Guide : FAQPage Schema

TL;DR — FAQPage schema is code vous ajouter to une page with a frequently-asked-questions section — it étiquettes chaque question and its réponse pour moteur de recherches. It utilisé to faire Google montrer an expandable liste of votre questions correct in the résultats de recherche (the “FAQ rich result”). Google took que fonctionnalité away pour everyone on May 7, 2026. The markup itself is encore fine to garder — Google’s policy is que it doesn’t causer quelconque problems and Google dit it encore reads it — but it ne … plus earns vous que supplémentaire spot in search.

Ce que FAQPage schema is

Si une page has a “Frequently asked questions” section, a human peut tell the questions from the réponses simplement by reading. A moteur de recherche sees plain text. FAQPage schema spells it out in code, en utilisant the shared schema.org vocabulary: “this is the page’s FAQ,” “this is a question,” “this is its answer.”

It’s almost toujours written as JSON-LD — a petit block of code que sits in the page sans modification how lune page semble.

Pourquoi personnes ajouté it — and ce que modifié

Pour années, valid FAQPage markup pourrait earn a FAQ rich result: Google voudrait montrer votre questions as an expandable liste directement sous votre search listing, taking up plus space on lune page. That’s pourquoi FAQ schema got so popular.

Here’s the partie que matters la plupart in 2026: que rich result is gone. Google phased it out in stages —

• August 2023 — Google limited the FAQ rich result to well-known government and health websites. La plupart sites stopped seeing it.
• May 7, 2026 — Google supprimé it entirely, pour everyone, notamment ceux government and health sites.

So today, Google ne fait pas liste FAQPage among its current pris en charge rich-result types. Valid Schema.org markup and Google rich-result eligibility are separate questions. Evidence for this claim Google's current search gallery and FAQ documentation determine whether FAQ markup has a supported Google rich-result treatment. Scope: Google Search feature status; valid Schema.org markup can exist without a corresponding Google rich result. Confidence: high · Verified: 2026-07-14 Google: Structured data search gallery

Devrait vous supprimer votre FAQ schema?

Probably pas — but it’s worth checking a few choses, pas simplement taking “Google said it’s fine” at face valeur. Google’s standing rule is que données structurées it ne … plus displays doesn’t causer quelconque problems and there’s aucun penalty pour leaving it in placer, and Google dit it encore reads données structurées généralement to aider comprendre pages. Treat que as Google’s stated policy plutôt que something re-confirmed specifically pour FAQPage in ce réussir.

Avant vous decide, vérifier:

• Is the markup encore vrai? Si votre FAQ content modifié and the schema didn’t garder up, fix or supprimer it — stale markup que misrepresents lune page is the incorrect appel regardless of quelconque rich result.
• Fait anything besides Google encore utiliser it? Non-Google systems may encore lire FAQPage markup même though Google’s rich result is gone — a raison to garder it, pas a raison to supprimer it.
• Is the upkeep worth it? Si keeping the markup in sync with lune page is réel ongoing fonctionner and you’re confident nothing meaningful reads it in votre cas, removing it is a legitimate appel aussi.
• Ce que sinon pourrait que temps do? Effort spent maintaining unused FAQ markup pourrait be meilleur spent elsewhere — a business tradeoff, pas a penalty-avoidance un.

Ce que vous shouldn’t do is ajouter FAQ schema now expecting the old rich result. Que reward doesn’t exist anymore.

Two rapide choses que trip personnes up

• Google isn’t the whole web. Bing hasn’t announced quelconque equivalent restriction or removal of its propre — but that’s an absence of an announcement, pas direct confirmation que Bing is currently displaying FAQ résultats enrichis pour vous. Treat it as “aucun connu Google-style removal,” pas a guarantee.
• FAQPage n’est pas the même as QAPage. FAQPage is pour votre questions and réponses (un authoritative réponse chaque). QAPage is pour community Q&A où utilisateurs post multiple competing réponses (think forum threads) — and QAPage is encore pris en charge by Google. Don’t mix les up.

Vouloir the exact dates, the JSON-LD structure, the FAQPage-vs-QAPage breakdown, the “does it help AI search” données, and clair keep-or-remove guidance? Switch to the Avancé tab.

TL;DR — schema.org/FAQPage markup (mainEntity → Question → acceptedAnswer → Answer.text) une fois made une page eligible pour Google’s expandable FAQ rich result. Google restricted it to authoritative government and health sites on August 8, 2023, alors entièrement supprimé it pour everyone — notamment ceux gov/health sites — on May 7, 2026. Google’s propre FAQ tooling wound bas on a staggered schedule: the FAQ search-appearance filter, rich result report, and Résultats enrichis Tester prise en charge stopped in June 2026; Search Console API prise en charge is scheduled to drop in August 2026 and hadn’t happened as of ce mettre à jour. Critically, the FAQPage type is pas deprecated — it’s encore valid markup, Google dit it garde parsing it pour page understanding, and there’s aucun penalty pour leaving it in. Bing has announced aucun equivalent restriction or removal — that’s an absence of an announcement, pas independent confirmation Bing is actively displaying FAQ résultats enrichis today. FAQPage ≠ QAPage (community Q&A, encore pris en charge, with a March 24, 2026 pris en charge- properties mettre à jour). The “FAQ schema boosts AI citations” claim is unproven — the un dataset I pourrait vérifier trouvé a statistically insignificant modifier, pas a meaningful effect soit façon. My appel: leave existing markup, don’t chase the dead rich result, judge nouveau FAQ content on its propre merits.

The central question: is FAQ schema encore worth doing?

Ce is the question almost everyone lands on ce topic asking in 2026, so I’ll réponse it up front and alors justify it:

• The FAQ rich result is gone — entièrement supprimé from Recherche Google on May 7, 2026, pour every site.
• The FAQPage schema type n’est pas deprecated. It’s encore valid schema.org vocabulary, Google dit it encore parses it to comprendre votre page, and there’s aucun penalty and aucun besoin to supprimer it.
• So don’t panic-delete existing markup, and don’t ajouter nouveau FAQ schema expecting the old SERP enhancement — que reward ne … plus exists. Evaluate FAQ content on its on-page/UX valeur, pas on a schema-ROI cas that’s now moot in Google.

Everything ci-dessous is the detail behind que.

The complet timeline — how FAQ résultats enrichis were phased out

The unique chose la plupart competing articles obtenir loose on is the dates. Here’s the precise version. Google didn’t supprimer FAQ résultats enrichis in un déplacer — là were three distinct stages:

August 2023 — restricted to government and health sites

Google’s Changements to HowTo and FAQ résultats enrichis blog post (August 8, 2023) drew the line: going forward, FAQ résultats enrichis from FAQPage données structurées voudrait seulement be affiché pour well-known, authoritative government and health websites, and pour tout autre sites the rich result voudrait ne … plus be affiché regularly. (Ce was reported contemporaneously by Moteur de recherche Journal, qui quoted the post directement.) The raison, per Google’s framing and industry summaries of it, was abuse: sites bolting on artificial FAQ sections purely to grab plus SERP réel estate, with questions que didn’t match intent and “answers” que existed seulement to occupy pixels.

Ce is où a lot of stale content — and, jusqu’à recently, même ce site’s propre données structurées hub — got stuck: describing the 2023 gov/health state as si it’s encore the current state. It isn’t.

May 7, 2026 — entièrement supprimé pour everyone

On May 7, 2026, Google supprimé the FAQ rich result entirely. The gov/health carve-out from 2023 went away with it — nobody sees a FAQ rich result in Google now. Google ajouté a deprecation notice to the FAQPage documentation, and coverage from Moteur de recherche Land and Moteur de recherche Journal captured the notice verbatim. Google’s propre documentation changelog aussi logged a separate, plus tard entry — dated June 15, 2026 — describing removal of the dedicated FAQ rich-result documentation itself, a distinct step from the May 7 afficher modifier. The general FAQPage structured-data référence page (lié in Official Docs ci-dessous) encore exists as of ce writing, so lire ce as Google retiring a standalone FAQ guide, pas every FAQ-related doc page disappearing.

June–August 2026 — Google retires its propre FAQ tooling

Removing the SERP fonctionnalité is un chose; Google aussi wound bas the reporting and testing infrastructure autour it on a staggered schedule, qui is ce que the deprecation notice spelled out. Per Google’s notice:

“FAQ résultats enrichis are ne … plus appearing dans la recherche Google. We va be dropping the FAQ search appearance, rich result report, and prise en charge in the Résultats enrichis tester in June 2026. To autoriser temps pour adjusting votre API calls, prise en charge pour the FAQ rich result in the Search Console API va be supprimé in August 2026.”

So the Résultats enrichis Tester and Search Console’s FAQ report/filter stopped covering FAQ in June 2026. The Search Console API is scheduled to drop FAQ prise en charge in August 2026 — as of ce mettre à jour que modifier hadn’t taken effect yet. Si a script of yours déjà renvoie nothing pour the FAQ search-appearance type in Search Console’s UI, that’s the June modifier; expect the API appel itself to arrêter returning FAQ données une fois August 2026 arrives.

Ce que Google dit now — the markup n’est pas deprecated

Ce is the distinction the whole topic hinges on, and it’s où the lower-quality coverage goes incorrect: “Google stopped displaying it” n’est pas the même as “the markup is now incorrect / harmful / contre guidelines.”

Google’s propre deprecation-notice wording is à propos de the fonctionnalité — the rich result — pas the vocabulary. The FAQPage, Question, and Answer types remain valid schema.org markup. Google has been consistent que it garde reading données structurées to comprendre pages même quand it ne … plus produces a visible result, and que its standing policy is: données structurées que isn’t being utilisé doesn’t besoin to be proactively supprimé and doesn’t causer problems pour Search. (I’d point at a principal Search Central line pour que exact sentence, but the cleanest version of it in my research was captured secondhand — treat it as the well-established Google policy it is plutôt que a fresh verbatim quote.)

There’s a broader rep signal ici aussi. Quand personnes saw the FAQ removal alongside a run of autre structured-data type retirements, John Mueller pushed back on the “schema is dying” framing, saying Google is pas killing schema — the pris en charge définir obtient trimmed of old or redundant types pendant que the ones que meaningfully aider Search are kept, plus haircut que funeral (reported by Moteur de recherche Roundtable). Un caveat I vouloir to be straight à propos de: que comment apparaît to be à propos de the broader wave of structured-data retirements, pas FAQPage specifically, so I’m treating it as general context on Google’s posture toward schema — pas as FAQ-specific commentary.

Bottom line from Google’s side: aucun penalty, aucun besoin to supprimer, encore parsed pour understanding — simplement aucun rich result.

FAQPage structure and exemple JSON-LD

The markup itself hasn’t modifié; it’s worth knowing regardless, parce que it’s encore valid schema.org vocabulary and Bing has announced aucun equivalent removal. Ce is a statement à propos de schema.org validity, pas a claim à propos de current Google rich-result eligibility — que fonctionnalité is gone. The minimum valid structure is:

FAQPage → mainEntity (an array of Question items) → chaque Question has a name (the question text) and an acceptedAnswer (an Answer whose text holds the réponse, qui may inclure some basic HTML comme liens).

{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "FAQPage",
  "mainEntity": [
    {
      "@type": "Question",
      "name": "Do I need to remove FAQPage schema now that the rich result is gone?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "No. The rich result is gone, but the FAQPage markup is still valid, causes no problems, and Google still reads it. There's no penalty for leaving it in place."
      }
    },
    {
      "@type": "Question",
      "name": "Has Bing made the same change to FAQ rich results as Google?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "No. Bing has not announced any equivalent restriction or removal — this is a Google-specific change."
      }
    }
  ]
}

A few property notes: mainEntity is inherited from CreativeWork and holds the array of questions; Question (schema.org/Question) aussi documents answerCount and suggestedAnswer, but pour FAQ vous vouloir a unique acceptedAnswer per question; the réponse corps lives in Answer.text. Que single-authoritative-answer shape is exactly ce que distinguishes FAQPage from QAPage. Evidence for this claim FAQPage uses Question entities and acceptedAnswer Answer entities to represent publisher-authored questions and answers. Scope: Schema.org vocabulary; QAPage models a different community-answer use case. Confidence: high · Verified: 2026-07-14 Schema.org: FAQPage

FAQPage vs. QAPage — don’t confuse les

Ce is the freshest, la plupart utile distinction to obtenir correct, parce que a lot of coverage smears “FAQ schema” and “Q&A schema” ensemble, and ils are différent types with différent eligibility:

Si votre page is genuinely a community Q&A with multiple user-submitted réponses, that’s QAPage — a separate, still-supported type — pas FAQPage. Reaching pour QAPage on a page vous contrôler and réponse yourself is simplement as incorrect as reaching pour FAQPage on a forum thread. Ce distinction is pourquoi FAQPage sits in the Social & Community schema groupe alongside QAPage and DiscussionForumPosting: they’re the “who’s doing the talking” family of types, and seulement some of les lost leur rich result.

QAPage isn’t simplement theoretically encore autour, soit: Google’s propre documentation changelog recorded an mettre à jour to QAPage’s pris en charge properties on March 24, 2026 — a sign the type is actively maintained, pas a stale leftover. That’s a différent claim que “QAPage will show a rich result for your specific query” — confirmer current eligibility pour votre propre pages with the Résultats enrichis Tester plutôt que assuming blanket prise en charge.

Fait FAQ schema encore aider with AI search or AI Overviews?

Here’s a claim I voir everywhere with zero evidence behind it: “FAQ schema boosts votre AI Overview / LLM citations, so it’s worth doing pour que raison alone.” Be skeptical.

There’s aucun confirmed Google linkage entre FAQ données structurées and AI Overview inclusion. Google dit aucun special Schema.org markup is requis pour AI Overviews or AI Mode. Evidence for this claim Google says there is no special Schema.org markup required to appear in AI Overviews or AI Mode. Scope: Google Search AI-features guidance; FAQPage markup should not be presented as a confirmed AI-citation lever. Confidence: high · Verified: 2026-07-14 Google: AI features and your website The meilleur données point I trouvé doesn’t prise en charge an AI-citation lift soit: an Ahrefs tester reported by Moteur de recherche Journal mesuré ChatGPT citations à travers roughly 1 885 pages avant and après ajout schema markup (pooling multiple schema types ensemble, pas testing FAQPage specifically) and trouvé seulement a +2,2% modifier — petit suffisant que the researchers themselves appelé it “aussi petit to tell apart from random variation.” I’d treat que as a null result, pas evidence of a lift or a penalty, and it isn’t an FAQPage-specific tester. Soit façon, it’s suffisant to knock bas the confident “FAQ schema is an AI-citation lever” assertion — the données doesn’t prise en charge it.

The distinction que en réalité holds up: well-structured Q&A content — clair questions, direct réponses, scannable format — genuinely helps LLMs extract and reuse votre material, and it helps human readers aussi. Que valeur comes from the content and its structure on lune page, and LLMs peut lire it si or pas it’s wrapped in FAQPage JSON-LD. The FAQPage markup itself has aucun demonstrated AI-citation lift. Écrire bon FAQ content; don’t do it pour the schema.

Fait Bing encore utiliser FAQ schema?

Ce is a Google-specific modifier, pas an industry-wide un. Bing has pas announced quelconque restriction or removal of FAQ résultats enrichis, and industry reporting in 2026 dit Bing (and the engines on its index, comme DuckDuckGo and Brave Search) continues to traiter FAQPage markup — though I haven’t independently reconfirmed que contre a Bing-owned principal source in ce réussir, so treat it as industry-reported plutôt que Bing-official. Bing doesn’t publish a standalone FAQ rich-result spec page — it supports the shared schema.org vocabulary via its general structured-data documentation — so the accurate framing is “no deprecation announced by Bing,” pas “Bing currently montre FAQ résultats enrichis pour every requête,” qui isn’t something ce réussir independently verified.

Fabrice Canel, Principal Product Manager at Microsoft Bing, has separately confirmed — in the broader structured-data context — que balisage de données structurées helps Microsoft’s LLMs and Copilot comprendre content (via Moteur de recherche Land), qui is déjà cited on ce site’s données structurées hub. That’s general, pas FAQ-specific, but it’s a fair raison pas to assume FAQ markup is “dead everywhere” simplement parce que Google stopped displaying it.

Ce que FAQPage schema is encore bon pour

Strip away the rich result and there’s encore a réel, si plus petit, cas pour FAQ content (remarque: content, pas necessarily the markup):

• On-page UX. A clean FAQ section lets utilisateurs scan pour the objection or detail that’s blocking les, qui matters la plupart correct avant a conversion.
• Maillage interne. Answer.text accepts basic HTML, so réponses peut lien out to votre deepar pages — a legitimate façon to route authority and readers.
• Content organization pour humans and machines. Structured Q&A is facile pour personnes to lire and facile pour engines and LLMs to parse — même sans a Google rich-result reward, and potentially in Bing aussi, où aucun equivalent removal has been announced.

So: garder votre existing FAQPage markup (it’s harmless and Google dit it encore reads it), garder writing genuinely utile FAQ content où it sert readers, and simplement arrêter treating the Google FAQ rich result as a raison to do soit — parce que it’s gone.

Pour où FAQPage sits in the wider picture, voir the broader Données structurées and Balisage de données structurées hubs ce article nests sous, and the QAPage schema sibling pour the community-Q&A side of ce family.

AI summary

A condensed prendre on the Avancé version:

• Ce que c’est: schema.org/FAQPage markup (usually JSON-LD) que étiquettes une page’s FAQ content — mainEntity → Question (with name) → acceptedAnswer → Answer.text.
• The core réponse: the FAQ rich result is gone, but the FAQPage type n’est pas deprecated — encore valid, Google dit it encore parses it pour understanding, aucun penalty and aucun besoin to supprimer it.
• Exact timeline (three stages): Aug 8, 2023 restricted to authoritative gov/health sites → May 7, 2026 entièrement supprimé pour everyone (gov/health inclus) → June 2026 FAQ search-appearance filter, rich result report, and Résultats enrichis Tester prise en charge dropped → August 2026 Search Console API prise en charge scheduled to drop (pas yet in effect).
• Google’s stance: the deprecation notice is à propos de the fonctionnalité, pas the vocabulary; Mueller dit Google is “not killing schema” (que comment reads as general, pas FAQ-specific).
• Bing: aucun equivalent restriction or removal announced — that’s an absence of an announcement, pas confirmed current afficher. Google-specific modifier, pas industry-wide.
• FAQPage ≠ QAPage: FAQPage = page-owner content, un accepted réponse, rich result supprimé; QAPage = community Q&A, multiple réponses, encore pris en charge. Différent types, différent utiliser cas.
• AI-citation myth: unproven — an Ahrefs tester (via SEJ) pooling schema types à travers ~1 885 pages trouvé seulement a +2,2% ChatGPT-citation modifier après ajout schema, petit suffisant que the researchers appelé it indistinguishable from random variation (pas an FAQPage-specific tester). The valeur is in well-structured Q&A content, qui LLMs lire with or sans the markup — pas the markup itself.
• Encore bon pour: on-page UX, maillage interne (réponses accept basic HTML), and content organization — plus a chance at Bing résultats enrichis, since aucun equivalent removal is announced là.
• My advice: leave existing markup in placer, don’t chase the dead Google rich result, judge nouveau FAQ content on its on-page merits.

Documentation officielle

Primary-source documentation and the modifier record.

Google

• FAQPage (FAQ) données structurées — the FAQPage référence, now carrying the deprecation notice pour the FAQ rich result.
• Changements to HowTo and FAQ résultats enrichis (Aug 8, 2023) — the original restriction to government and health sites.
• Données structurées general guidelines — the standing policy que unused/no-longer-displayed données structurées doesn’t besoin to be supprimé and causes aucun problems.
• Résultats enrichis Tester — encore validates FAQPage as valid markup, but ne … plus reports FAQ rich-result eligibility (que prise en charge was dropped June 2026).

schema.org

• FAQPage — a WebPage presenting un or plus frequently-asked questions; hierarchy Thing > CreativeWork > WebPage > FAQPage.
• Question — the Question type with acceptedAnswer, answerCount, and suggestedAnswer.
• QAPage — the différent type pour community Q&Une pages, so vous pouvez voir the contrast.

Bing / Microsoft

• Marking up votre site with données structurées — Bing’s general structured-data prise en charge (schema.org, JSON-LD). Aucun FAQ-specific removal announced.

Quotes from the source

On-the-record statements, with deep liens où the source page exposes the text.

Google — the deprecation notice

• “FAQ rich results are no longer appearing in Google Search. We will be dropping the FAQ search appearance, rich result report, and support in the Rich results test in June 2026. To allow time for adjusting your API calls, support for the FAQ rich result in the Search Console API will be removed in August 2026.” — Recherche Google Central, FAQPage documentation deprecation notice. Jump to coverage

Google — the August 2023 restriction

• “Going forward, FAQ (from FAQPage structured data) rich results will only be shown for well-known, authoritative government and health websites. For all other sites, this rich result will no longer be shown regularly.” — Recherche Google Central Blog, Changements to HowTo and FAQ résultats enrichis (Aug 8, 2023), as quoted by Moteur de recherche Journal. Lire the coverage

John Mueller, Google (general structured-data context, pas FAQ-specific)

• Google is “not killing schema” — Google trims old or redundant markup types pendant que keeping the ones que meaningfully aider Search comprendre and afficher content. Lire the coverage

FAQPage schema cheat sheet

The one-line réponse

FAQ rich result = gone in Google (May 7, 2026). FAQ markup = encore valid, Google dit it encore reads it, aucun penalty, aucun besoin to supprimer. Bing: aucun equivalent modifier announced.

The removal timeline

Minimum valid structure

FAQPage → mainEntity[] → Question { name, acceptedAnswer: Answer { text } }

FAQPage vs. QAPage

Fast facts

• The FAQPage type is pas deprecated — seulement the rich result was supprimé.
• Google’s policy: unused données structurées causes aucun problems; aucun besoin to supprimer it.
• Bing: aucun equivalent modifier announced.
• AI-citation lift: unproven — an Ahrefs tester (via SEJ) trouvé seulement a +2,2% ChatGPT-citation modifier après ajout schema (pooled à travers schema types, ~1 885 pages, pas FAQPage-specific) — aussi petit to separate from random variation.
• Don’t ajouter FAQ schema expecting the old Google rich result — it’s gone pour bon.

Devrait I garder, supprimer, or ajouter FAQPage schema?

Fonctionner bas the questions:

FAQPage schema Mythes et erreurs à éviter

Myth: “FAQPage schema still gives everyone a rich result.” It doesn’t — the FAQ rich result was entièrement supprimé on May 7, 2026 pour every site, notamment the government and health sites que briefly kept it après August 2023. Nobody obtient a FAQ rich result in Google now.

Myth: “Google restricted FAQ to gov/health sites, and that’s still the current state.” Que was the interim August 2023 state. The May 7, 2026 removal took it away même from ceux sites. A lot of older content — and ce site’s propre hub, avant it was tightened — is stuck describing the 2023 situation as si it’s current.

Myth: “The FAQPage type is deprecated / against guidelines now — rip it out.” The rich result is gone; the schema type is pas deprecated. It’s encore valid schema.org markup, Google dit it encore parses it pour understanding, Bing has announced aucun equivalent removal, and there’s aucun penalty pour leaving it. Removing it isn’t requis — it’s simplement busywork.

Myth: “FAQPage and QAPage are the same thing.” They’re distinct types with différent eligibility. QAPage (community Q&A, multiple user-submitted réponses) is a separate, still-supported Google rich result. Don’t utiliser FAQPage pour a forum thread, or QAPage pour votre propre help-page FAQ.

Myth: “FAQ schema is a proven AI Overview / ChatGPT citation booster.” There’s aucun confirmed Google linkage, and an Ahrefs tester (via SEJ) que pooled schema types à travers ~1 885 pages trouvé seulement a +2,2% ChatGPT-citation modifier après ajout schema — petit suffisant que the researchers appelé it indistinguishable from random variation, and it wasn’t an FAQPage-specific tester. The valeur is in well-structured Q&A content — qui LLMs lire regardless of markup — pas in the FAQPage JSON-LD itself.

Myth: “Since Google dropped it, no search engine cares about FAQ schema.” Ce is a Google-specific modifier. Bing (and DuckDuckGo/Brave on the Bing index) have announced aucun equivalent removal — treat it as an industry-wide death and you’re incorrect.

Mistake: ajout FAQPage schema to chase the old Google rich result. Que reward ne … plus exists pour anyone. Si you’re ajout FAQ content, do it pour readers, pour Bing, or pour content clarity — pas pour a Google SERP enhancement that’s been supprimé.

Mistake: encore querying the FAQ search-appearance type in the Search Console API. Prise en charge is scheduled to drop in August 2026 (the Résultats enrichis Tester and rich result report prise en charge déjà dropped in June 2026). Si a monitoring script déjà renvoie nothing pour FAQ in the report/filter, that’s the June modifier; expect the API appel itself to arrêter returning FAQ données une fois August 2026 arrives — mettre à jour votre script ahead of que.

FAQPage En pratique — correct, incorrect, and mis-typed

A valid FAQPage block (encore fine to garder)

Page-owner Q&A, un authoritative réponse per question, réponses peut carry basic HTML:

{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "FAQPage",
  "mainEntity": [
    {
      "@type": "Question",
      "name": "When did Google remove FAQ rich results?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "Google restricted them to government and health sites on August 8, 2023, then removed them entirely for everyone on May 7, 2026."
      }
    },
    {
      "@type": "Question",
      "name": "Should I delete my FAQPage schema?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "No. It is still valid markup, Google says it still reads it, Bing has announced no equivalent removal, and there is no penalty for leaving it in place."
      }
    }
  ]
}

Ce validates and is harmless. It simplement won’t earn a Google rich result — that’s the seulement chose que modifié.

The incorrect type: ce devrait be QAPage, pas FAQPage

A forum thread où utilisateurs post multiple competing réponses is community Q&A — QAPage, pas FAQPage. Marking it up as FAQPage misrepresents it (and FAQPage has aucun rich result to gain anyway):

{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "QAPage",
  "mainEntity": {
    "@type": "Question",
    "name": "How do I fix a slow LCP on a WordPress site?",
    "answerCount": 3,
    "acceptedAnswer": {
      "@type": "Answer",
      "text": "The top-voted community answer..."
    },
    "suggestedAnswer": [
      { "@type": "Answer", "text": "Another user's answer..." }
    ]
  }
}

Remarque the differences: QAPage, an answerCount, and suggestedAnswer alongside the acceptedAnswer — the shape of community Q&A. QAPage is encore a pris en charge Google rich result; FAQPage isn’t. Pick the type que matches who en réalité wrote the réponses.

The “why is my script empty?” cas

Si a Search Console API appel or a Résultats enrichis Tester vérifier pour FAQ rich-result eligibility suddenly renvoie nothing, it’s pas a bug in votre markup:

• Résultats enrichis Tester / FAQ rich result report / FAQ search-appearance filter — prise en charge dropped June 2026.
• Search Console API FAQ prise en charge — scheduled to drop August 2026 (pas yet in effect as of ce mettre à jour).

The markup peut encore be perfectly valid; Google simplement ne … plus reports on a rich result it ne … plus montre. Mettre à jour the script’s expectations plutôt que “fixing” the schema.

Outils pour checking FAQPage markup

• Balisage de données structurées Validator — paste the JSON-LD or page HTML to confirmer que the still-valid FAQPage vocabulary is bien formed, chaque Question has a name, and chaque acceptedAnswer has text.
• schema.org Validator — utiliser the vocabulary’s propre validator as a second vérifier quand the question is si the markup is valid schema.org, pas si it peut earn a Google fonctionnalité.
• Bing Webmaster Outils Markup Validator — utiliser Bing’s validator quand Bing is the raison vous are retaining or ajout the markup. Google’s Résultats enrichis Tester aucun plus long supports the supprimé FAQ rich result, so it n’est pas the correct réussir/échouer outil pour FAQPage eligibility in 2026.

Testez vos connaissances: FAQPage Schema

Five rapide questions on FAQPage schema, the removal timeline, and how it differs from QAPage. Pick an réponse pour chaque, alors vérifier.

Ressources utiles

My writing on ce topic

I haven’t publié a standalone FAQPage schema guide of my propre — ce is genuinely fresh ground plutôt que a rewrite — so plutôt que point vous at something que doesn’t exist, I’ll send vous to the principal sources and the connexe structured-data fonctionner on ce site. Pour the broader vocabulary and où FAQPage fits (notamment the complet liste of rich-result types Google has supprimé), voir the Données structurées hub ce article nests sous; pour the AI angle, Balisage de données structurées pour AI.

From autour the industry

• FAQPage (FAQ) données structurées (Recherche Google Central) — the référence, now carrying the deprecation notice.
• Changements to HowTo and FAQ résultats enrichis (Recherche Google Central Blog, Aug 8, 2023) — the original restriction to government and health sites.
• Google to ne … plus prise en charge FAQ résultats enrichis (Moteur de recherche Land) — the breaking-news piece with the deprecation-notice wording.
• Google Drops FAQ Résultats enrichis From Search (Moteur de recherche Journal) — independent corroboration of the notice, dates, and “markup stays valid” framing.
• SERP FAQ Removal & Nouveau Données Challenge Schema’s AI Search Valeur (Moteur de recherche Journal) — the Ahrefs ChatGPT-citation tester (~1 885 pages, +2,2% modifier, appelé statistically insignificant).
• The rise and fall of FAQ schema – and Ce que cela signifie pour le SEO today (Moteur de recherche Land, Jenn Mathews) — the historical arc from the 2023 restriction onward.
• Google N’est pas Killing Schema (Moteur de recherche Roundtable) — Mueller’s pushback on the “schema is dying” framing (general, pas FAQ-specific).
• FAQ Pages pour le SEO (+ Exemples & Meilleur Practices) (Ahrefs) — practical FAQ-content guidance au-delà the markup.

Journal des modifications