Ecommerce site product reviews, canonicals – which option to choose?
-
Recently, I discovered that only the first 4 reviews on our product pages are crawled and indexed. Example: http://www.improvementscatalog.com/eucalyptus-deep-seat-furniture-group/253432 I'm assuming it's due to the canonical that's on the product page http://www.improvementscatalog.com/eucalyptus-deep-seat-furniture-group/253432" />.
When you click on page 2 of the reviews, the url does not change, but the next batch of reviews appears on the product page. Same with page 3, etc… The problem is the additional pages are not being crawled and indexed.
We have to have the canonical on the product page because our platform creates multiple urls for each product page by including each category where the product resides, related link parameters, etc in the product url (example: http://www.improvementscatalog.com/eucalyptus-deep-seat-furniture-group/patio-furniture/outdoor-furniture/253432) – trust me, it gets ugly!
I've researched other Moz answers and I've found that there appears to be a couple of ways to fix the issue. Any ideas/help/guidance/examples on the below options is greatly appreciated!!!!
- Show only 4 reviews on the first page and place the remaining reviews on a new page by themselves (similar to how Amazon does it). However, I would rather keep all of the reviews on the product page if possible.
- Add page 2, page 3, etc parameters to the url to display the remaining reviews and adding rel=prev/next. If we chose option 2, would each product page have a different canonical? If so, would it create a duplicate content issue since the above-the-fold content, title tag and meta descriptions would all be the same? Also, would you include each additional page in the sitemap?
- We had a similar issue with our category pages and we implemented the "viewall" in the canonical. Would that work for our reviews?
Thanks in advance for your help!
-
Hey Cyndee,
Your issue has to do with how this is coded. Let me explain.
Here's what your paginated numbers at the bottom look like in the code:
<a title="2" data-bvcfg="3520493" name="BV_TrackingTag_Review_Display_PageNumber_2" data-bvjsref="http://improvements.ugc.bazaarvoice.com/0048-en_us/414441/reviews.djs?format=embeddedhtml&page=2&scrollToTop=true" <strong="">href="javascript://">2</a>
Notice that the "href" parameter of the anchor tag has no direct URL and because of that Google doesn't crawl to the next page in the series because there's no actual link. What would be ideal is if you had the actual URL to the second page so that it is accessible to Google as the href tag. Granted, Google will likely come back to these pages with the more feature-rich crawler and be able to access the content, but that could potentially take a long time or in fact never happen. I believe this is a function of how BazaarVoice operates, although I haven't had enough experience with it to know. A view-all page would help you get around the problem, but again, I'm not sure how that works with regard to BazaarVoice.
You can also use rel-prev and rel-next to connect the pages, but that directive often has spotty results.
-Mike
-
I was making that suggestion.
You can add an additional page for the reviews, but it might be hard to do correctly with your platform. I would look into going that route as well. A lot of times it comes down to how flexible the platform you are using is as to what you can do.
-
Thanks for the response! I see your point w/ the watering down of the content...
Are you saying to add them to one of our tabs? I'm not sure how feasible that is because, from what I understand, our platform can only house a limited number of tabs and we currently use them all. Another issue is that we have one platform for multiple brands/sites and we all have to use the same configuration with regards to reviews.
Would you recommend keeping all of the reviews on the same page or adding an additional page (ie Amazon) for the multiple reviews?
Thanks again helping me with this.
-
I personally would recommend redoing your review area if I was making a recommendation to a client. I cannot see a good reason why they should not be located here, http://screencast.com/t/s4HDE6GZJ0Cu Also I would shrink them down so you can fit more reviews in the same space too. Here is a quick mock up of what I mean, http://screencast.com/t/omzjxmvZ That way you could add more reviews in the same amount of space.
There are two things that are important to consider about your reviews though. If you are using them for SEO value, having them as low on the page as you have them shows that the value of them is not important. The other is the more reviews you have on the page the more watered down your content will be. They could even get to the point where they use keywords that are so different that your pages target different keywords as well.
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
-
Cross domain canonical for different branded sites
Hi everyone, We are working on 5 websites that offer the same products but are of different brands and locations. They are owned by the same company, but each run independently. On the sites, they have content such as privacy policies, terms and conditions and guides that are the same across all brands. Will publishing these be flagged as duplicate content by Google? If yes, is it recommended to add rel=canonical to all duplicate pages across all sites pointing to one of the five? We are just concerned that the 4 sites with duplicate content would be valued less than the canonical as a result of passed link equity. We are doing SEO optimisations for all and are trying to rank them well in SERPs. If a canonical is not the best solution here, what would be the best to do apart from completely rewriting content? Is it noindex tag or turning the texts into images and adding to PDFs? Thank you.
Technical SEO | | nhhernandez1 -
Why would this site outrank a Pr2 site with higher domain authority?
I am trying to get a pr2 site to be on top 7 local spot for the keyword Van Nuys Bail bonds but have discovered a site which has barely any back links and is not even a year old on top results. Their backlinks are from lower authority domains than what we have. How could this site be beating a 7 year old pr2 website? The site I'm working on is http://bbbail.com/ The site that is ranking in 5th spot local with pr0 is http://www.vipbailbonds.org/ is it maybe because it is a .org site? Also I notice that all websites in top spots have www, could that be a factor as well?
Technical SEO | | jesse13410 -
Is adding reviews to your site using schema structured data markup considered duplicating content?
A client of mine whats to add reviews from other sites such as Judys Book and Yahoo to their site. (Yes the actual content of what was posted in the review. They are proud of what their clients are saying). I am not sure if using schema mark up and including the review body on the clients web site was safe or would it be considered duplicate content? Is there a "good practice" for this? Any assistance or suggestions are welcomed. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | mgordon0 -
Canonical tags
How hard is it to put in Canonical tags on a webpage? My web guy didn't do it because he put in redirects in place for all old URLs and all content
Technical SEO | | Boodreaux
(except error pages and advanced searches) should have a unique URL. By not having canonical tags does it lose link juice? Not sure if that question makes sense. 🙂 Poo1 -
Certain product ranking higher than category (ecommerce)
Hi all, I'm a bit stumped on a SERP. The product is ranking higher than the actual category. Is there anyway to fix this? When I type in "category111", I get the product link instead of a link to the general category. It would be "productname category111" and link would point to product not category. Hope that makes since! TIA
Technical SEO | | William.Lau0 -
What Are The Page Linking Options?
Okay, so I'm working with a site that has pretty good domain authority, but the interior pages are not well linked or optimized. So, it ranks for some terms, but everything goes to the home page. So, I'd like to increase the authority of the interior pages. The client is not wild about spreading targeted juice via something like a footer. They also don't like a "Popular Searches" style link list. The objection is that it's not attractive. They currently use cute euphemisms as the linking text, so like "cool stuff" instead of "sheepskin seat covers." In that made up example, they'd like to rank for the latter, but insist on using the former. What about a slide show with alt text/links? Would that increase the authority of those pages in a term-targeted kinda way? Are there other options? Does it matter how prominent those links are, like footers not as good as something higher up the page? They currently use a pull-down kind of thing that still results in some pages having no authority. Do bots use that equally well? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | 945010 -
Did I implement the Canonical Correctly?
Hello, I am trying for the first time to implement a canonical redirect on a page and would really appreciate it if someone could tell me if this was done correctly. I am trying to do a canonical redirect: -from http://www.diamondtours.com/default.aspx -to http://www.diamondtours.com/ As you will see in the source code of the default.aspx page, the line of code written is: <link rel="canonical" href="http://www.diamondtours.com" /> Is this correct? Any guidance is greatly appreciated. Jeffrey Ferraro
Technical SEO | | JeffFerraro0 -
Can I noindex most of my site?
A large number of the pages on my site are pages that contain things like photos and maps that are useful to my visitors, but would make poor landing pages and have very little written content. My site is huge. Would it be benificial to noindex all of these?
Technical SEO | | mascotmike0