Check whether a Google review is removable
check_review_removabilityFree and read-only. Tells a business owner whether a Google review matches one of Google’s named review rules, the same verdict as the free checker on essentras.com. Ask the person for facts only, never the review text, a name or a link: whose review it is, whether the reviewer was a real customer, what the review contains, whether they can show it, and where they are in Google’s process. Returns the verdict (strong match, arguable, or no policy match), Google’s rule with its policy link and the date it was read, where to report, the evidence to attach, Google’s stated timing, the appeal path, report and reply templates, and the Essentras service with its current price only when the page offers it. A genuine negative review gets “No policy match”: Google does not remove a review for being negative, and the tool says so. Google decides every removal.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| status | No | Where are you in the process? not-reported = Not reported yet; pending = Decision pending; no-violation = Report reviewed - no policy violation; escalated = Escalated - check your email for updates; appeal-denied = Appeal decided, review still up; removed = Removed. | not-reported |
| contains | No | When ownership is business. What does the review contain? Select all that apply. Not a genuine experience: conflict = Written by a competitor, a current or former employee, a relative, or someone else with a conflict of interest; incentivized = Paid for or incentivized by anyone (money, discount, free product or service); burst = Part of a sudden burst of similar reviews from accounts you cannot match to customers; duplicate = The same or near-identical text posted more than once, from 1 account or several; impersonation = Posted by someone pretending to be another person, a business or an official. Breaks a rule in the text itself: harassment = Threats, doxxing, or sexualized remarks about a person; hate = Slurs, or calls for violence against a protected group; profanity = Profanity or obscenity used to offend; personal-info = A private person’s home address, phone number, photo, or financial, medical or ID details; advertising = An advert, a phone number or a link; wrong-business = About a different business or location; gibberish = Meaningless characters. Judgment calls (decided case by case): staff-name = Names a staff member or another private person by full or last name (not a first name alone); accusation = Accuses you or your staff of a crime or unethical conduct, with nothing to back it up; false-claims = Describes what you sell or do in a way that is false; rant = Political or social commentary, or a rant that is not about a visit. Not a rule violation: genuine = A real customer describing a bad experience; harsh = Harsh, exaggerated or unfair, but based on a real visit; old = Old, and the business has changed since; star-only = A low star rating with no text, from a real customer. Also happening: extortion = Someone demanded money or a favor to remove, or not post, reviews. | |
| customer | No | When ownership is business. Was the reviewer a real customer? Search bookings, orders, invoices and your CRM by name, email, phone and the dates the review mentions. yes = Yes, I can match them to a visit or order; no-record = No record after searching; unsure = Not sure yet. | |
| evidence | No | Can you show it? Only for selected items that need proof: yes = the owner has it now, not-yet = not yet. A missing answer counts as not-yet. Items whose proof is the review text itself need no answer. | |
| ownership | Yes | Whose review is it? mine = I wrote it; business = It is about my business; other = It is about another business. | |
| false_facts | No | Does it state specific facts about your business that are false? no = No, it is opinion or a real experience; docs = Yes, and I have documents that prove it; no-docs = Yes, but no documents yet. | no |