Rankings drop - we've added user reviews, are they causing over optimisation on page?
-
Hello
Hopefully can get a few opinions on this.
We've added some user reviews to our website for key products. We added these approximately 3-4 weeks ago. In the last week we've seen keyword rankings drop on the pages they've been added to.
For example see: http://www.naturalworldsafaris.com/wildlife/primates.aspx
This page ranked well for both gorilla safari and gorilla safaris but both terms have dropped considerably (12 to 20 checking Google UK on the Moz rank checker). Due to the formatting required for the Rich Snippets (and we have the user review stars in the SERPS) the term "Gorilla safari" is perhaps becoming a bit spammy on the page.
Another example would be "Borneo holidays" (up and down in the SERPS between 12-18) on this page: http://www.naturalworldsafaris.com/destinations/far-east/borneo.aspx
Do you feel that these fluctuations in keyword ranking could be to do with this?
Thanks
-
I think that over the past few weeks search traffic itself has declined a little, that is what I meant.
I don't think the age will matter. It will help in the users eyes to show longevity. I have reviews from 1999 on my site
-
Hi Monica and thank you.
Our site is cached pretty regularly, last done 10 Dec 2014 03:29:11 GMT. The decrease in rankings ties into the subsequent loss of traffic. Our rankings are fluctuating a lot though.
Some of our reviews are a few years old, do you think that this would put off current users or do you think the value of the date tag to Google is the higher priority in this instance?
Since the disavow we have built in a number of new, good quality links but I will look at the link neighborhoods to see if anything stands out.
-
Kate,
I honestly do not believe that there is anything to worry about here. It sounds like there was a decrease in search traffic and that is all that has affected your rankings.
Do you know how to find a cached copy of your page? It will tell you the last time it was crawled. Before you do anything else, see if you can add the date and place of origin to the reviews.
If you had a manual penalty from Penguin 2.0 or 2.1 the 3.0 update should have removed any negative effects if the clean up was done properly. Since this update is rolling out at snails pace, it is possible there was a small change that affected your rankings.
After your disavow and link clean up did you build any new, quality, relevant links? Do you have a social presence and allow people to share your images and pages socially? Can any of your existing links maybe have a no so clean link profile? 3.0 really targeted link neighborhoods, which means you could be guilty by association. Take a look at GWT and see what the links to your site looks like. Use OSE to see if there is anything new you may have over looked.
Your on page optimization looks pretty good. If you haven't refreshed your link profile with new links, or, aren't using social media a lot, you could suffer the same amount of rankings loss. SEO isn't successful unless both the on page and off page op are working together.
-
Just a side thought - I'm not sure what the page speed was prior to the decline, but it's pretty slow at the moment. So that won't be doing you any favours
-
Thanks again for everyone adding their thoughts.
The traffic decline seems to have come about since Thursday 4th December. We did well out of the Penguin 3.0 update, having previously been negatively affected (link clean up and disavow put in place earlier this year). Our ranking on important terms have dropped below their pre-Penguin 3.0 uplift now though.
Our keywords have continued to drop again today with several showing a loss of 7-10 places (on top of previous drops).
I did test the expanding panels and found that Google did seem to be indexing the content okay. I have tried making one of the reviews panels permanently expanded to see if it makes a difference though but still worry it just makes the page look very spammy as the keyword is the same as the item being reviewed, so is repeated numerous times on the page.
Any further thoughts?
Thanks,
Kate -
"may not' be indexed is the key term there. More likely than not, it is being indexed.
-
According to John Meuller, any content that is only visible to a user after they have clicked a tab, button or link may not be indexed.
-
That isn't true in this case because the reviews themselves are clearly seen in the source code. It can be fully crawled by robots, therefore it is being indexed.
-
Keep in mind that there was holiday week in there too. The trend usually includes a decrease in search traffic the weeks of Thanksgiving, Christmas, and other major holidays. If you get a large amount of traffic from the US the change in your rankings could just be due to the decrease in traffic and Google shaking the rankings up a little bit because of the change. Your CTR might have been lower because of the position change, but if your SERPs were still getting clicks at position 20, then you should see your results pop back up. Those clicks tell Google that your SERP is relevant to the searcher and could cause them to go back up.
I say add the day, city and state of where the reviews came from. That is very important.
Since this is related to content and not to any nefarious link building, I would look at the Panda updates and not Penguin. If you really think it could be Penguin then check your GWT account for any jumps in links or messages from the spam team.
It isn't uncommon after you make a change to see your results go backwards. I think that if after this week and possibly next week you don't see any progress, you should remove the reviews, wait a couple of weeks and see what happens. If your rankings go back up, then the problem is the reviews. If not, there is something else going on.
-
You mention in the last week, Penguin has been drunkenly stumbling around messing with most SERPs as seen here - http://algoroo.com/ and here - http://searchengineland.com/holidays-google-breaks-updates-rules-gives-fresh-penguin-updates-210367
Could it be due to this?
-
As already said, it's unlikely these comments are negatively affecting the page. Moreover, Google's John Meuller intimated that hidden content within 'click to expand' style boxes is not indexed. With this in mind, only the most recent review will be looked at by Google.
-
Sorry I forgot to add, we have seen some decrease in CTR but this corresponds to the decrease in ranking so I would expect the CTR to be lower at #20 than #12 for example?
-
Hi all
Thank you for your responses, I appreciate you taking the time to look at our website.
I'm glad that the general consensus is that the user reviews are good content, all the review content should be accessible to Google bot and isn't hidden at source level, it's just behind an expanding panel to stop the page becoming too long. We'll look at rewording the first paragraph to make sure it is very specific to the reviews on that page and won't appear as review spam.
The reviews are all genuine - it is a concern that that may appear otherwise; we may have to look again at whether to include dates. The reviews we receive are generally really positive, which from a company perspective is great, but I can understand why users may be skeptical.
If the fluctuating keyword rankings for these pages aren't connected to the new reviews then I'm not sure what else could be causing it - Penguin 3.0 related updates?
-
On a first look I would propose that the following paragraph just before the reviews themselves is problematic:
_"Natural World Safaris tailor-make gorilla safari holidays to meet your requirements. This gives you complete flexibility and allows you to choose your preferred travel dates, areas you wish to visit and the standard of accommodation that suits your style and budget. Please see below reviews from clients who have returned from our gorilla tracking safari holidays." _
Try rewriting that or removing that. Your page is already über-optimised and the first sentence is just over-the-top keyword stuffing. Also rethink hiding your reviews behind a plus button. Because the reviews are hidden as secondary content the Google bot sees the above paragraph as the same review for all the different pages. Thus thinks this is review spam across your otherwise very beautiful and, again, extremely optimised pages.
It is reasonable to expect that Google will want to combat review spam since many people use review mark-up for nefariously ranking higher.
-
I agree with Monica, it's seems unlikely that adding user reviews would affect your rankings in a negative way.
Did you also notice a decrease in traffic on these pages?That been said, I don't doubt the quality of the products you offer, but to be very honest, the reviews look a bit fake (they are all very positive, there is no date on the reviews), and apart from the two you mentioned, I don't find a lot of other reviews on the site (first 10 pages of site:www.naturalworldsafaris.com reveal maybe 5/6 holidays with reviews, and then it's minimum 3 reviews). Don't think this would have an impact on the search results, but probably something to think about for your human visitors
-
In my opinion, this is highly unlikely. User reviews are the holy grail of on page content.
I would check GWT to see if you have had a decrease in CTR organically. This can temporarily effect your rankings. What other changes have you made to these pages? It could just take another week or too for the page to be crawled and indexed properly. When is the last time these pages were cached?
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Ranking 2 pages on the same domain in the same SERP
I thought it was generally said that Google will favour 1 page per domain for a particular SERP, but I have seen examples where that is not the case (i.e. Same domain is ranking 2 different pages on the 1st page of the SERPs...) Are there any "tricks" to taking up 2 first page SERP positions, or am I mistaken that this doesn't always happen?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Ullamalm0 -
Newly designed page ranks in Google but then disappears - at a loss as to why.
Hi all, I wondered if you could help me at all please? We run a site called getinspired365.com (which is not optimised) and in the last 2 weeks have tried to optimise some new pages that we have added. For example, we have optimised this page - http://getinspired365.com/lifes-a-bit-like-mountaineering-never-look-down This page was added to Google's index via webmaster tools. When I then did a search for the full quote it came back 2nd in Google's search. If I did a search for half the quote (Life is a bit like mountaineering) it also ranked 2nd. We had another quote page that we'd optimised that displayed similar behaviour (it ranked 4th). But then for some reason when I now do the search it doesn't rank in the top 100 results. This, despite, an unoptimised "normal" page ranking 4th for a search such as: Thousands of geniuses live and die undiscovered. So our domain doesn't seem to be penalised as our "normal" pages are ranking. These pages aren't particularly well designed from an SEO standpoint. But our new pages - which are optimised - keep disappearing from Google, despite the fact they still show as indexed. I've rendered the pages and everything appears fine within Google Webmaster Tools. At a bit of a loss as to why they'd drop so significantly? A few pages I could understand but they've all but been removed. Any one seen this before, and any ideas what could be causing the issue? We have a different URL structure for our new pages in that we have the quote appear in the URL. All the content (bar the quote) that you see in the new pages are unique content that we've written ourselves. Could it be that we've over optimised and Google view these pages as spam? Many thanks in advance for all your help.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MichaelWhyley0 -
Weirdist Meta Description I've Seen in a SERP
For one e-commerce website, in place of the proper meta description, Google is showing a 318-character-long mix of snippets from the homepage content for the domain search (e.g. [example.com]). A brand search returns the correct meta description - as do the keywords the homepage ranks for. I know Google changes the meta description if it doesn't think it's relevant, but this one (there is only one) is and has (as far as we know) shown until now, and I've never seen such a mix of text in the SERP, and so many characters - it's picking up random text from bits of anchor text e.g. "privacy policy", title attributes from links, labels from radio buttons and more. The home page W3C validates apart from a couple of basic things like missing alt text. The only things that might be related that don't are some custom meta name tags added by the CMS - but I wouldn't think this would make any difference to whether a meta description is displayed properly or not? I've recommended we wait until tomorrow to see if Google fixes this on recrawl, but does anyone have any ideas if it doesn't? The homepage doesn't feature much standalone text, so I was thinking if we add a few extra words it might encourage Google to pick from that if it doesn't want to use the meta description. The text would have to be useful for users and fit in with the design of course, which could be awkward...
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Alex-Harford1 -
Can't get page moving!
Hi all. I've been working on a page for months now and can't seem to make any progress. I'm trying to get http://www.alwayshobbies.com/dolls-houses on the first page for term 'dolls houses'. I've done the following: Cleaned up the site's overall backlink profile Built some new links to the page Added 800 words of new copy Reduced the number of keyword instances on the page below 15 Any advice would be much appreciated. I don't think it's down to links as the DA/PA isn't wildly different from its competitors. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Blink-SEO0 -
Rank drop in June
Since fixing a major duplicate content issue in Dec 2012, our traffic saw steady and dramatic growth through the summer. It has started to settle down now and rankings have started to decline. I have a bad feeling that something is wrong but for the life of me I cannot figure it out. Our Moz rank is pretty high but some of our biggest keywords have gone from #2 to #9 in a fairly short time period which makes me very nervous. I am not even sure where to look at this point. Any suggestions are welcomed as I am kind of at a loss now but worry I am missing something basic. www.threeguysgolf.com
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | astaelin0 -
Low Page ranking and domain authoriy
Hi, Even after building links through white hat, publishing fresh content and infographics every week and links from more than 1700 domains our site’s domain authority is 49 and page authority is 57. Any idea what we are doing wrong? Thank you Chris Adams
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | INN0 -
Soft 404's from pages blocked by robots.txt -- cause for concern?
We're seeing soft 404 errors appear in our google webmaster tools section on pages that are blocked by robots.txt (our search result pages). Should we be concerned? Is there anything we can do about this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline4 -
How are pages ranked when using Google's "site:" operator?
Hi, If you perform a Google search like site:seomoz.org, how are the pages displayed sorted/ranked? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | anthematic0