The decision that matters
Generate structured data from the article’s source record rather than maintaining a separate hand-written copy. Use truthful author or publisher information and a representative image. Avoid assigning a founder as the author merely because their name sounds authoritative. Do not fabricate review scores or change publication dates to make old content appear new. Valid syntax alone does not establish that the information is appropriate.
A practical scenario
An engineering journal prepared by an editorial process can identify the organization as the author and explain its publishing approach. If a named engineer later reviews and materially updates a guide, the visible byline and modification date can reflect that real contribution. The markup should mirror those facts rather than invent a personal endorsement.
Before you ship
- Keep headline, date and author consistent with visible content.
- Escape serialized data so article text cannot break the script context.
- Validate representative pages after template changes.
A useful next step
Treat structured data as another output of the content model. Review it alongside the rendered article and social preview. It can help describe the page, but it does not justify ranking promises or replace the work of making the article useful.
Primary reference & further reading
This guide combines general engineering recommendations with an illustrative scenario. Provider behavior can change; check current documentation before applying it. Read our editorial approach.