Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi everyone

A question about using product reviews on a website - I completely understand genuine product reviews can be great for creating totally unique content and for seo in general.

But my understanding is also that it is great only when it's accessible by google. So the question I have is that by using aggregate review services - i.e. reviews(dot)co(dot)uk widgets,  are they always easily accessible by Google?

Examples I've seen that use the widget are:

https://www.oliverbonas.com/jewellery/silver-honeycomb-bee-necklace-29494

http://www.fires-cookers.co.uk/hoover-dyc169a-tumble-dryer-white.html#prod-reviews

So when you view the page source for these pages, the actual content of the reviews are nowhere to be seen.

I was wondering if anyone has experience of using any of these thrid party widgets, and if these come as issues, what you would do to make sure these reviews content are seen by Google?

Thank you

Hi,

I know this topic has been covered in the past but I haven't been able to find the answers to this specific thing.

So let's say on a website, all the product pages contain partial duplicate content - i.e. this could be delivery options or returning policy etc.

Would this be classed as duplicate content? Or is this something that you would not get concerned about if it's let's say 5-10% of the content on the page?

Or if you think this is something you'd take into consideration, how would you fix it?

Thank you!

Thanks Everett! yes there's definitely seo benefit from having the title in the URL, and I think it's pretty significant - from what I have seen previously when we made a massive url changes for one of the websites I worked on - went from /{id}/ to {id}-{product-title}. Also there is a study shows that display url in search results is still a prominent element to influencing searchers' clicks. This is from 2012 but I think the same still applies today. http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/155941/domainbias.pdf so I'd prefer to have the titles included.

It is completely possible to make the very original static, and that would be my preferred option - but we need to assess whether the changes were made because they were "mildly" or "totally" incorrect in the first place, and also at the same time need to convince others - who feel keeping the original urls (when the product titles change) would worsen ux.

301 redirects would be totally mental - so this would not be an option. Also adding canonical tag to the "non-original" urls method - potentially ok in the short term.

I think using static (hardcoded) urls would be the only long-term solution.

Hi Patrick that's really helpful thanks,

Completely understand it's confusing, I was totally surprised myself to find out there were so many changes to the title on a daily basis.

I would personally have one static url (original url) so this page can carry on build authority. I'm going to find out what these changes that are being made may be.I mean if it's just the title changing and nothing else, the chances are that the original product title (& url) will still stay relevant - it may be that our clients are trying to optimise their title, or spelling error etc. - I'm not sure at this point but that will be my next job to find out!

I can't link to the site, as it is being worked for relaunch currently. Site relaunches are always terrifying

Hey Moz,

It's actually my first post - although I look at the Q&As on a daily basis!

I was hoping to get your opinions on how to handle dynamic product url that can change regularly.

Before we start, our product page urls get populated by the product titles.

So the situation is this.

• Let’s say we have a product url: /product/12345-abcde-fghj/
• Then the client decides to change the title a week later, so the url changes with it to): /listing/12345-klm-qjk
• Another week later, the agent changes to: /listing/12345-jkhfk-jhf-kjdhfkjdhf

So to note, the product ID will always remain the same.

Naturally, 301 redirecting every time would cause a bit of page authority to be lost every time 301ed. Also potentially creating new a few hundreds of 301 redirect daily sounds totally mental. (I have been informed by the dev we expect a few hundreds to change url daily) Although I understand there’s no limit on how many 301s you can have on a single domain, this would look completely unnatural - really not ideal.

So the potential solution we thought was:

we’ll keep the original url, and make sure that is the only url that will get indexed**/product/12345-abcde-fghj/**and put canonical tag on any of the new urls, directing to the original url. The problem we will have then is that the most current url may not exactly match the description of the product -wouldn’t be ideal for ux.

Has anyone had dealing with issues like this in the past? Would love to get your input!

Many Thanks