Canonical url with pagination
-
I would like to find out what is the standard approach for sections of the site with large number of records being displayed using pagination. They don't really contain the same content, but if title tag isn't changed it seem to process it as duplicate content where the parameter in the url indicating the next page is used.
For the time being I've added ' : Page 1' etc. at the end of the title tag for each separate page with the results, but is there a better way of doing it? Should I use the canonical url here pointing to the main page before pagination shows up in the url?
-
Moz crawls paginated pages even if you have added the rel="next" and rel="prev".
-
Does Moz manage crawling through Wordpress paginated posts (with tags rel="next" / "prev") ?
Since I divided long posts in two posts (page 1 and page 2) using "nextpage" feature in Wordpress, Moz shows duplicate title between page 1 and page 2. For example : https://captaincontrat.com/guide/societe-en-cours-de-formation/ and https://captaincontrat.com/guide/societe-en-cours-de-formation/2/
Thanks a lot
-
Thanks.
-
It does, although Google seems to be slightly less fond of it over time. Since I wrote my reply in March, rel=prev/next are actually beginning to be more effective. I've never seen any major issues with NOINDEX'ing pages 2+, though. In many cases, it's just a lot easier to implement.
The big issue this year is that Google sometimes just ignores deindexation signals. So, you really have to try it and see.
I'd also add that I'm talking about search pagination here, not article pagination. Rel=prev/next is a much better choice for article pagination, because the content is unique across pages. Indexing page 11 of search results isn't much of a benefit, in most cases.
-
Anyone use "no-index" and "follow" for page 2 , page 3 etc? Does this work?
-
So, I have to say that I'm actually upset about Google's recent recommendations, because they've presented them as if their simple and definitive, whereas they're actually very complicated to implement and don't always work very well. A couple of problems:
(1) Rel=prev/next is a fairly weak signal. If you're just trying to help the crawlers, it's fine. If you have issues with large-scale duplication (or have been hit with Panda), it's not a good fix, in my experience.
(2) Rel=prev/next isn't honored at all by Bing.
(3) It's actually really tough to code, especially their proposed Rel=prev/next + Rel=canonical solution.
There are a couple of other options:
(a) If you have a "View All" page (or if that's feasible without it being huge), you can rel-canonical to it from all of the paginated pages.
(b) You can META NOINDEX, FOLLOW pages 2+. I find that's a lot easier and usually more effective. Again, it depends on the severity of the problem and scope of the paginated content.
If you're not having problems and can manage the implementation, Rel=prev/next is a decent first step.
I should add that this is assuming you mean internal search results, and not content pagination (like paginated articles). With paginated search, the additional pages usually aren't a good search-user experience (Google visitors don't need to land on Page 11 of 17 of your search results), so I find that proactively managing them is a good thing. It really does depend a lot on the scope and the size of your index, though. This is a very complex issue that tends to get oversimplified.
-
These pages obviously contain different items and each page only shares the same title and meta tags.
Marcin - do you think that if I add the rel attribute that will solve the problem? Will the Moz reports actually pick it and won't mark it as Duplicate Content and Title?
-
Hi Sebastian,
actually, there's a very clean solution which is fully supported by Google - just use rel="next" and rel="prev" in your paginated links to indicate relationships between pages.
Here's a recent discussion of the best practices from Google itself, and here's another comment by Yoast (famous for his Wordpress SEO plugin).
Hope it helps.
-
I think this is going to depend on two things: 1. Your Site Structure and If you want those pages indexed.
Rand Fishkin - recommends for paginated results not to put the canonical tag pointing back to the top page, which I agree.
Site Structure
If the final pages can only be found by going through the paginated structure, you'll definitely want them followed. You'd only want to no-follow to prioritize your crawl rate, but not recommended unless you have multiple formats (see the article above).
Indexed
If the content is unique (usually blog content) and you are getting traffic to those pages from searches then it may be worthwhile to keep them indexed.
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=93710
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
-
Looking for list Pro's & Con's of removing Folder from URL?
Hi We have a sub-folder ("/shop-by-department/") which is pretty much useless on our site and I'm looking to remove it. But the team want a list of the Pro's & Con's in doing so. So for example I'll be changing www.example.ie/shop-by-department/furniture/beds/product-a to www.example.ie/furniture/beds/product-a I know there will be an intial hit as Google adjusts to the change but think it's definitely the way to go. I was lookng for a complete list of the Pro's & Con's to send onto the team. It'll be going to the traditional marketing (print, radio, etc.) too so can ve top-level points too. Hope you can help! Thanks
Web Design | | Frankie-BTDublin0 -
Canonical and Sitemap issue
Hi all, I was told that I could change my homepage Canonical tag to match that of my XML sitemap, this sitemap is being generated for me automatically and shows the homepage as e.g. https://www.mysite.com/index.html, yet my Canonical tag has been set to https://www.mysite.com. Google currently shows as https://www.mysite.com/ being indexed, but https://www.mysite.com/index.html is not currently displayed in search results. Can someone please tell me if I should change the Canonical to the index.html version, or if I should do nothing, or remove the Canonical tag altogether? Thank you for looking.
Web Design | | scarebearz0 -
Pushstate and Infinite Scrolling Article Pages: Is it detrimental to not change URLs as the page is being scrolled?
I've noticed a recent trend of news sites using infinite scrolling on article pages to garner more pageviews and I can assume serve up more ads. Here is an overview. Here is an article from NBC news that uses this technique: http://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/music/grammys-2016-here-s-why-adele-s-performance-was-out-n519186 Studies have shown that this technique has decreased bounce rates by +15% for some sites. My question is: If a site is using the technique without changing URLs as the user scrolls down what overall negative effects does this have? Obviously you wouldn't be getting credit for the extra pageviews but I was wondering if there were any indexation implications with this. Here is an example of article infinite scrolling without changing the URL: http://www.wftv.com/news/national-content/deputies-wife-attacks-husband-because-he-didnt-get-her-a-valentines-day-gift/87691927
Web Design | | Cox-Media-Group1 -
Will interlinking using dynamic parameters in url help us in increasing our rankings
Hi, Will interlinking our internal pages using dynamic parameters(like abc.com/property-in-noida?source=footer) help us in increasing our rankings for linked pages OR we should use static urls for interlinking Regards
Web Design | | vivekrathore0 -
Question Mark In URL??
So I am looking at a site for a client, and I think I already have my answer, but wanted to check with you guys. First off the site is in FLASH and HTML. I told the client to dump the flash site, but she isn't willing right now. So the URLS are generated like this. Flash: http://www.mysite.com/#/page/7ca2/wedding-pricing/ HTML: http://www.mysite.com/?/page/7ca2/wedding-pricing/ checking the site in Google with a site:mysite, none of the interior pages are indexed at all. So that is telling me that Google is pretty much ignoring everything past the # or ?. Is that correct? My recommendation is to dump the flash site and redo the URLS in a SEo friendly format.
Web Design | | netviper0 -
Is it better to redirect a url or set up a landing page for a new site?
Hi, One of our clients has got a new website but is still getting quite a lot of traffic to her old site which has a page authority of 30 on the home page and has about 20 external backlinks. It's on a different hosting package so a different C block but I was wondering if anyone could advise if it would be better to simply redirect this page to the new site or set up a landing page on this domain simply saying "Site has moved, you can now find us here..." sort of idea. Any advice would be much appreciated Thanks
Web Design | | Will_Craig0 -
URL structure for multiple cities?
Hi, i am in the process of setting up a business directory site that will be used in a number of cities, though i am initially launching with only one city. My question is, what is the best URL structure to use for the site and should i start using this URL structure from day one? At the moment i am using www.mysite.com.au as my primary website where it contains all listings for the the one initial launch city. Though to plan for the future i was considering this URL structure: www.mysite.com.au/cityname so for example, if i launch in the city Sydney initially then all website traffic that goes to www.mysite.com.au would simply be redirected (302 temp redirect?) to www.mysite.com.au/sydney. When i expand to other cities www.mysite.com.au would simply be a "select your city" screen that then redirects to the city of choice (similar to www.groupon.com page). How would doing a 302 redirect from www.mysite.com.au to www.mysite.com.au/city impact on SEO for the initial launch? Or should i just place this on the root domain since no other cities exist at the moment?
Web Design | | adamkirk0 -
Javascript changing URL - Thoughts?
So, our developer just created a player at the bottom of this site I work for. It's not really important what it is. The thing is, when you go to our home page now, the javascript changes the url from www.site.com to www.site.com/home It's not actually redirected or anything (no 301, it's just the javascript doing this), but I'm worried that if someone links back to our site they're going to surely pull that URL to point back to, which is wrong. Also, when you go to a category, the URL changes from www.site.com/category to www.site.com/home#category. Again, it's not a redirect but I'm still worried people will link back to this since it's on the entire site now... I'm suggesting that we turn off this new feature until we find a workaround. I just wanted to confirm with you guys that this is best. Thanks
Web Design | | poolguy0