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.
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
-
Site hacked in Jan. Redeveloped new site. Still not ranking. Should we change domain?
Our top ranking site in the UK was hacked at the end of 2014. http://www.ultimatefloorsanding.co.uk/ The site was the subject of a manual spam action from Google. After several unsuccessful attempts to clean it up, using Securi.net and reinstating old versions of the site, changing passwords etc. we took the decision to redevelop the site. We also changed hosting provider as we had received absolutely no support from them whatsoever in resolving the issue. So far we have: Removed the old website files off the server Developed a new website having implemented 301's for all the old URL's (except the spam ones) Submitted a reconsideration request for the manual spam action, which was accepted. Disavowed all the spammy inbound links through Webmaster Tools Implemented custom URL parameters through Google to not index the SPAM URLs ( which were using parameters) Our organic traffic is down by 63% compared to last year, and we are not ranking for most of our target keywords any longer. Is there anything that I am missing in the actions I have taken so far? We were advised that at this stage changing domain and starting again might be the way to go. However the current domain has been used by us since 2007, so it would be a big call. Any advice is appreciated, thanks. Sue - http://www.ultimatefloorsanding.co.uk/
Technical SEO | | galwaygirl0 -
An article we wrote was published on the Daily Business Review, we'd like to post it on our site. What is the proper way?
Part 1
Technical SEO | | peteboyd
We wrote an article and submitted it to the Daily Business Review. They published the article on their website. We want to also post the article on our website for our users but we want to make sure we are doing this properly. We don't want to be penalized for duplicating content. Is this the correct way to handle this scenario written below? We added a rel="canonical" to the blog post (on our website). The rel="canonical" is set to the Daily Business Review URL where the article was originally published. At the end of the blog post we wrote. "This article was originally posted on The Daily Business Review." and we link to the original post on the Daily Business Review. Should we be setting the blog post (on our website) to be a "noindex" or rel="canonical" ? Part 2 Our company was mentioned in a number of articles. We DID NOT write those articles, we were only mentioned. We have also posted those same articles on our website (verbatim from the original article). We want to show our users that we have been mentioned in highly credited articles. All of these articles were posted on our website and are set to be a "noindex". Is that the correct thing to do? Should we be using a rel="canonical" instead and pointing to the original article URL? Thanks in advance MOZ community for your assistance! We tried to do the leg work of our own research for the answers but couldn't find the exact same scenario that we are encountering**.**0 -
Site not loading on Firefox
Hello guys, I can't get my website to be loaded on Firefox, why's that?
Technical SEO | | PremioOscar0 -
Cross links between sites
hi, We have several ecommerce sites and we cross linked 3 of them by mistake. We realize that the sites were linked through WMT, We have shut down 2 of the sites about 2 months ago, but WMT still shows the links coming from those 2 sites. how do we make sure that google will see the sites are shut down. Is there a better of way resolving this issue. We are no longer using those sites, so do not need them to be active. whats the best solution to show google that the links are no longer there. Crawler shows that it was able to crawl the site 45 days after it is shut down. thanks nick
Technical SEO | | orion680 -
Redirecting a old aged site to a new exact match site?
Hi All, I have a question. I have 2 sites with me in the same sector and want some help. site 1 is a old site started back in 2003 and has some amount of links to it and has a pr 3 with some good links to it but doesn't rank much for any keywords for the timing. site 2 is a aged domain but newly developed with unique content and has a good amount of exact match with a .com version. so will there be any benefit by redirecting site 1 to site 2 to get the seo benefits and a start for link bulding? or is it best to develop and work on each site? the sector is health insurance. Thanks
Technical SEO | | macky71 -
Canonical efficiency
Hi, I'm creating recommendations for one of my client's site. It's a news site highly based on a regional aspect. One of the main features would be that you can navigate on a high level, we call it inter-regional (with all the regions news) and on the regional level (with only news related to the region) which act as a filter which means that most of my content will be duplicate. To allow the user to navigate the site on the two levels means that all the news pages will be duplicated, one with the inter-regional URL and one with the regional URL. Example: http://www.sitename.com/category/2011/11/07/name-of-the-article http://www.sitename.com/region-name/category/2011/11/07/name-of-the-article The regional URL is the official one, since it has all the keywords I want, and I'm planning to have a canonical on both version with the regional URL. Is there a risk that this would affect my ranking? Any alternatives? I read that I could prevent SE to crawl inter-regional articles using my robot.txt but I'm not fond of that. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Pherogab0 -
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 -
Problem with my site
the site is casino.pt we created the site 7-8 month ago, we started to push it by good and natural links (http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/www.casino.pt/a!links!!filter!all!!source!external!!target!page), links in sites with content rich and most of them related to gambling and sport topics. During the first 3-5 months, the rankings were better and better, after the 6 months, the site lose all its rankings. Aditional details http://www.casino.pt/robots.txt http://www.google.pt/#hl=pt-PT&source=hp&biw=1280&bih=805&q=site:http%3A%2F%2Fwww.casino.pt&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&fp=2651649a33cd228 no critical errors in google webmaster tools any idea how can I fix it? thanks
Technical SEO | | Yaron530