A review can remain authentic while becoming misleading on the wrong product page. Product mapping deserves its own check, especially when sizes, materials or editions have changed.
Define the identity rule
Decide what makes two records the same reviewed product. A stable product reference is a useful starting point, but a materially changed item may still need a version distinction. Do not let a matching title decide the question automatically.
Write the rule before importing. Otherwise each ambiguous row becomes an improvised judgement made under deadline pressure.
Separate options from replacements
A colour option may belong to one product family; a redesigned construction may be a replacement. The correct treatment depends on what the review actually describes. A comment about fit or durability can be especially sensitive to a version change.
Keep an explicit unresolved group when the evidence is insufficient. It is better to hold a review than to assign it confidently to the wrong item.
Build a mapping with reasons
For each old reference, record the destination, the basis for the match and any display note required. Use a second field for ambiguous or withheld records rather than overloading a blank destination.
An illustrative row might say that the original and destination share the same SKU and dimensions, while another is withheld because the material changed. Those reasons make future corrections easier.
Check the rendered context
Inspect the destination product alongside the review. Does the review refer to an option no longer available? Does the photograph show a previous version? Does a shortened excerpt remove the clue that would explain the difference?
Do not treat successful file ingestion as successful editorial migration. A technically accepted row can still tell the wrong story.
Close with reconciliation and ownership
Count mapped, withheld and rejected records, and name the person responsible for unresolved cases. Preserve the original export privately. If you later correct a mapping, keep the reason rather than overwriting the history without explanation.
For a small catalogue, reviewing every ambiguous record may be practical. For a larger one, automate the obvious matches but keep a human decision for uncertain identity. The aim is not maximum imported volume; it is reliable evidence on the page where a customer uses it.
Use the catalogue hub to stabilise product references before beginning a review move. No particular review app or platform capability is assumed by this process.
Illustrative case to check
A pouch changed from a zip closure to a drawstring version while keeping a similar name. A review praising the zip should not silently appear as evidence for the new closure. Keep the older version distinct or retain an explicit, accurate context if the system supports it. The mapping decision should follow the reviewed product, not the convenience of the new catalogue.
Examples are illustrative. Confirm current features, charges and suitability before making a business decision.
Explore this topic → · Find an oBizee setup guide · Ask about your store