Is SeoMOZ Crawl Diagnostics wrong here?
-
We've been getting a ton of critical errors (about 80,000) in SeoMoz' Crawl Diagnostics saying we have duplicate content in our client's E-commerce site. Some of the errors are correct, but a lot of the pages are variations like:
www.example.com/productlist?page=1
www.example.com/productlist?page=2
However, in our source code we have used rel="prev" and rel="next" so in my opinion we should be alright.
Would love to hear from you if we have made a mistake or if it is an error in SeoMoz.
Here's a full paste of the script:
-
Just a minor clarification - you can use both rel=prev/next and rel=canonical, IF you have something like search filters. Then, the canonical would point to the unfiltered current page and the rel=prev/next would point to the filtered paginated pages. Yeah, I know, that made a lot of sense. Let's say your page is:
http://example.com/stuff?page=2&sort=price
...then you might have
It's more than a little confusing.
Definitely check out that JavaScript issue, though - it might be that bots aren't seeing what people are seeing, and that could be very dangerous.
-
Hi,
In regards the rel=next you are absolutely right, I must have overlooked it or just searched for the prev tag. So yes as far as proper implementation of the prev/next in that respect it is correct and please ignore that last part of my first post!
Turning of javascript is instructive to see all those tags on their individual page and helps clarify what exactly is being outputted and when without the dynamic loading, providing you don't miss a rel=next tag that is really there
-
Hi Lynn,
Thank you very much for your answer / analysis! As you said "It is a bit confusing" and I will just read your answer a couple of times...
I will grant your answer "Good answer" for you thorough analysis! I think it is spot on with the double "next/prev" and "rel=can" tags. I do have one remark. You said: When I turn off javescript, I get this:
In my opinion this is alright, because it shouldn't have a "prev" as this is the initial page.
-
Hi,
I had a look at what I assume is the site and I think you have a combination of things going on that is likely causing confusion (to you, to the moz bot, probably to google too!)
Firstly, it is not recommended to use rel prev/next and rel canonical on the same page. With that what you are effectively doing is only indexing the first page of the results since all the other pages rel canonical back to the first one. If you have a 'view all' type page then you could rel canonical all of the paginated pages back to this one and you would not need to use the prev/next tags at all. It is also possible that your use of relative canonical links in combination with the above is also causing confusion, usually best to use absolute urls if possible.
Beyond that, the site dynamically loads more products as you scroll down the page which also results in the url changing to hoeretelefon/? for ALL the pages. If that is a problem or not depends on how it is coded and how the google and seomoz bots are deciding to parse the page, but it certainly adds another potential area of complexity to the issue.
Lastly, if you browse the site with javascript turned off you can see something odd in that the initial page /elektronik/baerbar-lyd/hoeretelefon has no prev/next OR canonical tag but has a link to /elektronik/baerbar-lyd/hoeretelefon?page=1 on which you find prev/next and canonicals back to the non paginated version. So you are basically skipping the pagination setup that goes from the original to the page=1 (but also giving a canonical back to the original page).
Phew! It is a bit confusing. I would recommend deciding on if you want to go with prev/next or canonical in the first place and take it from there. I would think that if you have the ability to canonical to a 'see all products page' then this might be the best way to go since it should theoretically take care of any issues the dynamic loading is causing also.
Hope that helps!
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
-
Site Crawl 4xx Errors?
Hello! When I check our website's critical crawler issues with Moz Site Crawler, I'm seeing over 1000 pages with a 4xx error. All of the pages that are showing to have a 4xx error appear to be the brand and product pages we have on our website, but with /URL at the end of each permalink. For example, we have a page on our site for a brand called Davinci. The URL is https://kannakart.com/davinci/. In the site crawler, I'm seeing the 4xx for this URL: https://kannakart.com/davinci/URL. Could this be a plugin on our site that is generating these URLs? If they're going to be an issue, I'd like to remove them. However, I'm not sure exactly where to begin. Thanks in advance for the help, -Andrew
Moz Pro | | mostcg0 -
Seo moz has only crawled 2 pages of my site. Ive been notified of a 403 error and need an answer as to why my pages are not being crawled?
SEO Moz has only crawled 2 pages of my clients site. I have noticed the following. A 403 error message screaming frog also cannot crawl the site but IIS can. Due to the lack of crawling ability, im getting no feed back on my on page optimization rankings or crawl diagnostics summary, so my competitive analysis and optimization is suffering Anybody have any idea as to what needs to be done to rectify this issue as access to the coding or cms platform is out of my hands. Thank you
Moz Pro | | nitro-digital0 -
Using Seomoz for Site Evaluation am I up to par ?
Just wanted to see how people using the seomoz bar would rate a four month old site with Domain-Homepage Authority of 27 Mozrank of 5.08 and Moztrust of 5.65 . I've read up on all the factors but just wanted to know if Im up to par on building a great site thats search engine friendly. Inner pagers are on a PA of 20 and around the same mozrank and moztrust levels of +- 5.
Moz Pro | | NikolasNikolaou0 -
Why does SEOMoz think I have duplicate content?
The SEOmoz crawl report shows me a large amount of duplicate content sites. Our site is built on a CMS that creates the link we want it to be but also automatically creates it's own longer version of the link (e.g. http://www.federalnational.com/About/tabid/82/Default.aspx and http://www.federalnational.com/about.aspx). We set the site up so that there are automatic redirects for our site. Google Webmaster does not see these pages as duplicate pages. Why does SEOmoz consider them duplicate content? Is there a way to weed this out so that the crawl report becomes more meaningful? Thanks!
Moz Pro | | jsillay0 -
Ranking Differs between SEOmoz and Google Webmaster?
My Google webmaster ranking for keywords differs significantly from SEOmoz. For example, Webmaster say 8 and SEOmoz says 1...thoughts?
Moz Pro | | mjcarrjr0 -
Why did SEOMoz only crawl 1 page?
I have multiple campaigns and on a few of them SEOMoz has only crawled one page. I think this may have to do with how I set up the campaign. How do I get SEOMoz to crawl more than one page on these campaigns.
Moz Pro | | HermanAdvertising0 -
SEOmoz Crawl CSV in Excel: already split by semicolon. Is this Excel's fault or SEOmoz's?
If for example a page title contains a ë the .csv created by the SEOmoz Crawl Test is already split into columns on that point, even though I haven't used Excel's text to columns yet. When I try to do the latter, Excel warns me that I'm overwriting non-empty cells, which of course is something I would rather not do since that would make me lose valuable data. My question is: is this something caused by opening the .csv in Excel, or earlier in the process when this .csv is created?
Moz Pro | | DeptAgency2 -
How to handle crawl diagnostic errors for the same url. /products & /products/
I have copied on of the errors out of the crawl diagnostics report. Both /products and /products/ are returning an error, and both have pretty good domain authority so I feel like its hurting my site that these show up this way. Both urls create the same page, should I just setup a 301 on the /products with no slash or will that cause more harm... I am using the MODx cms system and that could have something to do with it. | Products | Datalight http://www.datalight.com/products 1 37 5 Products | Datalight http://www.datalight.com/products/ | 1 | 30 | 1 |
Moz Pro | | tjsherrill0