Pagination: rel="next" rel="prev" in ?
-
With Google releasing that instructional on proper pagination I finally hunkered down and put in a site change request.
I wanted the rel="next" and rel="prev" implemented… and it took two weeks for the guy to get it done. Brutal and painful.
When I looked at the source it turned out he put it in the body above the pagination links… which is not what I wanted. I wanted them in the .
Before I respond to get it properly implemented I want a few opinions - is it okay to have the rel="next" in the body? Or is it pretty much mandatory to put it in the head?
(Normally, if I had full control over this site, I would just do it myself in 2 minutes… unfortunately I don't have that luxury with this site)
-
Guys I have just joined seo moz and I ended up with 3600 crawl errors and after speaking with abe from seo moz it soon became clear it was to do with the on page pagination we then asked our developer to add rel=”next” & rel=”prev” Within a few minutes my rankings on certain keywords started to drop some ranking on page 1 in the top 5 have now dropped out of the top 50.
I'm a retailer with a certain amount of knowledge regarding seo but this stuff im completely puzzled could anyone help. my site is www.maximumsports-nutrition.com
Cheers
Andy
-
Ah thanks for that Matthew! You gave me exactly what I needed for my email…
Now to wait another two weeks for this web developer. (beyond frustrating)
-
Matthew is spot on here. Has to be in the head or it wont work properly. All the rel/link tags exist in the head (same with rel=canonical, etc...)
-
It does need to be in the head tag. I was in a similar situation on another site where the rel next/prev was put in the . We saw no results from it (in terms of pages indexed) but as soon as those were moved back to the , life was good.
If you need documentation proof for your change request (which I was asked for!), these might help:
Google's blog post about this says "rel=”next” and rel=”prev” only need to be declared within the section, not within the document ."
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2011/09/pagination-with-relnext-and-relprev.html
At a more basic level, the tag only works in the . See the "Tips & Notes" section.
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
-
Pagination do you still need unique titles?
Hi Guys, For pagination, if you have implemented the rel Prev/Next tags correctly, is it fine to have duplicate titles in the series example: Title Tag: Black Dresses URL: http://www.site.com/blackdresses
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jayoliverwright
Title Tag: Black Dresses URL: http://www.site.com/blackdresses/2
Title Tag: Black Dresses URL: http://www.site.com/blackdresses/3
Title Tag: Black Dresses URL: http://www.site.com/blackdresses/4 Some people mention that you should make them unique and add the page number example: Title Tag: Black Dresses URL: http://www.site.com/blackdresses
Title Tag: Black Dresses URL: http://www.site.com/blackdresses/2
Title Tag: Black Dresses URL: http://www.site.com/blackdresses/3
Title Tag: Black Dresses URL: http://www.site.com/blackdresses/4 Keen to hear what you guys thing? Personally, i think its fine to have duplicate title tags when you have properly implemented rel Prev/Next tags as Googel will see the series as one. Cheers.0 -
Pagination with rel=“next” and rel=“prev”
Hi Guys, Just wondering can anyone recommend any tools or good ways to check if rel=“next” and rel=“prev” attributes have been implemented properly across a large ecommerce based site? Cheers. rel=“next” and rel=“prev”
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jayoliverwright0 -
How To Implement Pagination Properly? Important and Urgent!
I have seen many instructions but I am still uncertain. Here is the situation We will be implementing rel prev rel next on our paginted pages. The question is: Do we implement self referencing canonical URL on the main page and each paginated page? Do we implement noindex/follow meta robots tag on each paginated page? Do we include the canonical URL for each paginated page in the sitemap if we do not add the meta robots tag? We have a view all but will not be using it due to page load capabilities...what do we do with the viewl all URL? Do we add meta robots to it? For website search results pages containing pagination should we just put a noindex/follow meta robots tag on them? We have seperate mobile URL's that also contain pagination. Do we need to consider these pages as a seperate pagination project? We already canonical all the mobile URL's to the main page of the desktop URL. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seo320 -
Rel="self" and what to do with it?
Hey there Mozzers, Another question about a forum issue I encountered. When a forum thread has more than just one page as we all know the best course of action is to use rel="next" rel="prev" or rel="previous" But my forum automatically creates another line in the header called Rel="self" What that does is simple. If i have 3 pages http://www.example.com/article?story=abc1
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Angelos_Savvaidis
http://www.example.com/article?story=abc2
http://www.example.com/article?story=abc3 **instead of this ** On the first page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc1 On the second page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc2 On the third page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc3: it creates this On the first page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc1 So as you can see it creates a url by adding the ?page=1 and names it rel=self which actually gives back a duplicate page because now instead of just http://www.example.com/article?story=abc1 I also have the same page at http://www.example.com/article?story=abc1?page=1 Do i even need rel="self"? I thought that rel="next" and rel="prev" was enough? Should I change that?0 -
Does 301 vs 302 matter when dealing with "social signal"?
When looking at links and how search engines look at "social signal," does it matter if a link is 301 vs 302? In addition to that, if I build out my own short URL system that gets used for link redirects that include referral attributes, would/could I get penalized if I use 301 instead of 302?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JDatSB0 -
Using the Word "Free" in Metadata
Hi Forum! I've searched previous questions, and couldn't find anything related to this. I know the word "free" when used in email marketing can trigger spam filters. If I use the word "free" in my metadata (title tag, description, and keywords just for fun) will I be penalized in any way? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Travis-W0 -
Pagination & SEO
I have the WP-Pagination plugin and I am wondering how to handle duplicate content issues and what's best for SEO. My developer initially downloaded the plugin to speed up loading for the home page. Now my home page has 21 pages of paginated content. But the pagination continues with each of my categories as well. Should I be placing a canonical reference to my home page, or category main page? My site name is gracessweetlife (dot) com
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | gracessweetlife0 -
Schema.org Implementation: "Physician" vs. "Person"
Hey all, I'm looking to implement Schema tagging for a local business and am unsure of whether to use "Physician" or "Person" for a handful of doctors. Though "Physician" seems like it should be the obvious answer, Schema.org states that it should refer to "A doctor's office" instead of a physician. The properties used in "Physician" seem to apply to a physician's practice, and not an actual physician. Properties are sourced from the "Thing", "Place", "Organization", and "LocalBusiness" schemas, so I'm wondering if "Person" might be a more appropriate implementation since it allows for more detail (affiliations, awards, colleagues, jobTitle, memberOf), but I wanna make sure I get this right. Also, I'm wondering if the "Physician" schema allows for properties pulled from the "Person" schema, which I think would solve everything. For reference: http://schema.org/Person http://schema.org/Physician Thanks, everyone! Let me know how off-base my strategy is, and how I might be able to tidy it up.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mudbugmedia0