暫定日本語訳：FAQPage スキーマ

暫定日本語案: TL;DR — FAQPage スキーマ is code you add to a ページ with a frequently-asked-questions 暫定日本語案: section — it labels each question and its answer for 検索 engines. It used to 暫定日本語案: make Google show an expandable list of your questions right in the 検索 results 暫定日本語案: (the “FAQ rich result”). Google took that feature away for everyone on May 7, 暫定日本語案: 2026. The markup itself is still fine to keep — Google’s policy is that it doesn’t 暫定日本語案: cause any problems and Google says it still reads it — but it no longer earns you that 暫定日本語案: extra spot in 検索.

暫定日本語案: What FAQPage スキーマ is

暫定日本語案: If a ページ has a “Frequently asked questions” section, a human can tell the questions 暫定日本語案: from the answers just by reading. A 検索エンジン sees plain text. FAQPage スキーマ 暫定日本語案: spells it out in code, using the shared スキーマ.org 暫定日本語案: vocabulary: “this is the ページ’s FAQ,” “this is a question,” “this is its answer.”

暫定日本語案: It’s almost always written as JSON-LD — a small block of code that sits in the 暫定日本語案: ページ without changing how the ページ looks.

暫定日本語案: Why people added it — and what changed

暫定日本語案: For years, valid FAQPage markup could earn a FAQ rich result: Google would show 暫定日本語案: your questions as an expandable list directly under your 検索 listing, taking up 暫定日本語案: more space on the ページ. That’s why FAQ スキーマ got so popular.

暫定日本語案: Here’s the part that matters most in 2026: that rich result is gone. Google 暫定日本語案: phased it out in stages —

• 暫定日本語案: August 2023 — Google limited the FAQ rich result to well-known government and 暫定日本語案: health websites. Most sites stopped seeing it.
• 暫定日本語案: May 7, 2026 — Google removed it entirely, for everyone, including those 暫定日本語案: government and health sites.

暫定日本語案: So today, Google does not list FAQPage among its current supported rich-result 暫定日本語案: types. Valid スキーマ.org markup and Google rich-result eligibility are separate 暫定日本語案: 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

暫定日本語案: Should you remove your FAQ スキーマ?

暫定日本語案: Probably not — but it’s worth checking a few things, not just taking “Google said it’s 暫定日本語案: fine” at face value. Google’s standing rule is that structured データ it no longer 暫定日本語案: displays doesn’t cause any problems and there’s no penalty for leaving it in place, and 暫定日本語案: Google says it still reads structured データ generally to help understand ページ. Treat 暫定日本語案: that as Google’s stated policy rather than something re-confirmed specifically for FAQPage 暫定日本語案: in this pass.

暫定日本語案: Before you decide, check:

• 暫定日本語案: Is the markup still true? If your FAQ コンテンツ changed and the スキーマ didn’t keep up, 暫定日本語案: fix or remove it — stale markup that misrepresents the ページ is the wrong call regardless 暫定日本語案: of any rich result.
• 暫定日本語案: Does anything besides Google still use it? Non-Google systems may still read FAQPage 暫定日本語案: markup even though Google’s rich result is gone — a reason to keep it, not a reason to 暫定日本語案: remove it.
• 暫定日本語案: Is the upkeep worth it? If keeping the markup in sync with the ページ is real ongoing 暫定日本語案: work and you’re confident nothing meaningful reads it in your case, removing it is a 暫定日本語案: legitimate call too.
• 暫定日本語案: What else could that time do? Effort spent maintaining unused FAQ markup might be 暫定日本語案: better spent elsewhere — a business tradeoff, not a penalty-avoidance one.

暫定日本語案: What you shouldn’t do is add FAQ スキーマ now expecting the old rich result. That 暫定日本語案: reward doesn’t exist anymore.

暫定日本語案: Two quick things that trip people up

• 暫定日本語案: Google isn’t the whole web. Bing hasn’t announced any equivalent restriction or 暫定日本語案: removal of its own — but that’s an absence of an announcement, not direct confirmation 暫定日本語案: that Bing is currently displaying FAQ rich results for you. Treat it as “no known 暫定日本語案: Google-style removal,” not a guarantee.
• 暫定日本語案: FAQPage is not the same as QAPage. FAQPage is for your questions and answers 暫定日本語案: (one authoritative answer each). QAPage is for community Q&A where users post 暫定日本語案: multiple competing answers (think forum threads) — and QAPage is still supported 暫定日本語案: by Google. Don’t mix them up.

暫定日本語案: Want the exact dates, the JSON-LD structure, the FAQPage-vs-QAPage breakdown, the 暫定日本語案: “does it help AI 検索” データ, and clear keep-or-remove guidance? Switch to the 暫定日本語案: Advanced tab.

暫定日本語案: TL;DR — スキーマ.org/FAQPage markup (mainEntity → Question → acceptedAnswer 暫定日本語案: → Answer.text) once made a ページ eligible for Google’s expandable FAQ rich result. 暫定日本語案: Google restricted it to authoritative government and health sites on 暫定日本語案: August 8, 2023, then fully removed it for everyone — including those 暫定日本語案: gov/health sites — on May 7, 2026. Google’s own FAQ tooling wound down on a staggered schedule: 暫定日本語案: the FAQ 検索-appearance filter, rich result report, and Rich Results Test support 暫定日本語案: stopped in June 2026; 検索 Console API support is scheduled to drop in 暫定日本語案: August 2026 and hadn’t happened as of this update. Critically, the 暫定日本語案: FAQPage type is not deprecated — it’s still valid markup, Google says it 暫定日本語案: keeps parsing it for ページ understanding, and there’s no penalty for leaving it in. 暫定日本語案: Bing has announced no equivalent restriction or removal — that’s an absence of an 暫定日本語案: announcement, not independent confirmation Bing is actively displaying FAQ rich results 暫定日本語案: today. FAQPage ≠ QAPage (community Q&A, still supported, with a March 24, 2026 supported- 暫定日本語案: properties update). The “FAQ スキーマ boosts AI citations” claim is unproven — the one 暫定日本語案: dataset I could verify found a statistically insignificant change, not a meaningful 暫定日本語案: effect either way. My call: leave existing markup, don’t chase the dead rich result, 暫定日本語案: judge new FAQ コンテンツ on its own merits.

暫定日本語案: The central question: is FAQ スキーマ still worth doing?

暫定日本語案: This is the question almost everyone lands on this topic asking in 2026, so I’ll answer 暫定日本語案: it up front and then justify it:

• 暫定日本語案: The FAQ rich result is gone — fully removed from Google 検索 on May 7, 2026, 暫定日本語案: for every サイト.
• 暫定日本語案: The FAQPage スキーマ type is not deprecated. It’s still valid スキーマ.org 暫定日本語案: vocabulary, Google says it still parses it to understand your ページ, and there’s no 暫定日本語案: penalty and no need to remove it.
• 暫定日本語案: So don’t panic-delete existing markup, and don’t add new FAQ スキーマ expecting the 暫定日本語案: old SERP enhancement — that reward no longer exists. Evaluate FAQ コンテンツ on its 暫定日本語案: on-ページ/UX value, not on a スキーマ-ROI case that’s now moot in Google.

暫定日本語案: Everything below is the detail behind that.

暫定日本語案: The full timeline — how FAQ rich results were phased out

暫定日本語案: The single thing most competing articles get loose on is the dates. Here’s the precise 暫定日本語案: version. Google didn’t remove FAQ rich results in one move — there were three distinct 暫定日本語案: stages:

暫定日本語案: August 2023 — restricted to government and health sites

暫定日本語案: Google’s Changes to HowTo and FAQ rich results 暫定日本語案: blog post (August 8, 2023) drew the line: going forward, FAQ rich results from FAQPage 暫定日本語案: structured データ would only be shown for well-known, authoritative government and health 暫定日本語案: websites, and for all other sites the rich result would no longer be shown regularly. 暫定日本語案: (This was reported contemporaneously by 暫定日本語案: 検索エンジン Journal, 暫定日本語案: which quoted the post directly.) The reason, per Google’s framing and industry 暫定日本語案: summaries of it, was abuse: sites bolting on artificial FAQ sections purely to grab more 暫定日本語案: SERP real estate, with questions that didn’t match intent and “answers” that existed 暫定日本語案: only to occupy pixels.

暫定日本語案: This is where a lot of stale コンテンツ — and, until recently, even this サイト’s own 暫定日本語案: structured データ hub — got stuck: describing 暫定日本語案: the 2023 gov/health state as if it’s still the current state. It isn’t.

暫定日本語案: May 7, 2026 — fully removed for everyone

暫定日本語案: On May 7, 2026, Google removed the FAQ rich result entirely. The gov/health carve-out 暫定日本語案: from 2023 went away with it — nobody sees a FAQ rich result in Google now. Google added 暫定日本語案: a deprecation notice to the FAQPage documentation, and coverage from 暫定日本語案: 検索エンジン Land 暫定日本語案: and 検索エンジン Journal 暫定日本語案: captured the notice verbatim. Google’s own documentation changelog also logged a separate, 暫定日本語案: later entry — dated June 15, 2026 — describing removal of the dedicated FAQ rich-result 暫定日本語案: documentation itself, a distinct step from the May 7 display change. The general FAQPage 暫定日本語案: structured-データ reference ページ (linked in Official Docs below) still exists as of this 暫定日本語案: writing, so read this as Google retiring a standalone FAQ guide, not every FAQ-related doc 暫定日本語案: ページ disappearing.

暫定日本語案: June–August 2026 — Google retires its own FAQ tooling

暫定日本語案: Removing the SERP feature is one thing; Google also wound down the reporting and 暫定日本語案: testing infrastructure around it on a staggered schedule, which is what the deprecation 暫定日本語案: notice spelled out. Per Google’s notice:

暫定日本語案: “FAQ rich results are no longer appearing in Google 検索. We will be dropping the 暫定日本語案: FAQ 検索 appearance, rich result report, and support in the Rich results test in 暫定日本語案: June 2026. To allow time for adjusting your API calls, support for the FAQ rich result 暫定日本語案: in the 検索 Console API will be removed in August 2026.”

暫定日本語案: So the Rich Results Test and 検索 Console’s FAQ report/filter stopped covering FAQ 暫定日本語案: in June 2026. The 検索 Console API is scheduled to drop FAQ support in 暫定日本語案: August 2026 — as of this update that change hadn’t taken effect yet. If a script of 暫定日本語案: yours already returns nothing for the FAQ 検索-appearance type in 検索 Console’s UI, 暫定日本語案: that’s the June change; expect the API call itself to stop returning FAQ データ once August 暫定日本語案: 2026 arrives.

暫定日本語案: What Google says now — the markup is not deprecated

暫定日本語案: This is the distinction the whole topic hinges on, and it’s where the lower-quality 暫定日本語案: coverage goes wrong: “Google stopped displaying it” is not the same as “the markup is 暫定日本語案: now wrong / harmful / against guidelines.”

暫定日本語案: Google’s own deprecation-notice wording is about the feature — the rich result — not 暫定日本語案: the vocabulary. The FAQPage, Question, and Answer types remain valid スキーマ.org 暫定日本語案: markup. Google has been consistent that it keeps reading structured データ to understand 暫定日本語案: ページ even when it no longer produces a visible result, and that its standing policy is: 暫定日本語案: structured データ that isn’t being used doesn’t need to be proactively removed and doesn’t 暫定日本語案: cause problems for 検索. (I’d point at a primary 検索 Central line for that exact 暫定日本語案: sentence, but the cleanest version of it in my research was captured secondhand — treat 暫定日本語案: it as the well-established Google policy it is rather than a fresh verbatim quote.)

暫定日本語案: There’s a broader rep signal here too. When people saw the FAQ removal alongside a run of 暫定日本語案: other structured-データ type retirements, John Mueller pushed back on the “スキーマ is dying” 暫定日本語案: framing, saying Google is not killing スキーマ — the supported set gets trimmed of old 暫定日本語案: or redundant types while the ones that meaningfully help 検索 are kept, more haircut 暫定日本語案: than funeral (reported by 暫定日本語案: 検索エンジン Roundtable). 暫定日本語案: One caveat I want to be straight about: that comment appears to be about the broader 暫定日本語案: wave of structured-データ retirements, not FAQPage specifically, so I’m treating it as 暫定日本語案: general context on Google’s posture toward スキーマ — not as FAQ-specific commentary.

暫定日本語案: Bottom line from Google’s side: no penalty, no need to remove, still parsed for 暫定日本語案: understanding — just no rich result.

暫定日本語案: FAQPage structure and example JSON-LD

暫定日本語案: The markup itself hasn’t changed; it’s worth knowing regardless, because it’s still valid 暫定日本語案: スキーマ.org vocabulary and Bing has announced no equivalent removal. This is a statement 暫定日本語案: about スキーマ.org validity, not a claim about current Google rich-result eligibility — that 暫定日本語案: feature is gone. The minimum valid structure is:

暫定日本語案: FAQPage → mainEntity (an array of Question items) → each Question has a name 暫定日本語案: (the question text) and an acceptedAnswer (an Answer whose text holds the answer, 暫定日本語案: which may include some basic HTML like リンク).

{
  "@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."
      }
    }
  ]
}

暫定日本語案: A few property notes: mainEntity is inherited from CreativeWork and holds the array 暫定日本語案: of questions; Question (schema.org/Question) also documents answerCount and 暫定日本語案: suggestedAnswer, but for FAQ you want a single acceptedAnswer per question; the answer 暫定日本語案: body lives in Answer.text. That single-authoritative-answer shape is exactly what 暫定日本語案: 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

暫定日本語案: FAQPage vs. QAPage — don’t confuse them

暫定日本語案: This is the freshest, most useful distinction to get right, because a lot of coverage 暫定日本語案: smears “FAQ スキーマ” and “Q&A スキーマ” together, and they are different types with 暫定日本語案: different eligibility:

暫定日本語案: If your ページ is genuinely a community Q&A with multiple user-submitted answers, that’s 暫定日本語案: QAPage — a separate, still-supported type — not FAQPage. Reaching for QAPage on a 暫定日本語案: ページ you control and answer yourself is just as wrong as reaching for FAQPage on a forum 暫定日本語案: thread. This distinction is why FAQPage sits in the Social & Community スキーマ group 暫定日本語案: alongside QAPage and DiscussionForumPosting: they’re the “who’s doing the talking” family 暫定日本語案: of types, and only some of them lost their rich result.

暫定日本語案: QAPage isn’t just theoretically still around, either: Google’s own documentation 暫定日本語案: changelog recorded an update to QAPage’s supported properties on March 24, 2026 暫定日本語案: — a sign the type is actively maintained, not a stale leftover. That’s a different claim 暫定日本語案: than “QAPage will show a rich result for your specific query” — confirm current 暫定日本語案: eligibility for your own ページ with the Rich Results Test rather than assuming blanket 暫定日本語案: support.

暫定日本語案: Does FAQ スキーマ still help with AI 検索 or AI Overviews?

暫定日本語案: Here’s a claim I see everywhere with zero evidence behind it: “FAQ スキーマ boosts your AI 暫定日本語案: Overview / LLM citations, so it’s worth doing for that reason alone.” Be skeptical.

暫定日本語案: There’s no confirmed Google linkage between FAQ structured データ and AI Overview 暫定日本語案: inclusion. Google says no special スキーマ.org markup is required for AI Overviews or 暫定日本語案: 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 best データ point I found doesn’t support an AI-citation lift either: an Ahrefs 暫定日本語案: test reported by 暫定日本語案: 検索エンジン Journal 暫定日本語案: measured ChatGPT citations across roughly 1 885 ページ before and after adding スキーマ 暫定日本語案: markup (pooling multiple スキーマ types together, not testing FAQPage specifically) and found 暫定日本語案: only a +2,2% change — small enough that the researchers themselves called it “too small 暫定日本語案: to tell apart from random variation.” I’d treat that as a null result, not evidence of a 暫定日本語案: lift or a penalty, and it isn’t an FAQPage-specific test. Either way, it’s enough to knock 暫定日本語案: down the confident “FAQ スキーマ is an AI-citation lever” assertion — the データ doesn’t support 暫定日本語案: it.

暫定日本語案: The distinction that actually holds up: well-structured Q&A コンテンツ — clear 暫定日本語案: questions, direct answers, scannable format — genuinely helps LLMs extract and reuse your 暫定日本語案: material, and it helps human readers too. That value comes from the コンテンツ and its 暫定日本語案: structure on the ページ, and LLMs can read it whether or not it’s wrapped in FAQPage 暫定日本語案: JSON-LD. The FAQPage markup itself has no demonstrated AI-citation lift. Write good 暫定日本語案: FAQ コンテンツ; don’t do it for the スキーマ.

暫定日本語案: Does Bing still use FAQ スキーマ?

暫定日本語案: This is a Google-specific change, not an industry-wide one. Bing has not announced 暫定日本語案: any restriction or removal of FAQ rich results, and industry reporting in 2026 says 暫定日本語案: Bing (and the engines on its index, like DuckDuckGo and Brave 検索) continues to 暫定日本語案: process FAQPage markup — though I haven’t independently reconfirmed that against a 暫定日本語案: Bing-owned primary source in this pass, so treat it as industry-reported rather than 暫定日本語案: Bing-official. Bing doesn’t publish a standalone FAQ rich-result spec ページ — it supports 暫定日本語案: the shared スキーマ.org vocabulary through its general 暫定日本語案: structured-データ documentation — 暫定日本語案: so the accurate framing is “no deprecation announced by Bing,” not “Bing currently shows 暫定日本語案: FAQ rich results for every query,” which isn’t something this pass independently verified.

暫定日本語案: Fabrice Canel, Principal 商品 Manager at Microsoft Bing, has separately confirmed — in 暫定日本語案: the broader structured-データ context — that スキーマ markup helps Microsoft’s LLMs and Copilot 暫定日本語案: understand コンテンツ (via 暫定日本語案: 検索エンジン Land), 暫定日本語案: which is already cited on this サイト’s structured データ hub. That’s general, not FAQ-specific, 暫定日本語案: but it’s a fair reason not to assume FAQ markup is “dead everywhere” just because Google 暫定日本語案: stopped displaying it.

暫定日本語案: What FAQPage スキーマ is still good for

暫定日本語案: Strip away the rich result and there’s still a real, if smaller, case for FAQ コンテンツ 暫定日本語案: (note: コンテンツ, not necessarily the markup):

• 暫定日本語案: On-ページ UX. A clean FAQ section lets users scan for the objection or detail that’s 暫定日本語案: blocking them, which matters most right before a conversion.
• 暫定日本語案: Internal linking. Answer.text accepts basic HTML, so answers can リンク out to your 暫定日本語案: deeper ページ — a legitimate way to route authority and readers.
• 暫定日本語案: コンテンツ organization for humans and machines. Structured Q&A is easy for people to 暫定日本語案: read and easy for engines and LLMs to parse — even without a Google rich-result reward, 暫定日本語案: and potentially in Bing too, where no equivalent removal has been announced.

暫定日本語案: So: keep your existing FAQPage markup (it’s harmless and Google says it still reads it), keep 暫定日本語案: writing genuinely useful FAQ コンテンツ where it serves readers, and just stop treating the 暫定日本語案: Google FAQ rich result as a reason to do either — because it’s gone.

暫定日本語案: For where FAQPage sits in the wider picture, see the broader 暫定日本語案: Structured データ and スキーマ Markup hubs this 暫定日本語案: article nests under, and the QAPage スキーマ sibling for the community-Q&A side of this family.

暫定日本語案: AI summary

暫定日本語案: A condensed take on the Advanced version:

• 暫定日本語案: What it is: schema.org/FAQPage markup (usually JSON-LD) that labels a ページ’s 暫定日本語案: FAQ コンテンツ — mainEntity → Question (with name) → acceptedAnswer → Answer.text.
• 暫定日本語案: The core answer: the FAQ rich result is gone, but the FAQPage type is not 暫定日本語案: deprecated — still valid, Google says it still parses it for understanding, no 暫定日本語案: penalty and no need to remove it.
• 暫定日本語案: Exact timeline (three stages): Aug 8, 2023 restricted to authoritative gov/health 暫定日本語案: sites → May 7, 2026 fully removed for everyone (gov/health included) → June 2026 暫定日本語案: FAQ 検索-appearance filter, rich result report, and Rich Results Test support dropped → 暫定日本語案: August 2026 検索 Console API support scheduled to drop (not yet in effect).
• 暫定日本語案: Google’s stance: the deprecation notice is about the feature, not the vocabulary; 暫定日本語案: Mueller says Google is “not killing スキーマ” (that comment reads as general, not 暫定日本語案: FAQ-specific).
• 暫定日本語案: Bing: no equivalent restriction or removal announced — that’s an absence of an 暫定日本語案: announcement, not confirmed current display. Google-specific change, not industry-wide.
• 暫定日本語案: FAQPage ≠ QAPage: FAQPage = ページ-owner コンテンツ, one accepted answer, rich result 暫定日本語案: removed; QAPage = community Q&A, multiple answers, still supported. Different 暫定日本語案: types, different use cases.
• 暫定日本語案: AI-citation myth: unproven — an Ahrefs test (via SEJ) pooling スキーマ types across 暫定日本語案: ~1 885 ページ found only a +2,2% ChatGPT-citation change after adding スキーマ, small 暫定日本語案: enough that the researchers called it indistinguishable from random variation (not an 暫定日本語案: FAQPage-specific test). The value is in well-structured Q&A コンテンツ, which LLMs read 暫定日本語案: with or without the markup — not the markup itself.
• 暫定日本語案: Still good for: on-ページ UX, internal linking (answers accept basic HTML), and コンテンツ 暫定日本語案: organization — plus a chance at Bing rich results, since no equivalent removal is 暫定日本語案: announced there.
• 暫定日本語案: My advice: leave existing markup in place, don’t chase the dead Google rich result, 暫定日本語案: judge new FAQ コンテンツ on its on-ページ merits.

暫定日本語案: Official documentation

暫定日本語案: Primary-source documentation and the change record.

暫定日本語案: Google

• 暫定日本語案: FAQPage (FAQ) structured データ — the FAQPage reference, now carrying the deprecation notice for the FAQ rich result.
• 暫定日本語案: Changes to HowTo and FAQ rich results (Aug 8, 2023) — the original restriction to government and health sites.
• 暫定日本語案: Structured データ general guidelines — the standing policy that unused/no-longer-displayed structured データ doesn’t need to be removed and causes no problems.
• 暫定日本語案: Rich Results Test — still validates FAQPage as valid markup, but no longer reports FAQ rich-result eligibility (that support was dropped June 2026).

暫定日本語案: スキーマ.org

• 暫定日本語案: FAQPage — a WebPage presenting one or more frequently-asked questions; hierarchy Thing > CreativeWork > WebPage > FAQPage.
• 暫定日本語案: Question — the Question type with acceptedAnswer, answerCount, and suggestedAnswer.
• 暫定日本語案: QAPage — the different type for community Q&A ページ, so you can see the contrast.

暫定日本語案: Bing / Microsoft

• 暫定日本語案: Marking up your サイト with structured データ — Bing’s general structured-データ support (スキーマ.org, JSON-LD). No FAQ-specific removal announced.

暫定日本語案: Note: Google’s docs render partly via JavaScript, and my research pass reached the 暫定日本語案: documentation changelog index for FAQPage but not always the full post body of the 暫定日本語案: August 2023 blog announcement — confirm the exact deprecation-notice and 2023 wording 暫定日本語案: against the live ページ before treating any of it as final verbatim text.

暫定日本語案: Quotes from the source

暫定日本語案: On-the-record statements, with deep リンク where the source ページ exposes the text.

暫定日本語案: Google — the deprecation notice

• 暫定日本語案: “FAQ rich results are no longer appearing in Google 検索. We will be dropping the FAQ 検索 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 検索 Console API will be removed in August 2026.” 暫定日本語案: — Google 検索 Central, FAQPage documentation deprecation notice. 暫定日本語案: Jump to coverage

暫定日本語案: Google — the August 2023 restriction

• 暫定日本語案: “Going forward, FAQ (from FAQPage structured データ) 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.” 暫定日本語案: — Google 検索 Central Blog, Changes to HowTo and FAQ rich results (Aug 8, 2023), as quoted by 検索エンジン Journal. 暫定日本語案: Read the coverage

暫定日本語案: John Mueller, Google (general structured-データ context, not FAQ-specific)

• 暫定日本語案: Google is “not killing スキーマ” — Google trims old or redundant markup types while keeping the ones that meaningfully help 検索 understand and display コンテンツ. 暫定日本語案: Read the coverage

暫定日本語案: Note: several of these are captured through secondary coverage (検索エンジン 暫定日本語案: Journal, 検索エンジン Land, 検索エンジン Roundtable) rather than a directly-fetched 暫定日本語案: Google ページ, because Google’s docs and blog render via JavaScript and the August 2023 暫定日本語案: post body resisted automated retrieval in this pass. Confirm the exact wording and the 暫定日本語案: #:~:text= fragments against the live ページ before treating them as final. The Mueller 暫定日本語案: line reads as commentary on the broader wave of structured-データ retirements, not on 暫定日本語案: FAQPage specifically, so treat it as general context.

暫定日本語案: FAQPage スキーマ cheat sheet

暫定日本語案: The one-line answer

暫定日本語案: FAQ rich result = gone in Google (May 7, 2026). FAQ markup = still valid, 暫定日本語案: Google says it still reads it, no penalty, no need to remove. Bing: no equivalent 暫定日本語案: change announced.

暫定日本語案: The removal timeline

暫定日本語案: Minimum valid structure

暫定日本語案: FAQPage → mainEntity[] → Question { name, acceptedAnswer: Answer { text } }

暫定日本語案: FAQPage vs. QAPage

暫定日本語案: Fast facts

• 暫定日本語案: The FAQPage type is not deprecated — only the rich result was removed.
• 暫定日本語案: Google’s policy: unused structured データ causes no problems; no need to remove it.
• 暫定日本語案: Bing: no equivalent change announced.
• 暫定日本語案: AI-citation lift: unproven — an Ahrefs test (via SEJ) found only a +2,2% 暫定日本語案: ChatGPT-citation change after adding スキーマ (pooled across スキーマ types, ~1 885 ページ, 暫定日本語案: not FAQPage-specific) — too small to separate from random variation.
• 暫定日本語案: Don’t add FAQ スキーマ expecting the old Google rich result — it’s gone for good.

暫定日本語案: Should I keep, remove, or add FAQPage スキーマ?

暫定日本語案: Work down the questions:

暫定日本語案: FAQPage スキーマ myths and mistakes to avoid

暫定日本語案: Myth: “FAQPage スキーマ still gives everyone a rich result.” 暫定日本語案: It doesn’t — the FAQ rich result was fully removed on May 7, 2026 for every サイト, 暫定日本語案: including the government and health sites that briefly kept it after August 2023. Nobody 暫定日本語案: gets a FAQ rich result in Google now.

暫定日本語案: Myth: “Google restricted FAQ to gov/health sites, and that’s still the current state.” 暫定日本語案: That was the interim August 2023 state. The May 7, 2026 removal took it away even from 暫定日本語案: those sites. A lot of older コンテンツ — and this サイト’s own hub, before it was tightened — 暫定日本語案: is stuck describing the 2023 situation as if it’s current.

暫定日本語案: Myth: “The FAQPage type is deprecated / against guidelines now — rip it out.” 暫定日本語案: The rich result is gone; the スキーマ type is not deprecated. It’s still valid 暫定日本語案: スキーマ.org markup, Google says it still parses it for understanding, Bing has announced 暫定日本語案: no equivalent removal, and there’s no penalty for leaving it. Removing it isn’t required 暫定日本語案: — it’s just busywork.

暫定日本語案: Myth: “FAQPage and QAPage are the same thing.” 暫定日本語案: They’re distinct types with different eligibility. QAPage (community Q&A, multiple 暫定日本語案: user-submitted answers) is a separate, still-supported Google rich result. Don’t use 暫定日本語案: FAQPage for a forum thread, or QAPage for your own help-ページ FAQ.

暫定日本語案: Myth: “FAQ スキーマ is a proven AI Overview / ChatGPT citation booster.” 暫定日本語案: There’s no confirmed Google linkage, and an Ahrefs test (via SEJ) that pooled スキーマ 暫定日本語案: types across ~1 885 ページ found only a +2,2% ChatGPT-citation change after adding 暫定日本語案: スキーマ — small enough that the researchers called it indistinguishable from random 暫定日本語案: variation, and it wasn’t an FAQPage-specific test. The value is in well-structured Q&A 暫定日本語案: コンテンツ — which LLMs read regardless of markup — not in the FAQPage JSON-LD itself.

暫定日本語案: Myth: “Since Google dropped it, no 検索エンジン cares about FAQ スキーマ.” 暫定日本語案: This is a Google-specific change. Bing (and DuckDuckGo/Brave on the Bing index) have 暫定日本語案: announced no equivalent removal — treat it as an industry-wide death and you’re wrong.

暫定日本語案: Mistake: adding FAQPage スキーマ to chase the old Google rich result. 暫定日本語案: That reward no longer exists for anyone. If you’re adding FAQ コンテンツ, do it for readers, 暫定日本語案: for Bing, or for コンテンツ clarity — not for a Google SERP enhancement that’s been removed.

暫定日本語案: Mistake: still querying the FAQ 検索-appearance type in the 検索 Console API. 暫定日本語案: Support is scheduled to drop in August 2026 (the Rich Results Test and rich result 暫定日本語案: report support already dropped in June 2026). If a monitoring script already returns 暫定日本語案: nothing for FAQ in the report/filter, that’s the June change; expect the API call itself 暫定日本語案: to stop returning FAQ データ once August 2026 arrives — update your script ahead of that.

暫定日本語案: FAQPage in practice — right, wrong, and mis-typed

暫定日本語案: A valid FAQPage block (still fine to keep)

暫定日本語案: ページ-owner Q&A, one authoritative answer per question, answers can 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."
      }
    }
  ]
}

暫定日本語案: This validates and is harmless. It just won’t earn a Google rich result — that’s the only 暫定日本語案: thing that changed.

暫定日本語案: The wrong type: this should be QAPage, not FAQPage

暫定日本語案: A forum thread where users post multiple competing answers is community Q&A — 暫定日本語案: QAPage, not FAQPage. Marking it up as FAQPage misrepresents it (and FAQPage has no 暫定日本語案: 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..." }
    ]
  }
}

暫定日本語案: Note the differences: QAPage, an answerCount, and suggestedAnswer alongside the 暫定日本語案: acceptedAnswer — the shape of community Q&A. QAPage is still a supported Google rich 暫定日本語案: result; FAQPage isn’t. Pick the type that matches who actually wrote the answers.

暫定日本語案: The “why is my script empty?” case

暫定日本語案: If a 検索 Console API call or a Rich Results Test check for FAQ rich-result eligibility 暫定日本語案: suddenly returns nothing, it’s not a bug in your markup:

• 暫定日本語案: Rich Results Test / FAQ rich result report / FAQ 検索-appearance filter — support 暫定日本語案: dropped June 2026.
• 暫定日本語案: 検索 Console API FAQ support — scheduled to drop August 2026 (not yet in 暫定日本語案: effect as of this update).

暫定日本語案: The markup can still be perfectly valid; Google just no longer reports on a rich result it 暫定日本語案: no longer shows. Update the script’s expectations rather than “fixing” the スキーマ.

暫定日本語案: Tools for checking FAQPage markup

• 暫定日本語案: スキーマ Markup Validator — paste the JSON-LD or 暫定日本語案: ページ HTML to confirm that the still-valid FAQPage vocabulary is well formed, 暫定日本語案: each Question has a name, and each acceptedAnswer has text.
• 暫定日本語案: スキーマ.org Validator — use the vocabulary’s 暫定日本語案: own validator as a second check when the question is whether the markup is valid 暫定日本語案: スキーマ.org, not whether it can earn a Google feature.
• 暫定日本語案: Bing Webmaster Tools Markup Validator — use Bing’s validator when Bing is the 暫定日本語案: reason you are retaining or adding the markup. Google’s Rich Results Test no 暫定日本語案: longer supports the removed FAQ rich result, so it is not the right pass/fail 暫定日本語案: tool for FAQPage eligibility in 2026.

暫定日本語案: Test yourself: FAQPage スキーマ

暫定日本語案: Five quick questions on FAQPage スキーマ, the removal timeline, and how it differs from QAPage. Pick an answer for each, then check.

暫定日本語案: Resources worth your time

暫定日本語案: My writing on this topic

暫定日本語案: I haven’t published a standalone FAQPage スキーマ guide of my own — this is genuinely fresh 暫定日本語案: ground rather than a rewrite — so rather than point you at something that doesn’t exist, 暫定日本語案: I’ll send you to the primary sources and the related structured-データ work on this サイト. 暫定日本語案: For the broader vocabulary and where FAQPage fits (including the full list of rich-result 暫定日本語案: types Google has removed), see the Structured データ 暫定日本語案: hub this article nests under; for the AI angle, スキーマ Markup for AI.

暫定日本語案: From around the industry

• 暫定日本語案: FAQPage (FAQ) structured データ (Google 検索 Central) — the reference, now carrying the deprecation notice.
• 暫定日本語案: Changes to HowTo and FAQ rich results (Google 検索 Central Blog, Aug 8, 2023) — the original restriction to government and health sites.
• 暫定日本語案: Google to no longer support FAQ rich results (検索エンジン Land) — the breaking-news piece with the deprecation-notice wording.
• 暫定日本語案: Google Drops FAQ Rich Results From 検索 (検索エンジン Journal) — independent corroboration of the notice, dates, and “markup stays valid” framing.
• 暫定日本語案: SERP FAQ Removal & New データ Challenge スキーマ’s AI 検索 Value (検索エンジン Journal) — the Ahrefs ChatGPT-citation test (~1 885 ページ, +2,2% change, called statistically insignificant).
• 暫定日本語案: The rise and fall of FAQ スキーマ – and what it means for SEO today (検索エンジン Land, Jenn Mathews) — the historical arc from the 2023 restriction onward.
• 暫定日本語案: Google Is Not Killing スキーマ (検索エンジン Roundtable) — Mueller’s pushback on the “スキーマ is dying” framing (general, not FAQ-specific).
• 暫定日本語案: FAQ ページ for SEO (+ Examples & Best Practices) (Ahrefs) — practical FAQ-コンテンツ guidance beyond the markup.

変更履歴