How to get gold star reviews on SERP's
-
Hello
I have always wanted to know: How to get gold star reviews on Google in search results! Please look at the screenshot to see what I am talking about. Please can someone share with me the knowledge required to make this happen - it would be perfect for my e-commerce website!
-
Hmmm, depending on the product and number of reviews I would either have a database holding your reviews so you just add to the DB and it updates your dynamic variables per scheme.
If it is for a brand and the same aggregate review is over the entire site you could maybe have a config file that references a single dynamic field which will update the entire site, this method may not need a DB.
You may have to do some leg work in the first instance to make the figures dynamic. I tend to use PHP and MySQL for this purpose.
-
Good answer Tim
Do you know a way that the schema markup will be dynamic and adjust as our reviews increase? We average around 5 positive reviews a week, so editing 60 pages can be time consuming.
TY
KJr
-
Also you can use data highlighter in Search Console
-
Hey XDunningX,
In order to get Gold stars (rich snippet) in your serps you need to apply a specific set of Schema data to the architecture or loaded elements of your site products. This can either be by microdata
itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/AggregateRating">
Rated 3.5/5
based on 11 customer reviews **Or via JSONPLEASE SEE FULL EXAMPLES ON SCHEMA.ORG, THESE HAVE BEEN STRIPPED A TOUCH.
Where I woork we have linked up a series of products with the product schema and then associated a series of aggregate reviews (average star rating for lots of reviews) and individual reviews left by our customers that are associated with the product. You can also apply reviews to Brands, Services, Events, Creative work, Offers, Organisations and Places.
The schema website supported by Google and Bing, outlines a series of examples for you to implement.
However, please bear in mind, that even if you have implemented the schema correctly sometimes the search engines will elect not o show it. I feel however it is worth the effort to give you the chance.
Have fun implementing.**
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
-
Less relevant/not optimized competitor sites ranking higher in SERPs?
Has anyone else noticed their rank positions falling to competitor sites that aren't optimized and are less relevant? I've noticed that we've lost some rankings or have dropped over the past few weeks and the competitor pages that have replaced us haven't been optimized, aren't as relevant, and it doesn't look like there has been any updates (looking through archived versions). For example, their main "shoes" gallery is ranking for more specific shoe types, like "sandals", and "sandals" isn't even mentioned in their metadata and they have no on-page copy. Their DA is slightly higher, but our sites have a denser link profile (although, yes, I do need to go through and see what kind of links, exactly, we've gained). Has anyone else seen this happen recently, or have any ideas of why or what we could do to get our rank positions back? My main initiatives have been to create and implement fresh on-page copy, metadata, and manage 404s/301 redirects, but I'm thinking this issue is beyond a quick copywriting tweak.
Algorithm Updates | | WWWSEO0 -
Does Google's Information Box Seem Shady to you?
So I just had this thought, Google returns information boxes for certain search terms. Recently I noticed one word searches usually return a definition. For example if you type in the word "occur" or "happenstance" or "frustration" you get a definition information box. But what I didn't see is a reference to where they are getting or have gotten this information. Now it could very well be they built their own database of definitions, and if they did great, but here is where it seems a bit grey to me... Did Google hire a team of people to populate the database, or did they just write an algorithm to comb a dictionary website and stick the information in their database. The latter seems more likely. If that is what happened then Google basically stole the information from somebody to claim it as their own, which makes me worry, if you coin a term, lets say "lumpy stumpy" and it goes mainstream which would entail a lot of marketing, and luck. Would Google just add it to its database and forgo giving you credit for its creation? From a user perspective I love these information boxes, but just like Google expects us webmasters to do, they should be giving credit where credit is due... don't you think? I'm not plugged in to the happenings of Google so maybe they bought the rights, or maybe they bought or hold a majority of shares in some definition type company (they have the cash) but it just struck me as odd not seeing a reference to a site. What are your thoughts?
Algorithm Updates | | donford1 -
Does Google use dateModified or date Published in its SERPs?
I was curious as to the prioritization of dateCreated / datePublished and dateModified in our microdata and how it affects google search results. I have read some entries online that say Google prioritizes dateModified in SERPs, but others that claim they prioritize datePublished or dateCreated. Do you know (or could you point me to some resources) as to whether Google uses dateModified or date Published in its SERPs? Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | Parse.ly0 -
Strange Google SERP Layout: Anyone?
I haven't been able to repeat this, but I just saw a strange Google SERP layout. The screenshot is attached below. Has anyone else seen something like this? I kind of rubbed my eyes and wondered 'if it was kicking in'. ca2JqaP
Algorithm Updates | | Travis_Bailey0 -
How to get Yahoo visitors to my site
I get great traffic from Google but Yahoo is at about a 20 to 1 ratio on visitors. Is there anything I should do to increase Yahoo traffic? I bought a Yahoo Directory listing about 3 months ago but it did no good. Thanks, Boo
Algorithm Updates | | Boodreaux0 -
How to show your ratings in the Google SERP
I've noticed that some organic search results are showing ratings just above the meta tag. How are these sites doing this? Example: If you search "cash advance", there is a result between #4 and #6 in the organic results. The site is "goldcashadvance.com". It's showing a 5-star rating in the result.
Algorithm Updates | | sparagi0 -
Vanity URL's and http codes
We have a vanity URL that as recommended is using 301 http code, however it has been discovered the destination URL needs to be updated which creates a problem since most browsers and search engines cache 301 redirects. Is there a good way to figure out when a vanity should be a 301 vs 302/307? If all vanity URL's should use 301, what is the proper way of updating the destination URL? Is it a good rule of thumb that if the vanity URL is only going to be temporary and down the road could have a new destination URL to use 302, and all others 301? Cheers,
Algorithm Updates | | Shawn_Huber0 -
How did a competitor's brand name get in google's related search list?
When doing a google search for the term "ulster county real estate" the related search list at the bottom of the serp includes 7 obviously related search terms and 1 brand name of a competitor. (see attachment) The competitor doesn't rank for this term organically at all yet he enjoys a link on the first page with those of us that do by being in the related search list? I don't get it. Anyone know how something like this happens? Innhs.png
Algorithm Updates | | jhogan801