If I use schema markup for my google reviews, would it be smart to have Google review's on my home page?
-
Hello, Moz's
I'm thinking about added scheme markup to show my google reviews. I have a 4.8 rating and 25 reviews.
I'm thinking about added scheme markup to show my google reviews. I have a 4.8 rating and 25 reviews.
My first question is: when people see that and then visit my site, would it be good to have the Google reviews on the home page?
My second questions is: Is there any reason why I wouldn't want to add this to my site? None of my competition has done this, so I'm a little apprehensive?
Thanks in advance
-
Hi BlueCorona, How you doin? I would like to ask you a question, I am wondering if I can integrate my google ratings to my homepage using schema scripts. That being said, my plan is to include the numerical ratings through AggregateRating and hopefully be displayed on Google's SERP when someone searches for my website.
Since you mentioned that we can feature the said overall ratings. What would that link be? Should the link be visible on the Homepage itself? Example: "See all reviews" (This will be the anchor text pointing to our google profile placed somewhere in our homepage). *** OR *** Should the link be included on the schema script only. Let's say it will be included on the RelatedLink or SameAs property.
Looking forward for your insights. Thank you and have a nice day!
-
What Miriam_ Is saying is 100% correct. Thank you for updating me, Miriam!_
I would recommend utilizing a system of getting your own testimonials/reviews reputation stacker is a great one so is white spark I have provided some URLs below you are paid services that allow you to cultivate your own unique testimonials which you can then use schema on however like it is stated below and Marion said you cannot use schema on reviews that are from websites other and yours. Meaning they had to show up there first.
- https://reputationstacker.com/ (great tool)
- https://whitespark.ca/reputation-builder/
- https://whitespark.ca/review-handout-generator/
- https://whitespark.ca/google-review-link-generator/
"The big change here is that when you include third-party syndicated reviews that are not “directly produced by your site,” you should not mark up those reviews with schema. Only “directly produced by your site, not reviews from third-party sites or syndicated reviews” should be marked up, according to these guidelines".
https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/reviews#local-business-reviews
All the best,
Tom
-
If you do decide to add schematic markup to your website for reviews, ensure you are following the guidelines. These were recently updated and you want ep avoid being penalized for featuring third party reviews incorrectly on your website.
Instead of featuring the reviews themselves, you could features your overall google rating. But if you do this, we recommend making sure you include a link to your Google profile to verify that the rating is correct.
Let me know if you have any questions about implementing the schem correctly!
-
Hi There!
No, this would not be a recommended practice to markup your third-party reviews with Scheme. Google recently updated their guidelines specifically regarding this. For more on this, see: http://searchengineland.com/google-updates-local-reviews-schema-guidelines-257745
-
Ok, that looks complicated, but thank you so much!!
I'll try and figure it all out, although I have a company doing it for me, I still like to know what they're doing.
-
The only reason I can think of why you would not want to is if you're in some sort of industry where it is not relevant but those are hard to think of. As far as putting schema on your reviews I strongly recommend it below are two generators of micro data and one of JSON-LD schema use one you like.
- https://webcode.tools/json-ld-generator/review
- https://webcode.tools/microdata-generator/review
- http://tools.seochat.com/tools/review-schema-generator/
- another generator for basic schema https://hallanalysis.com/json-ld-generator/
- and if you use WordPress https://wordpress.org/plugins/schema-app-structured-data-for-schemaorg/
** This is a great article on how to get the stars where your or .8 to show up underneath the snippet the Google SERPS**
https://whitespark.ca/blog/how-to-use-aggregate-review-schema-to-get-stars-in-the-serps/
here is an example of code you could use
All the best,
Tom
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
-
Google My Business right had side block disapeared for a brand search
Hi Just redeveloped my site and went live end of April Since then whenever i do a branded search the GMB 'pack' has always shown on the right hand side whenever i do a branded search but it has disapeared as of the last couple of days. Any ideas why this can happen ? and is it anything to worry about or just a google 'glitch' that should right itself soon? If not any ideas how to fix ? (accounts and website all properly linked) etc When i go to GMB dashboard and click 'View on Search' it does show up as it should, but not when i go to do a google search for the brand name !? All Best Dan
Reviews and Ratings | | Dan-Lawrence1 -
BazaarVoice Paginated Reviews Not Honoring Canonical & Indexing Multiple Pages
If there are enough reviews on a product page to warrant page 2, 3 etc, BazaarVoice appends the below snippets to each new page of reviews, which are then also indexed, despite BazaarVoice SEO settings that automate a canonical tag (seemingly since the differing reviews on each page are not similar enough to honor the canonical). <cite class="iUh30">?bvstate=pg:2/ct:r</cite> <cite class="iUh30">?bvstate=pg:3/ct:r</cite> It seems Target.com has found a way to hack the BV code to create a dedicated page to view all reviews: https://www.target.com/p/ultra-soft-fitted-sheet-300-thread-count-threshold-153/-/A-13973172?showOnlyReview=true While Ikea.com blocks it in the Robots file (defeats SEO value) - Noindex: */catalog/products/bvroute=Review Noindex: */catalog/products/bvtab Tons of brands apparently have the issue, and you can see more examples if you search "inurl:bvstate=pg" Anyone aware of a solution to this?
Reviews and Ratings | | Eroc2 -
Schema Markup - Star Ratings
I'm trying to get the star ratings to appear next to our client's website in google search results. Here is the url:https://cstoneroof.com/ I believe I have it setup correctly but am unsure why the stars don't appear: structure data test here I pulled the rating value and count from Facebook. Not sure if it has to be Google reviews or if FB will work as well. Anybody have any thoughts here?
Reviews and Ratings | | a_toohill0 -
Bug In Google System. Google Says Is Not Bug.
Hello Moz fellowship. Ive been learning and following SEO and local optimization for many years. MOZ has been a SEO playbook and bible for me. Im running into a transparency issue with Google and need some help please. I sent Google GMB this email:Hello GMB "Hello GMB There is a bug in your system that revises a previously posted review date to a become a new current post date. The bug occurs when someone updates a previously posted review with new pictures or deletes and updates new pictures. When the deletion occurs and new pictures are uploaded, the old review becomes the new date of the picture updates. This bug allows an old review to become a new review. I can send screen shots and can explain how I found this out if Google would like. Basically it doesn't show a true representation of the time line of posted reviews. Thank you"Google GMB support on the phone says it is not a bug. The problem is that its show non-factual and untruthful timeline information to potential consumers because of the original review date changes. The rep says that example: a reviewer from 3 years ago original review could show up as the most recent review with the most recent date. The main problem is, any consumer shopping and doing research would misinterpret this as being the newest review when it was not. On GMB dashboard the date gets revised to show the latest date. There is no notation that the review is old or that there has been a modification to the original review. So where is the transparency on Google's side to show the customer the actual real date of the review? This problem opens up a can of worms for millennials trying to make it happen and for business owners that are trying their best to become better at their service, etc. Especially when you want the newest review and not something from years ago or months ago or dealing with a potential harassing customer who knows the bug exist and will take advantage of the flaw and constantly update his review so it shows as being the 1st all the time. How does the online customer know this is happening?thank you.
Reviews and Ratings | | Carwrapsolutions0 -
Local Search for Home Businesses
I'm a home based business. I know Google has cracked down on PO boxes and UPS locations. What is one to do if they work from home but don't conduct business with clients from their home office? How can I get an address that's Google-approved?
Reviews and Ratings | | FathomMarketing1 -
Google Review Guidelines update.
OK Moz peeps... Right then, I have just been reading an article over on SEO RoundTable from Barry Schwartz. NEW Local review guidelines for businesses - take a look. It in effect alludes to Google stamping all over review schema and snippets, third party review solutions/providers and really trying to limit how they are used. I have interpreted the new guidelines to say that you can no longer mark up and use external stats on your own site in the form of aggregate ratings from the likes of TrustPilot, Feefo, Revoo (some uk review sites) and more.... These were the two key lines for more Only include reviews that have been directly produced by your site, not reviews from third-party sites or syndicated reviews. Aggregators or content providers must have no commercial agreements paid or otherwise with businesses to provide reviews. What does everyone else think? and how soon before people get penalised (if ever) for marking up external stats to make your own site and services look more favourable... Could definately be a slap in the face for Serp CTR and onpage conversion optimisation. Also how do people expect this to affect PPC review rating going forward. Will Partner sites become a thing of the past? Looking forward to a good discussion here 🙂 PS - I am not staff at Moz just have a t-shirt which is my avatar. I am not sure why below my avatar it suggests I am Staff due to the tag added to it. Is anyone else getting that on their profile too?
Reviews and Ratings | | TimHolmes0 -
Blocking Reviews by Blocking Words?
A client sent me an email this week, stating that you could block bad reviews on social media sites by "blocking" certain words from comments such as "I", "you", "them", "they"......she heard it at a conference from some other CEO's that had some problems with bad reviews. Essentially these CEO's blocked these words making the pages read only pages so no one could leave a review on social media sites. Now, I have never heard this tactic, nor think this is a good idea in any way shape or form. And I know that you can't block bad reviews from happening (without looking at the bigger picture and encouraging some look at internal processes and customer service). Has any one heard of this tactic? Or better, know of anywhere online that documents this idea of blocking words? I have to get back to her, but I have beaten the drum about how to acquire good reviews so much, I feel I am not getting through! Help! Thanks
Reviews and Ratings | | cschwartzel0 -
Too many reviews too quickly?
Is there any sort of guideline on this? Right now, we have very few google reviews. However, I've cross referenced a list of our happiest clients with people who have g+ accounts. There are at least 12 clients, I feel strongly would write us g+ reviews if I asked them to. I want to just get the word out today, but I'm worried if 8-12 reviews in a week would red flag us. I've heard that getting too many reviews to quickly can be a problem, but I'm thinking that more like 100 than 10, but I have no idea. Most of my competitors don't have any reviews, and the most any of them have is 10. I don't know if that matters at all either in terms of triggering a red flag. I'd appreciate whatever insight you all could give. Thanks, Ruben
Reviews and Ratings | | KempRugeLawGroup0
