As designed Review snippet Invalid object type for "itemReviewed" field


Well-known member
Affected version
This morning I'm receiving this error from the Search Console.
Is relative to a review let from an user on a resource.

Review Snippets.webp

It seems that aggregateRating is inside a 'Service' but it shouldn't go there.
How can be fixed this?
Hi Mike, yes I have seen, thanks.
But as you know in Search Console an error is always an error,
that after some time moltiplicate itself and become a problem... with relative ranking penalties
and is there always a reason and a way to fix it, also if some time is annoing to stay back each change that Google make and on this you found me totally agree.

The problem is there
and is there also on your site as you can see:

and here it seems that there are some advices on how to fix it:

Instead here, some users of Wordpress have had the same issue and have also found a way to fix it, I don't know if can be helpful also for XFRM:
Last edited:
It won’t become a problem. People very much overstate the significance of errors and warnings in Google’s search tools.

The error is there to tell you precisely one thing: they won’t show a rich snippet in the search results. That’s it. It won’t affect anything further long term or otherwise harm your site. That’s just not how it works.

The problem is that while there are workarounds, presumably by changing the metadata to a different type that Google considers to be valid for reviews, that’s not something you could or should do unless it is a relevant type for your resource.

While there are no repercussions for simply having an error in the schema data, Google would take a very dim view of sites trying to manipulate the search results to include snippets that they feel don’t apply.

Regardless, these workarounds are not something we can roll out to customers due to this risk so we have to include the data that most generally fits and complies with the standard. If Google chooses to do something different, that’s down to them. But at least other search engines will display the rich snippets without issue.

If there is a more applicable type that applies to your content that complies with Google’s metadata schema then you may be able to make adjustments in the xfrm_resource_view template.
With all due respect Chris, I'm not agree. :)
As you know on google everything is a problem, all things to be fixed if you want have a good site with a better ranking on own competitors.
The error is there to tell precisely one thing: Is there an error. :D
The fact that Google decide to show or not some contents, him does without to tell us that is there an error. Simply doesn't show in the search results. It show an error when something is changed or on a site or on way it read your site when some of him guide lines change.
Each error always can be fixed, the difficult is understand why is generated and how to fix it. You can teach me this.
What you say about "one error doesn't matter", can be good for a new site, or better nothing for that, but not for a big and good site as your one and my one. Also because an error in a file, for example a thread, a resource, or everything else, is moltiplicated for each content you have in that section, so an error of code that is there in a file of a thread for example, will be found in a big number of threads because they use the same files, so one issue can affect thousent of contents, that are also shown in the Search Console as errors and these let you loose the good position in the ranking you can have for that content. In your case have less impact because the argumets on Xenforo are only on your site and not in others, but if my site is about shoes for example I will have hundred of competitors and quality make the difference. The quality of every little thing is there on the site, I mean.
It must be a way to fix it, (as always). I will try to search it.

I know also the problem that is making Google focussing on the rich snippets about who try to manipulate these datas, so also for this is better to investigate to don't risk to be seen as this kind of behaviour.
For the rest how the others search engines valute our sites have few or nothng value, because the 95% of the traffic is generated from Google, so that is the first thing to have in order.
In each way I will keep you update if I found something about it.
Top Bottom