS THE DISCUSSION WE HAD ON OCTOBER 25th about the autor= rel +Markos Giannopoulos
There you go :)
pio dal cin
+CircleCount You are making me a happy camper .I have been struggling with this "author rank" for the last few months. This is a wonderful idea and news. I have done my homeworks here https://plus.google.com/u/0/+piodalcin/about does it work with the name or should I substitute the "piodalcin" with my G+ number? Thanks again, this is a great help for me. As usual you are really ROCKING!!!
Thanks +Markos Giannopoulos and +pio dal cin!
Unfortunately it looks like right now it's a bad idea as +Mark Traphagen write here: http://www.virante.org/blog/2013/08/21/google-answers-questions-about-google-authorship/
Maybe you should remove that again for the moment to avoid bad influence on your authorship. Sorry for that guys!
Here is btw what +Mark Traphagen told us:
"sorry to throw a wet blanket on this, but I think Google might frown upon connecting this sort of thing to your Authorship. See my post http://www.virante.org/blog/2013/08/21/google-answers-questions-about-google-authorship/ In their recent FAQ Google said that Authorship should not be connected to pages with multiple content pieces, and especially to pages that don't contain your own original content. They warned that doing so could cause your Authorship to stop showing in search".
Given that yesterday Google's Matt Cutts said at Pubcon they would be cutting out lower valued authorship results by up to 15%, I wouldn't risk this personally. See http://www.virante.org/blog/2013/10/24/matt-cutts-pubcon-2013-authorship-authority-future-search/
No problem +CircleCount Will remove the link. We were talking about the "authorship" with +Mark Traphagen on a post yesterday. I was really excited about being so easy:) Let us hope for some future developments, in the meantime I am studying HMTL by myself (it's never too late) thanks for the tip though.
I agree with "it's never too late" +pio dal cin.
Good luck with it and if you have any questions, you know that you can ask us here, right? ;)
pio dal cin
Just for the heck of it I'm going to leave it there for a couple of days and see what happens. I'll be your "guinea pig" if you will +CircleCount I will let you know if my visibility improves or not. I trust the knowledge of SEO guru +Mark Traphagen but I just want to give it a try:)
I already have the link to +CircleCount in my profile. Do I need to change anything?
hmm, it seems to be a link to 'apps'. Can't get links to point to http://www.circlecount.com/
+pio dal cin ok, that*s nice. That could be also a good experiment for +Mark Traphagen if he wants to track it.
I'm not sure if you need to change something when it was already there. I need to read the articles of Mark to understand it better. The short version is that you should remove CircleCount from there since it could give you a bad influence on your authorship. But I need to understand what someone should do if he is a contributor to a website like you are or like I'm as a developer who is not generating "content".
Let me know +CircleCount as it's unclear to me as well.
Will let you know the results in a couple of days
+pio dal cin and +CircleCount maybe I gave the wrong impression, and I apologize if I wasn't clear.
I didn't mean that connecting to a non-original content page like the Favorites would affect that particular result (as to Google showing it or not). The warnings from Google are directed at the overall behavior of an Authorship account across all the content its connected to.
So you won't necessarily see your Authorship result appear or disappear for the CircleCount page because you connected to it. My concern is more for your overall authority standing with Google, especially in light of the warnings we've had recently that I detailed in my post.
It's entirely possible, maybe even likely, that if you were connected to just this one "illegal" page, but otherwise your Authorship was connected only to high quality, original posts, one per page, clearly by you, that this one "infraction" won't hurt you at all. That has to be up to each individual user.
As for me, and I'm only speaking for me, I consider my good standing in Google Authorship (I get it for pretty much everything I post) to be something to be jealously guarded, and so I'm very picky about what I connect it to.
But perhaps that's just me.
Thanks for the clarification +Mark Traphagen!
Unfortunately (for us) this is a very complex subject.
Fortunately (for you) that you are an expert on this, since it's your job ;)
+CircleCount and you provide yours as well! I couldn't imagine having taken on what you guys accomplished, but I'd hate to be without you!
This is community and it happens better on Google+ than anywhere online I know of. We each keep watch on our area of expertise, and then we bring it together to help each other.
pio dal cin
thanks +Mark Traphagen for the clarification. You could have not explain it better than this. I am the worst tech person out here on G+, but my super-humble opinion is that given the popularity of authorship there should be some extra effort from those who understand the system better at Google to let people or pages with an established authority like +CircleCount to perform an operation like they did without hurting the author's content or integrity. Mine, as I said is just a creative approach to this issue, given the fact that I am in no position to give any advice on a matter that I have been trying to understand with a little result for the past months
+pio dal cin you're much smarter than you let on, but you are also very humble, which is one of your many charms ;-)
The reason they don't allow this sort of thing is that either Authorship means something or it's worthless. The object of Google Authorship isn't to get everyone's face photos in search for whatever they want. The object of the project is to identify and highlight unique, original content that is truly useful and is by a recognized author. The curation page on CircleCount doesn't fit that description, and thus rightly should not be given authorship attribution.
Google wants people to be able to trust that when they click on an Authorship result, they are getting an original content piece from the shown author. I hope that makes some sense.
pio dal cin
It sure does +Mark Traphagen and I thank you for your kind words as much as for your absolutely wonderful explanation. So authorship is like a great bottle of wine. i live where is produced, a wonderful sparkling wine that has had many attempts of forgery. In order to preserve the authencitity
of this wonderful product, a consortium has been created so that every bottle that comes out of this particular area is certified to be what it is written on the bottle's label.
Is this more or less what Google is trying to do with authorship? Preserve the content and giving the owner that peculiar accent?
As I told you yesterday on the post's thread I have been able to connect my site with the G+ account and I see some result when I post to Blogger, not so on Wordpress where I get ranked but without being able to show my "head"
As you can see in this search (http://goo.gl/ZPT9Ya) My snippet appears on the blogger article but below, on the wordpress it does not. I have placed my link to my G+ profile on my wordpress blog, as you can clearly see here
http://piodalcin.wordpress.com/ but read that WP doesn't support the snipped to the .com blogs. Is that the cause?
Beautiful analogy +pio dal cin. You've got it!
pio dal cinOct 25, 2013
thank to your explanation +Mark Traphagen May I suggest a hangout on the subject? You could explain well like you did to me to anyone out there who do not chew tech that much
Great discussion +Mark Traphagen and +pio dal cin !
Mark, the title here was a bit misleading and too much attention grabbing I think ;)
I understand the meaning of the authorship and thought that adding it to the profile pages would fit to the idea of Google. Since we are showing on the profile pages the first part of the last 50 posts of the person, the most (text) content is created by the user and we thought it should be honored by linking to his profile this way.
The favorite posts pages are in my opinion something like a blog article created by the user since he is collecting the posts manually and has the work of getting them together. The content does not need to be the work of the user himself but there is not less "authorship" than in a profile page on Google+ where someone is just resharing posts.
I don't want to convince you that we are doing it right ;) just want to explain what our thoughts have been.
+CircleCount from the Google Authorship FAQ:
The URL/page contains a single article (or subsequent versions of the article) or single piece of content, by the same author. This means that the page isn’t a list of articles or an updating feed. If the author frequently switches on the page, then the annotation is no longer helpful to searchers and is less likely to be featured.
CircleCountOWNEROct 25, 2013
+Mark Traphagen ok, thanks for the link. This description is telling me that what we have tried to add was not really correct, but... ;)
The part that confuses me is how Google+ is handling this.
For example the 1st search result when searching for "Luc Suy" is "https://plus.google.com/101358233585091716173" (which is the posts page) showing the profile picture of Luc.
Did I misunderstood again something or is Google+ not following their FAQ? ;)
Google does show authorship for profile pages when those profiles are connected to Authorship content.
For example, in a search for my name, my Google+ profile shows Authorship. Also, my profile page at http://www.virante.org/blog, because all my content on that blog is linked to that profile page, which is linked to my G+ profile, which is the legitimate 3-way method for setting up Authorship on a multi-author blog.
BTW, when I say "shows Authorship" in search results, that doesn't always mean just a photo. Google only shows one profile photo per author per page of results, but if you have other authorship content on teh same SERP (such as several blog profiles), Google will show your name on the other ones, indicating they are still Authorship results, even without the photo.
I checked also the search for your name at first +Mark Traphagen and everything looks correct there since it is linking to your about page on Google+, not the posts page. That's why I started to write something "you are right, I didn't see that the search results for google+ pages are linking to the about page", but then I tried to search for Luc ;)
I think I didn't get what you mean with
Google does show authorship for profile pages when those profiles are connected to Authorship content.
I think you don't need to connect anything to get the authorship for your Google+ Posts page.
One more example: https://www.google.de/search?q=larry%20page
Larry Page hasn't set anything on the "Contributor to" section, and still his picture is shown next to his posts page in the search results. And he has also reshared some posts there, it's not only "his" content (whereat everything is probably his content ;) ).
I hope this discussion is also interesting for you and not bothering you!
Sorry, we're getting two different things confused here: G+ posts and content and profiles from outside web sites.
Technically, everyone who has a Google+ profile has Authorship of their Google+ posts automatically. There's nothing you have to "do" for that, other than have a G+ profile and publish posts on G+.
So technically, every Google+ user with a proper photo could have both their G+ profile and/or their G+ posts show in search with an Authorship rich snippet.
However, that does not necessarily guarantee that Google will show an Authorship result for that content in search; that is dependent on some algorithmic threshold that we don't know.
I was trying to explain that Google will sometimes also show an Authorship result for an author profile page not on Google+ and that is automatic and therefore legitimate, if that profile connects to Authorship content.
Let me try to explain. On my company's blog, each author has a unique author profile page. Each blog post by a given author connects (by a linked byline with a rel="author" attribute) to that author's profile page. His profile page, in turn, connects to his G+ profile with a rel="me" attribute. In the original explanations of the markup for Authorship, Google explained that rel="me" indicates to them another profile on the web that is associated with content authored by you. The connection is completed with a link back to the author profile on our blog from the author's Contributor To section of his G+ profile.
So Google's sees that profile on our blog as an Authorship profile, and may show it with an authorship result in a search for that author's name.
So...both Google+ profiles and other author profiles on the web can show an Authorship search result. Does that help?
It helps +Mark Traphagen, thanks a lot!
I know that the description is meant to be for external pages, but doesn't that:
The URL/page contains a single article (or subsequent versions of the article) or single piece of content, by the same author.
conflict with the fact that the post pages (that are including multiple posts with possibly just reshares) have Authorship?
Great question. No, because Google set up Google+ to understand that the posts on a profile are just "archive" copies of that profile's content, and so it ignores them.
In other words, rel="me" profile pages are a special exception. They get autorship "credit" not because of content but because they represent the author. That's why I don't recommend connecting to your Favorites pages. They aren't truly author profiles.
I believe it works the same way with web site author profiles. My profile page on my blog is also an archive page. It contains links with small excerpts of everything I've written on that blog. But Google is fine with that, because of the rel="me" tag and the fact that my actual rel="author" content is clearly linked to that page, they understand that page as being a profile, and not a content. page.
Ok, that makes sense.
Thanks a lot +Mark Traphagen for all the detailed descriptions!
Glad to help +CircleCount
pio dal cin
great discussion +Mark Traphagen and +CircleCount (now I have a headache:) Mark I have a blogger blog (www.codognetreviso.com) I am the only writer in the blog. should I do the rel=me process or should I leave it as rel= author?
+pio dal cin if you're the only author, rel=author should be fine. But if you ever plan to incorporate other authors, you might need to set up author profiles. Most modern WordPress themes and frameworks make that easy.
Here the Post