User Reviews Question
-
On my e-commerce site, I have user reviews that cycle in the header section of my category pages. They appear/cycle via a snippet of code that the review program provided me with.
My question is...b/c the actual user-generated content is not in the page content does the google-bot not see this content? Does it not treat the page as having fresh content even though the reviews are new? Does the bot only see the code that provides the reviews?
Thanks in advance. Hopefully this question is clear enough.
-
Sure thing Jeff.
They can help in a few ways:
1. They add content to your pages (without you having to pay anything)
2. As you suggested, they can also send you some long tail traffic
3.Google can display the star rating of whatever it is you're reviewing via rich snippets:
http://www.dannyvince.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/engraved-gift-ideas-rich-snippets.jpg
However, they're a double-edged sword. If you're careful about keyword density and other on-page metrics (like I am), letting a bunch of people write the content of your site isn't the best idea.
I'm actually KILLING a competitor's site right now in the SERPs who have mostly UGC/reviews. A lot of this is because my on-page is leagues and bounds above theirs.
-
Thanks for the help Brian and Irving.
In what ways do those reviews help with SEO? Do they help with long-tail KW also?
-
Run a spider simulator to see what googlebot sees or look at the source code to see if the content is there.
Even if the content being added is not significant, if the content on the pages change often that will keep the bots coming back and respidering more often.
If it's random reviews populating randomly in the header though it won't really help for SEO. You need real reviews on that page that stay there and aggregate in order to help your SEO.
-
It depends on the way they're displayed, Jeff.
If the reviews are HTML, you bet your butt Googlebot can see them. If it's Java or Flash...that's another story.
Either way, that's not really the fresh content Google's looking for on page in my opinion.
When it comes to freshness, Google wants either a) significant amounts of content added to a site (ie. blog posts) or b) significant updates to existing content.
Either way, these reviews aren't likely to make much of a difference in terms of your rank.
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
-
Ajax Pagination in Magento Question
Hi, We just launched our new theme for Magento and my developer stated the pagination uses Ajax. Previously I had the developers set up rel prev/next for all our pages (categories/ecommerce site) that had multiples. He said it's not required with Ajax. Is this correct? Example: https://www.bestpricenutrition.com/whey.html and when you go to Page 2, the URL shows: https://www.bestpricenutrition.com/whey.html? I want to make sure these pages are set up correctly.
Technical SEO | | vetofunk0 -
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!
Technical SEO | | Improvements0 -
Redirecting root domain to a page based on user login
We have our main URL redirecting non-logged in users to a specific page and logged in users are directed to their dashboard when going to the main URL. We find this to be the most user-friendly, however, this is all being picked up as a 302 redirect. I am trying to advise on the ideal way to accomplish this, but I am not having much luck in my search for information. I believe we are going to put a true homepage at the root domain and simply redirect logged in users as usual when they hit the URL, but I'm still concerned this will cause issues with Google and other search engines. Anyone have experience with domains that need to work in this manner? Thank you! Anna
Technical SEO | | annalytical0 -
Back Link Question
Hi Folks, Our domain (www.alabu.com) has been around since 2000. We've accumulated a lot of back links over the years, many of which I don't recognize and didn't ask for. I've been reading on here recently about "cleaning up" back links. I do see a lot of ours that just aren't relevant and I don't know why they decided to link to us. We haven't gotten a warning from google or anything like that, but I wonder, how do I know if we could benefit from cleaning up our back links? Is there a benefit to it even if google hasn't warned us? Thanks! Hal
Technical SEO | | AlabuSkinCare0 -
Google PR Rank Question (s)
Hi
Technical SEO | | damientown
My Google PR rank is still 1/10 (www.abouttownmarketing.com) after 12 weeks of daily SEO work building what I thought were quality back links. Does anyone know how often Google updates its PR rank? Also is it a linear measure or link adwords quality score is it exponential?
Many thanks
Damien0 -
Question about duplicate content in crawl reports
Okay, this one's a doozie: My crawl report is listing all of these as separate URLs with identical duplicate content issues, even though they are all the home page and the one that is http://www.ccisolutions.com (the preferred URL) has a canonical tag of rel= http://www.ccisolutions.com: http://www.ccisolutions.com http://ccisolutions.com http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/IAFDispatcher?iafAction=showMain I will add that OSE is recognizing that there is a 301-redirect on http://ccisolutions.com, but the duplicate content report doesn't seem to recognize the redirect. Also, every single one of our 404-error pages (we have set up a custom 404 page) is being identified as having duplicate content. The duplicate content on all of them is identical. Where do I even begin sorting this out? Any suggestions on how/why this is happening? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | danatanseo1 -
Rel Canonical Question
I changed /tulsa-cleaning-services/ to /services/ because the URLs were getting too long. Now I'm getting an error for Appropriate use of Rel Canonical. I used a 301 to send old links to the new location. Any ideas? Thanks! Will www.americancarpetclean.com
Technical SEO | | WillWatrous0 -
How to get user genreated reviews indexed properly?
We are currently working to improve the deployment of a review widget on our website. The widget was deployed about 18 months ago and all reviews are behind Java navigation. I have been working with our IT staff to get the reviews into an HTML page which will either live on the product page as a tab or will be a link from the product page. Our IT staff has suggested leaving the Java navigation for users and creating separate HTML pages specifically for search engines. Based on my experience, this sounds like a bad idea, basically creating pages just for search engines that will not be use by site visitors, although the visitors will have access to the same content via the Java navigation. Anyone care to comment on this? Is creating HTML pages specifically for search engines a bad idea? An acceptable idea?
Technical SEO | | seorunner0