Rankings drop - we've added user reviews, are they causing over optimisation on page?
-
Hello
Hopefully can get a few opinions on this.
We've added some user reviews to our website for key products. We added these approximately 3-4 weeks ago. In the last week we've seen keyword rankings drop on the pages they've been added to.
For example see: http://www.naturalworldsafaris.com/wildlife/primates.aspx
This page ranked well for both gorilla safari and gorilla safaris but both terms have dropped considerably (12 to 20 checking Google UK on the Moz rank checker). Due to the formatting required for the Rich Snippets (and we have the user review stars in the SERPS) the term "Gorilla safari" is perhaps becoming a bit spammy on the page.
Another example would be "Borneo holidays" (up and down in the SERPS between 12-18) on this page: http://www.naturalworldsafaris.com/destinations/far-east/borneo.aspx
Do you feel that these fluctuations in keyword ranking could be to do with this?
Thanks
-
I think that over the past few weeks search traffic itself has declined a little, that is what I meant.
I don't think the age will matter. It will help in the users eyes to show longevity. I have reviews from 1999 on my site
-
Hi Monica and thank you.
Our site is cached pretty regularly, last done 10 Dec 2014 03:29:11 GMT. The decrease in rankings ties into the subsequent loss of traffic. Our rankings are fluctuating a lot though.
Some of our reviews are a few years old, do you think that this would put off current users or do you think the value of the date tag to Google is the higher priority in this instance?
Since the disavow we have built in a number of new, good quality links but I will look at the link neighborhoods to see if anything stands out.
-
Kate,
I honestly do not believe that there is anything to worry about here. It sounds like there was a decrease in search traffic and that is all that has affected your rankings.
Do you know how to find a cached copy of your page? It will tell you the last time it was crawled. Before you do anything else, see if you can add the date and place of origin to the reviews.
If you had a manual penalty from Penguin 2.0 or 2.1 the 3.0 update should have removed any negative effects if the clean up was done properly. Since this update is rolling out at snails pace, it is possible there was a small change that affected your rankings.
After your disavow and link clean up did you build any new, quality, relevant links? Do you have a social presence and allow people to share your images and pages socially? Can any of your existing links maybe have a no so clean link profile? 3.0 really targeted link neighborhoods, which means you could be guilty by association. Take a look at GWT and see what the links to your site looks like. Use OSE to see if there is anything new you may have over looked.
Your on page optimization looks pretty good. If you haven't refreshed your link profile with new links, or, aren't using social media a lot, you could suffer the same amount of rankings loss. SEO isn't successful unless both the on page and off page op are working together.
-
Just a side thought - I'm not sure what the page speed was prior to the decline, but it's pretty slow at the moment. So that won't be doing you any favours
-
Thanks again for everyone adding their thoughts.
The traffic decline seems to have come about since Thursday 4th December. We did well out of the Penguin 3.0 update, having previously been negatively affected (link clean up and disavow put in place earlier this year). Our ranking on important terms have dropped below their pre-Penguin 3.0 uplift now though.
Our keywords have continued to drop again today with several showing a loss of 7-10 places (on top of previous drops).
I did test the expanding panels and found that Google did seem to be indexing the content okay. I have tried making one of the reviews panels permanently expanded to see if it makes a difference though but still worry it just makes the page look very spammy as the keyword is the same as the item being reviewed, so is repeated numerous times on the page.
Any further thoughts?
Thanks,
Kate -
"may not' be indexed is the key term there. More likely than not, it is being indexed.
-
According to John Meuller, any content that is only visible to a user after they have clicked a tab, button or link may not be indexed.
-
That isn't true in this case because the reviews themselves are clearly seen in the source code. It can be fully crawled by robots, therefore it is being indexed.
-
Keep in mind that there was holiday week in there too. The trend usually includes a decrease in search traffic the weeks of Thanksgiving, Christmas, and other major holidays. If you get a large amount of traffic from the US the change in your rankings could just be due to the decrease in traffic and Google shaking the rankings up a little bit because of the change. Your CTR might have been lower because of the position change, but if your SERPs were still getting clicks at position 20, then you should see your results pop back up. Those clicks tell Google that your SERP is relevant to the searcher and could cause them to go back up.
I say add the day, city and state of where the reviews came from. That is very important.
Since this is related to content and not to any nefarious link building, I would look at the Panda updates and not Penguin. If you really think it could be Penguin then check your GWT account for any jumps in links or messages from the spam team.
It isn't uncommon after you make a change to see your results go backwards. I think that if after this week and possibly next week you don't see any progress, you should remove the reviews, wait a couple of weeks and see what happens. If your rankings go back up, then the problem is the reviews. If not, there is something else going on.
-
You mention in the last week, Penguin has been drunkenly stumbling around messing with most SERPs as seen here - http://algoroo.com/ and here - http://searchengineland.com/holidays-google-breaks-updates-rules-gives-fresh-penguin-updates-210367
Could it be due to this?
-
As already said, it's unlikely these comments are negatively affecting the page. Moreover, Google's John Meuller intimated that hidden content within 'click to expand' style boxes is not indexed. With this in mind, only the most recent review will be looked at by Google.
-
Sorry I forgot to add, we have seen some decrease in CTR but this corresponds to the decrease in ranking so I would expect the CTR to be lower at #20 than #12 for example?
-
Hi all
Thank you for your responses, I appreciate you taking the time to look at our website.
I'm glad that the general consensus is that the user reviews are good content, all the review content should be accessible to Google bot and isn't hidden at source level, it's just behind an expanding panel to stop the page becoming too long. We'll look at rewording the first paragraph to make sure it is very specific to the reviews on that page and won't appear as review spam.
The reviews are all genuine - it is a concern that that may appear otherwise; we may have to look again at whether to include dates. The reviews we receive are generally really positive, which from a company perspective is great, but I can understand why users may be skeptical.
If the fluctuating keyword rankings for these pages aren't connected to the new reviews then I'm not sure what else could be causing it - Penguin 3.0 related updates?
-
On a first look I would propose that the following paragraph just before the reviews themselves is problematic:
_"Natural World Safaris tailor-make gorilla safari holidays to meet your requirements. This gives you complete flexibility and allows you to choose your preferred travel dates, areas you wish to visit and the standard of accommodation that suits your style and budget. Please see below reviews from clients who have returned from our gorilla tracking safari holidays." _
Try rewriting that or removing that. Your page is already über-optimised and the first sentence is just over-the-top keyword stuffing. Also rethink hiding your reviews behind a plus button. Because the reviews are hidden as secondary content the Google bot sees the above paragraph as the same review for all the different pages. Thus thinks this is review spam across your otherwise very beautiful and, again, extremely optimised pages.
It is reasonable to expect that Google will want to combat review spam since many people use review mark-up for nefariously ranking higher.
-
I agree with Monica, it's seems unlikely that adding user reviews would affect your rankings in a negative way.
Did you also notice a decrease in traffic on these pages?That been said, I don't doubt the quality of the products you offer, but to be very honest, the reviews look a bit fake (they are all very positive, there is no date on the reviews), and apart from the two you mentioned, I don't find a lot of other reviews on the site (first 10 pages of site:www.naturalworldsafaris.com reveal maybe 5/6 holidays with reviews, and then it's minimum 3 reviews). Don't think this would have an impact on the search results, but probably something to think about for your human visitors
-
In my opinion, this is highly unlikely. User reviews are the holy grail of on page content.
I would check GWT to see if you have had a decrease in CTR organically. This can temporarily effect your rankings. What other changes have you made to these pages? It could just take another week or too for the page to be crawled and indexed properly. When is the last time these pages were cached?
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
-
Local SEO - ranking the same page for multiple locations
Hi everyone, I am aware that issue of local SEO has been approached numerous times, but the situation that I'm dealing with is slightly different, so I'd love to receive your expert advice. I'm running the website of a property management company which services multiple locations (www.homevault.com). From our local offices in the city center, we also service neighboring towns and communities ( ex: we have an office in Charlotte NC, from which we service Charlotte plus a dozen other towns nearby). We wanted to avoid creating dozens of extra local service pages, particularly since our offers are identical per metropolitan area and we're talking of 20-30 additional local pages for each area. Instead, we decided to create local service pages only for the main locations. Needless to say, we're now ranking for the main locations, but we're missing on all searches for property management in neighboring towns (we're doing good on searches such as 'charlotte property management', but we're practically invisible for 'davidson property management', although we're searvicing that area as well). What we've done so far to try and fix the situation: 1. The current location pages do include descriptions of areas that we serve. 2. We've included 1-2 keywords for the sattelite locations in the main location pages, but we're nowhere near the optimization needed to rank for local searches in neighboring towns (ie, some main local service pages rank on pages 2-4 for sattelite towns, so not good enough). 3. We've included the searviced areas in our local GMBs, directories, social media profiles etc. None of these solutions appear to work great. Should I go ahead and create the classic local pages for each and every town and optimize them on those particular keywords, even if the offer is practically the same, and the number of pages risks going out of control? Any other better ideas? Many thanks in advance!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HomeVaultPM0 -
Why does Google display the home page rather than a page which is better optimised to answer the query?
I have a page which (I believe) is well optimised for a specific keyword (URL, title tag, meta description, H1, etc). yet Google chooses to display the home page instead of the page more suited to the search query. Why is Google doing this and what can I do to stop it?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | muzzmoz0 -
Ecommerce category pages & improving rankings
Hi Moz 🙂 I work on an ecommerce site & am getting stuck with how to improve rankings on category pages. I have a competitor who writes loads of content for their category pages under tabs & they perform very well. The content isn't particularly helpful, more about their range and what they offer. I have tested adding similar content under a tab to some of our category pages - with some performing well & others not as well. I know this isn't ideal, and I'd like some help with an alternative. Does anyone have tips on improving rankings on category pages? I don't have much control on the layout, this is controlled by our parent company which restricts us. I am researching writing user guides, but these will be on other pages not directly on the category page & the way we have to add them is a lot of manual work for our webmaster, so I can't get them up as quickly as I'd like. I have seen REI have a small bit of content at the top of their pages that link to guides e.g - https://www.rei.com/c/static-and-rescue-ropes But obviously their domain authority is so high already, that they don't need as much help as me 🙂 At the moment I have some new Chair pages I need to rank, these are competitive and any ideas would be great 🙂 Here are some examples: http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/ergonomic-office-chairs http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/executive-office-chairs Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
Prioritise a page in Google/why is a well-optimised page not ranking
Hello I'm new to Moz Forums and was wondering if anyone out there could help with a query. My client has an ecommerce site selling a range of pet products, most of which have multiple items in the range for difference size animals i.e. [Product name] for small dog
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | LauraSorrelle
[Product name] for medium dog
[Product name] for large dog
[Product name] for extra large dog I've got some really great rankings (top 3) for many keyword searches such as
'[product name] for dogs'
'[product name]' But these rankings are for individual product pages, meaning the user is taken to a small dog product page when they might have a large dog or visa versa. I felt it would be better for the users (and for conversions and bounce rates), if there was a group page which showed all products in the range which I could target keywords '[product name]', '[product name] for dogs'. The page would link through the the individual product pages. I created some group pages in autumn last year to trial this and, although they are well-optimised (score of 98 on Moz's optimisation tool), they are not ranking well. They are indexed, but way down the SERPs. The same group page format has been used for the PPC campaign and the difference to the retention/conversion of visitors is significant. Why are my group pages not ranking? Is it because my client's site already has good rankings for the target term and Google does not want to show another page of the site and muddy results?
Is there a way to prioritise the group page in Google's eyes? Or bring it to Google's attention? Any suggestions/advice welcome. Thanks in advance Laura0 -
Will Using Attributes For Landing Pages In Magento Dilute Page Rank?
Hello Mozzers! We have an ecommerce site built on Magento. We would like to use attribute filters in our layered navigation for landing page purposes. Each page will have a unique URL, Meta Title and Meta Description. For example: URL: domain.com/art/abstract (category is Art, attribute is Abstract) Title: Abstract Art For Sale Meta: Blah Blah Blah Currently these attribute pages are not being indexed by google as they are set in google parameters. We would like to edit google parameters to start indexing some of the attribute filters that users search for, so they can be used as landing pages. Does anyone have experience with this? Is this a good idea? What are the consequences? Will this dilute Page Rank? Could this destroy the world? Cheers! MozAddict
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MozAddict0 -
Is 301 redirecting your index page to the root '/' safe to do or do you end up in an endless loop?
Hi I need to tidy up my home page a little, I have some links to our index.html page but I just want them to go to the root '/' so I thought I could 301 redirect it. However is this safe to do? I'm getting duplicate page notifications in my analytic reportings tools about the home page and need a quick way to fix this issue. Many thanks in advance David
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | David-E-Carey0 -
Adding Orphaned Pages to the Google Index
Hey folks, How do you think Google will treat adding 300K orphaned pages to a 4.5 million page site. The URLs would resolve but there would be no on site navigation to those pages, Google would only know about them through sitemap.xmls. These pages are super low competition. The plot thickens, what we are really after is to get 150k real pages back on the site, these pages do have crawlable paths on the site but in order to do that (for technical reasons) we need to push these other 300k orphaned pages live (it's an all or nothing deal) a) Do you think Google will have a problem with this or just decide to not index some or most these pages since they are orphaned. b) If these pages will just fall out of the index or not get included, and have no chance of ever accumulating PR anyway since they are not linked to, would it make sense to just noindex them? c) Should we not submit sitemap.xml files at all, and take our 150k and just ignore these 300k and hope Google ignores them as well since they are orhpaned? d) If Google is OK with this maybe we should submit the sitemap.xmls and keep an eye on the pages, maybe they will rank and bring us a bit of traffic, but we don't want to do that if it could be an issue with Google. Thanks for your opinions and if you have any hard evidence either way especially thanks for that info. 😉
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | irvingw0 -
Manage Ranking for " Out of Stock" pages
Hi, I own an e-commerce marketplace where the products are sold by 3rd party sellers and purchased by end users. My problem is that whenever a new product is added the search engine crawls the website and it ranks the new page on 4th page. when I start optimizing it to gain better rankings in search engines the product goes out of stock and the rankings drop to below 100. To counter that I started showing other related products on the "Out of Stock" pages but even then the rankings are dropping. Can someone help me with this problem?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RuchiPardal0