Rel="prev" and rel="next" implementation
-
Hi there
since I've started using semoz I have a problem with duplicate content so I have implemented on all the pages with pagination rel="prev" and rel="next" in order to reduce the number of errors but i do something wrong and now I can't figure out what it is.
the main page url is : alegesanatos.ro/ingrediente/
and for the other pages :
alegesanatos.ro/ingrediente/p2/ - for page 2
alegesanatos.ro/ingrediente/p3/ - for page 3 and so on.
We've implemented rel="prev" and rel="next" according to google webmaster guidelines without adding canonical tag or base link in the header section and we still get duplicate meta title error messages for this pages.
Do you think there is a problem because we create another url for each page instead of adding parameters (?page=2 or ?page=3 ) to the main url
alegesanatos.ro/ingrediente?page=2
thanks
-
Technically, rel=prev/next doesn't de-duplicate the way the canonical tag does, but it should solve any problems for Google. I don't believe we currently consider rel=prev/next when determining duplicate titles. Klarke is right - you could just give those pages semi-unique titles. We're not handling rel=prev/next as well as we could be (it turns out to be a tricky tag to parse well).
Looking at your pages, your implementation appears to be correct. My gut reaction is that your probably ok here. You're doing what Google claims they want (at least what they want this week).
-
Adding rel=next/rel=prev, will not fix issues with Duplicate Titles. You need to edit your templates so that paginated pages actually have unique titles. For example
Ingrediente - Page 1 of 5
Ingrediente - Page 2 of 5
Ingrediente - Page 3 of 5
-
Using rel=prev and rel=next will help to avoid duplicate content issues and is entirely separate from your meta tags. If you wish to avoid duplicate meta title errors then you will need to add 'page x' to your titles, similar to what Matt Cutts has done with his blog.
Hope that helps,
Adam.
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
-
How should I implement FAQs?
My client is ranked #3 for their primary keyword and we want to add FAQs that are educational (ie, related to the technology, not specifically to the company’s products or how to work with the company). Should I add the FAQs to the existing ranking content page? Or to a new dedicated “keyword FAQs” page? I have a LOT, about 40 questions and 4000+words of answer content. And two secondary questions: Many of the FAQs have expanded content on other pages throughout the site. Is it okay to link to that internal content? Is it okay to have multiple FAQ pages? So keyword1 FAQs, keyword2 FAQs...? Thanks so much!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DanaBinPA0 -
Index, follow on a paginated page with a different rel=canonical URL
Hello, I have a question about meta robots ="index, follow" and rel=canonical on category page pagination. Should the sorted page be <meta name="robots" content="index,follow"></meta name="robots" content="index,follow"> since the rel="canonical" is pointing to a separate page that is different from the URL? Any thoughts on this topic would be awesome. Thanks. Main Category Page
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Choice
https://www.site.com/category/
<meta name="robots" content="index,follow"><link rel="canonical" href="https: www.site.com="" category="" "=""></link rel="canonical" href="https:></meta name="robots" content="index,follow"> Sorted Page
https://www.site.com/category/?p=2&dir=asc&order=name
<meta name="robots" content="index, follow"=""><link rel="canonical" href="https: www.site.com="" category="" ?p="2""></link rel="canonical" href="https:></meta name="robots" content="index,> As you can see, the meta robots is telling Google to index https://www.site.com/category/?p=2&dir=asc&order=name , yet saying the canonical page is https://www.site.com/category/?p=2 .0 -
How to track keywords for cities right next to each other?
Should I track the same keywords for multiple cities that are right next to each other (there's about 10 cities in a 30 mile radius that the business services)? Or if the website ranks for a keyword in one city, will it automatically rank the same way in the city right next to it?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | pbrennan0 -
Brackets vs Encoded URLs: The "Same" in Google's eyes, or dup content?
Hello, This is the first time I've asked a question here, but I would really appreciate the advice of the community - thank you, thank you! Scenario: Internal linking is pointing to two different versions of a URL, one with brackets [] and the other version with the brackets encoded as %5B%5D Version 1: http://www.site.com/test?hello**[]=all&howdy[]=all&ciao[]=all
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mirabile
Version 2: http://www.site.com/test?hello%5B%5D**=all&howdy**%5B%5D**=all&ciao**%5B%5D**=all Question: Will search engines view these as duplicate content? Technically there is a difference in characters, but it's only because one version encodes the brackets, and the other does not (See: http://www.w3schools.com/tags/ref_urlencode.asp) We are asking the developer to encode ALL URLs because this seems cleaner but they are telling us that Google will see zero difference. We aren't sure if this is true, since engines can get so _hung up on even one single difference in character. _ We don't want to unnecessarily fracture the internal link structure of the site, so again - any feedback is welcome, thank you. 🙂0 -
REPOST: How much does "overall site semantic theme" influence rankings?
Hello everyone on the new cool Moz! I've optimized sites before that are dedicated to 1, 2 or 3 products and or services. These sites inherently talk about one main thing - so the semantics of the content across the whole site reflect this. I get these ranked well on a local level. Now, take an e-commerce site - which I am working on - 2000 products, all of which are quite varied - cookware, diningware, art, decor, outdoor, appliances... there is a lot of different semantics throughout the site's different pages. Does this influence the ranking possibilities? Your opinion and time is appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bjs20101 -
Should I remove all rel=nofollow links?
I have a 60 page site that had some nofollow links sprinkled throughout, 50% of which are probably on its mailto: email links. Should I remove all nofollows all in one go, or just the mailto links first, and later the others? Or has anyone had any negative effects in 2012 from this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | emerald0 -
Pagination with rel=“next” and rel=“prev”
Hey mozzers Would be interested to know if anyone has used the rel=“next” and rel=“prev” attributes more info here http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2011/09/pagination-with-relnext-and-relprev.html If you have used it, has it worked and what are your thoughts etc:? And for those that have used it, is it a better way of handling pagination other than the obvious of Google saying so. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CraigAddyman0
