As a result of a recent quality review, we have come across some common mistakes that many analysts are making. Two trends we have noticed are that many analysts are not rating results correctly when the query is for a chain business with or without a location modifier, and when the result is in an unexpected language.
When researching the query, the first thing you should do is understand the user intent and determine if there an explicit location in the query.
When there is an explicit location mentioned in the query, you can ignore the user and viewport locations. The user has told you exactly where they want to see results. If the query contains words like “near me” or “nearest,” the user’s location, not the viewport location, should be considered the explicit location intent.
In this example we can see that the query contains a location modifier. The user is looking for a chain business
“Tim Hortons” in Mont-Saint-Hilaire, QC, Canada.
A result is considered most relevant when it is located in the user’s area of expected results. There are two types of Location Intent:
In this example we can see that the query does not contain any location modifier. We also note that the viewport
is stale, so the user location is the user’s location intent.
If you do not know the correct location intent for a query, it can lead to many incorrect ratings.
Example 1 – Chain Business Query with NO Location Modifier
The query intent is for a chain business with no location modifier, so the location intent is based on section 2.3.2 Implicit Location in the Guidelines. According to that section, since the user is located outside of the fresh viewport, all relevant results inside the viewport are eligible for a rating of Excellent.
This result matches the chain business intent and is outside the fresh viewport. There are McDonald’s locations within the viewport, and this result (yellow) is located 1.3km from the viewport. Using the official
McDonald’s store locator, we discover that this location is the closest to the viewport. This result is rated Good with Distance/Prominence checked.
Example 2 – Chain Business Query with GENERAL Location Modifier
The query is for a chain business with a general location modifier, this scenario is covered in section 10.6.3.1 of the General Guidelines. As there is a location modifier is in the query, we disregard the user and viewport locations. This result satisfies the intent for a Tim Hortons, but it is not in Repentigny, the specified location. Research using the official Tim Hortons store locator shows that there are many Tim Hortons locations within Repentigny that would satisfy the user intent, so this location outside of Repentigny is rated Bad with Distance/prominence checked.
Result name/title is in unexpected language or script
Another trend we have noticed in your market is that many analysts are failing to rate correctly when the result name/title is in unexpected language or script.
In addition to section 4.1 of the General Guidelines, analysts in the fr_CA region should also refer to section 1.6.1 of the Country Specific Guidelines – Result name is in unexpected language or script in the Country Specific Guidelines – https://bit.ly/2FJMNcE
This result’s title is in English. In the province of Quebec, this chain does not include the word “The” on their signage or on their website.
See: http://tinyurl.com/y5uedf2q – by swapping the language of the website, we can confirm how the name is localized in Quebec. See how the logo changes in the top-left corner of the screen. As such, we check the Result name/title is in unexpected language or script checkbox.
Example 2
This result satisfies the user’s intent for .
this chain business, but the result title ,
is in English. In French, the name is “Rôtisserie St-Hubert”.
This goes beyond just missing the “ô” diacritic in “Rôtisserie”. The word order has changed to make this the English name of this chain business. This is considered a language issue, so the “Result name/title is in unexpected language or script” checkbox is ticked.