Article structured data: match the headline, author, and dates readers see

Check the machine-readable article details against the page

An article can show the correct headline to readers while sending an old headline or fictional author to search engines. Check the machine-readable version whenever the visible article changes.

Google supports Article structured data for details such as headline, author and publication dates. JSON-LD is a common format for supplying those details in a page’s code. A validator can tell you whether the format is valid; it cannot decide whether the named author really wrote the piece or whether the displayed update reflects a substantive change. (Google Article structured data ↗)

Valid structured-data code can still describe the wrong article

An editor changes a headline from “Gmail growth tips” to “Gmail bulk-sender requirements,” but a manually maintained schema field keeps the old title. Both strings are valid, yet readers and machines receive different descriptions.

Generate the headline, attribution and dates from the same editorial record. Then compare the rendered outputs; a shared input can still be formatted or mapped incorrectly.

Check the author and dates after the code validates

Open View Page Source and search for application/ld+json. In the blocks describing Article or NewsArticle, compare headline, author, datePublished and dateModified with the visible article. JSON-LD is a data format, so a correct-looking block is still only a claim about the article.

If the source contains no such block, ask whether a plugin adds it after JavaScript runs; inspect the rendered data before concluding it is absent. If several blocks describe the same article, check each for conflicting authors, dates or URLs. Correct the generating field or template rather than adding another competing block.

Include an old article with a substantive revision in the test. Confirm the original publication date survives, the changed headline reaches the data and the current public page matches the saved editorial record after caching.

Audit the fields that can drift after an edit

Choose a story that has been corrected or updated. Record the headline, byline and dates visible to the reader, then compare those values with the rendered markup and any feed entry. When a mismatch appears, trace it to the field the template reads. If a feed uses the original title while the page uses the corrected one, changing the visible headline again will not repair the feed.

Repeat the check for an article with a different byline configuration. This reveals whether the template assumes all stories have one author or silently substitutes an organization. Record which field is editorial and which is generated. Then the person fixing the template can correct the mapping without rewriting past article records.

Check two failure modes a schema validator can miss

A valid article object can still show the wrong publication date or use the organization name when the visible page credits a person. Compare the actual values, not only whether fields exist. If the same markup appears on multiple stories, verify it takes its headline and dates from the current article rather than a global template default.

Try one corrected article and one current article with a different author. Write down the expected values and inspect the output from the actual public response. After fixing the template, repeat both checks. This demonstrates that the change repaired the mapping without flattening the editorial differences readers depend on.

Save the two rendered responses as evidence for the next template release.