Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hey Armen,

It can depend upon how you have it structured and what type of schema mark-up you have in place. Is it an aggregate review for the business or product as a whole or individual review from a customer/testimonial?.

Also just because it the review shows by page for other search queries this does not mean it is broken for branded search to the homepage, Google kind of has the final say on if it chooses to show the snippet. Sometimes it might, sometimes it may not, it may also not show yours in favour of other sites thus not flooding the serps with stars everywhere..

Hope that helps.
Tim

Based on what I understand this is a quite normal side affect of going to https:// and in many cases the benefits you may have gained from performing multiple page speed upgrades, responsive edits etc may be reduced in there effectiveness from a page speed perspective.

However, and this is a big however, you will also benefit from an SEO stance from Google for using an encrypted protocol which is now considered a ranking factor, albeit a small one at press. Second to this, before too long many of the browsers will have fully adopted HTTP2 which is based on SPDY developed by Google and has apparently massive speed gains. In order to adopt HTTP2 you have to have already made the leap to using an SSL. HTTP2 allow you to load in parallel which will in turn give you much greater speeds going forward due to the request loading at the same time nd hence speeding things up even further..

Based on your current scores, I would imagine there are also a few more additional changes that you could make to further improve your sites speed whilst still using and SSL. CDN's, caching, compressing and more.

Use sites like tools.pingdom, gtmetrix, webpagetest.org to see what else can be improved.

Hope this offers some further insight.

As per Dirk and Logan, personally I would try and not have two sets of content to be delivered, the point of responsive is really to have one page that is simply delivered visually consistent on all device types.

With regards to it being considered as duplicate content this is a little harder to determine and I would imagine Google may not penalise you for it really unless it is really spammy and used for keyword stuffing/cloaking etc. Here is an old video from M. Cutts, although it may not be totally relevant in today's SEO landscape and is probably more geared towards duplicate pages.

I agree, GA can be a little hit and miss but it at least it has given you some reason to look into it further and see if there is actually something wrong. As per Dmitrii, I would suggest running a series of tests to establish if your site is truly running slower. There could be a multitude of reasons as to why it is running slower so eliminating the issues one by one may help.

Places to test your site include
tools.pingdom.com
gtmetrix.com
Google page speed test
Webpage Test.
Also as per Dmitrii, in browser with developer tools

As it is a new site, are there any new elements that were not included before? new scripts, images etc. Consider also using CDN's to deliver your content for added speed gains. Check the waterfall tables to see if any elements are struggling.

Have you also moved to an SSL when updating redesiging your responsive site, this can also cause a slight reduction in speed.

Hope this helps

Tim

Personally I would doubt that you would get penalised for it especially as these are genuine reviews. We use a similar tactic here and post individual user reviews gathered locally on site and then also feature aggregate review for an overall score located on a third party site.

As you are using TrustPilot which is a Google Partner for reviews, I would imagine this will only benefit you in the long run, but check with them about featuring their logos on your site. Some review sites are quite particular about how you display their logo/artwork and may also require a link back  Due to TrustPilot being a Google Partner, you also have the added benefit of having star ratings in any Google Adwords activity you may be doing, thus helping to further increase their positive impact on CTA's and conversions when landing.

Hope that helps. As per Robert, just make sure you get your schema correct to ensure accurate portrayal of the review data so it is picked up.

Finally, there is a chance that you will get your review snippet on Google, but this is not guaranteed even if your schema markup 100% correct.

Good luck

Tim

As per David above you can also use OpenSiteExplorer to delve into a competitor/relevant sites links to see which are passing the most value. This is great if you are trying to find relevant pages that are linking to your competitors and that will also be of benefit to your own site.

I think the hardest thing for you is to prove that the content is originally yours. I would suggest that when creating content make sure that you log the original date created and before making live inform any parties involved on the policing of your industry that the content is yours.

If the other party is simply copy and pasting for offline use it can be a bit harder to prove, but should you be able to get your hands on any hard copies that were created after your publication date you could possibly prove breach of copyrighted material, that is providing they have not simply rewrote the content to make it completely bespoke to them which again make it harder to prove they did not come up with the content.

If they are copying and pasting to their website make sure you add in a few links back to you as a source but also include any details/image with your own meta, watermarks and exif image data etc again tying it back to you. Eventually they will slip up and you will be able to prove they have been plagiarising your work.

If it is online you could also file a spam report with Google to try and get their copied content removed the serps etc. https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/spamreport This may also help about copyright infrigement in the US - http://copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-infringement.html / http://www.copyright.gov/

Failing all that I would imagine a court ruling would be the final steps to stop them using your content.

Personally unless you are linking to some other content or maybe offering a larger image to view I would not bother adding a link to the image. To ensure the images is optimised make sure you add a relevant Alt tag that is related to the contents of the image. That's my opinion on it anyway. Others may see it differently.

Just doing a quick test in Opensite explorer it would appear that http://www.scadgells.co.uk has a couple of external backlinks links from a website called furniturebuyer.info, where as http://scadgell.co.uk has no backlinks. The links are from a relevant source, but doubt will provide you with a huge boost.

If you can access OSE, I would suggest looking at the following link for the www. domain too just incase there are a few more elements.
https://moz.com/researchtools/ose/pages?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.scadgells.co.uk As well as the backlinks it also appears to show a possible 7 indexed pages which you may want to redirect or even 404 depending on what they were originally about. None of the pages deeper than the homepage appear to have any backlinks.

Hope that also helps.

Cheers Tim

I would suggest having a bit of a read over this old blog post which gives  you the necessary info to implement the rel=canonical tag correctly.

https://moz.com/blog/rel-confused-answers-to-your-rel-canonical-questions

I do not think that having the rel=canonical tag pointing to itself would necessarily harm your site, but it is probably best to avoid this if possible as is redundant code. If you have a dynamic meta / header include this might be the best solution for you if you cannot control it manually or by editing the code. I often have the rel canonical running in numerous pages, especially to help reduce MVT pages from being indexed.

Have you performed any more disavow processes since? If you have not, simply login to your Search Console and head to the disavow section.

https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/disavow-links

If you have not added any more, simply click the profile you are working with, and it should open up a box with a link to your most recent added file. See my linked image which shows the pop up. You can then download the text file that you/they added.

Hope that helps.

If it is an older file, I would suggest talking to google about seeing previous versions of the txt file, that is if they hold onto them.

X8nsy5k

I don't normally tend to put a time-scale on being competitive, for me it is more a case of if you site is built and optimised to the best of its ability then you should soon begin to climb. There is no reason why it could not be a as little as a few weeks if you nail all of your items down well.

Ensure you follow some of the quality guides that you can find on Moz, to get your site in the best condition possible to give you the best opportunity to climb well.

1. https://moz.com/beginners-guide-to-seo 2. Moz guide to link building - Paddy Moogan
3. How to Rank - Cyrus Sheppard
4. Lots more in here and all over the web. 

Much have already been mentioned, including MOZ, I think it depends what kind of optimisation you are talking about, are you after speed gains or content gains. Some of these are in the mix are:

PTEngine - some really nice free heatmapping will allow you to optimise your UX/UI. (FREE too)
Web Page Test - a bit like GTMetrix both very similar.
BrowserStack for testing on multiple browsers.
UsabilityHub - some free user testing
Compressor.io - for compressing images
ScreamingFrog
Do a search for minification of your CSS, JS and HTML - lots of tools for this.
CDN's for serving content.
Google page speed Structured Data testing tool Pingdom
SerpFox - rank tracking
Google Tag Manager is also useful

And there are so many more....

Very cool.. be nice if it could be extended to the top 100

Note just seen the Edit - great to see it is now showing pretty much everyone that is active.

Yes lots still going on, whether it is linked to the previous update or some other activity we will no doubt find out in time. However, for now I'd potentially expect more movements both up and down until things settle.

Good article and insight from SEORoundTable

Hi Nicolas, the dropbox link 404'd, the above schema you are showing is for reviews, and not for aggregate reviews.

Reviews are per individual item and should be related to the product on the page etc. This will not display any HTML stars in your Organic serp results in Google.

For aggregate results you will need to use another method that in effect calculates a total score based on all of the reviews accrued. You can definately use this for service based products etc.

<div itemscope itemtype="http: schema.org="" product"=""><span itemprop="name">Service
<div itemprop="aggregaterating"  itemscope itemtype="http: schema.org="" aggregaterating"="">Rated 3.5/5  based on 11 customer reviews

<./div>

Something like this should do the trick. If you are storing your reviews via an external site I would also add in an itemprop for url to source them back to the original source for justification.

The above should results in you achieving a star rating in your organic serps.

You can visually add in your own stars to your site to make it look more appealing.</div itemprop="aggregaterating"  itemscope itemtype="http:></span itemprop="name"></div itemscope itemtype="http:>

Two great responses from Dirk and Peter.

Once you have identified the pages that are loading particularly slowly you can utilise the tools to determine the order that elements are loaded on the page, you may find that shuffling the order in which items loads also helps to speed things up by removing render blocking elements to load later etc.

I quite often use tools.pingdom.com and GTMetrix for my site speed sampling and further analysis. The waterfall diagrams will really help you to visually see what are the slower items.

GZip Compression and delivery of images via CDN's may also offer you a speed boost.

The comments above are right, you do indeed need at least 30 reviews in the last 12 months that have been posted to one of Google's review partner websites. See here for a list of locations you could use. Once you have accrued a number of reviews they will be appended to your adverts.

Secondly, providing you are competitive in your SERP positions you could also look to implement Aggregate Rating Schema into your sites code, this will allow you to also display star ratings in your organic listings helping you to again stand out from your competitors when people search.  You can look into this further here. 

There are a couple of methods to help reduce any ghost/referral spam you may be getting, one is to use your htaccess, (this reduces crawled traffic only) and the other is to set up filters in GA.

This post from Carlos Escalera, is one of my favourites. https://moz.com/blog/stop-ghost-spam-in-google-analytics-with-one-filter

Hope this helps.

There are a few, in a few roles I was exposed to hootsuite which is good, but I have recently moved over to Buffer which so far to me seems far more intuitive to use. Also with the benefit of a mobile app and chrome extensions for quick publishing and scheduling.

Have you tried getting in touch with the people at Buffer to see if there is anything they can do to help?