Solving pagination issues for e-commerce
-
I would like to ask about a technical SEO issue that may cause duplicate content/crawling issues.
For pagination, how the rel=canonical, rel="prev" rel="next" and noindex tag should be implemented.
Should all three be within the same page source?
Say for example, for one particular category we may have 10 pages of products (product catalogues). So we should noindex page 2 onwards, rel canonical it back to the first page and also rel="prev" and rel="next" each page so Google can understand they contain multiple pages.
If we index these multiple pages it will cause duplicate content issues. But I'm not sure whether all 3 tags need adding.
It's also my understanding that the search results should be noindexed as it does not provide much value as an entry point in search engines.
-
I have found this useful in the past: https://www.ayima.com/guides/conquering-pagination-guide.html
-
Thanks for your advice, I will take a look at the Google webmaster video you've referenced. As we try to rank for specific search terms in our main categories, we put content in there so it can be indexed and it's great for user experience. That's why I was thinking to also implement the rel=canonical tag so the content wasn't duplicated over a series of 10 pages, but if we noindex and use the rel=prev and next tags, that should solve the issue. It's the same for filterable results really, as the content on the page can be duplicated when users choose to filter by specific options, such as size or colour.
-
Hi Joshua,
You will need all 3 of those tags to properly markup your pagination, just not all at the same time.
Page=1 should have a canonical to the base URL (no page=X), and a rel="next" for page 2. Page 2 will have prev tag for the base level URL, and next for page 3. And so on.
Google says they don't index paginated URLs anymore, but I prefer to play it safe and implement these tags anyway.
Regarding this comment: "It's also my understanding that the search results should be noindexed as it does not provide much value as an entry point in search engines." There is some validity to this, but honestly, it's your preference. I lean on the side of preventing indexing of search results. I don't see much value in those pages being indexed, and if you're doing SEO properly, you're already providing solid entry points. Those pages will also use up a lot of your crawl budget, so that's something to consider too. Chances are, there are better sections of your site that you'd prefer bots spend their time on.
-
You shouldn't use rel canonical for pagination - it's main use is to avoid duplicate content issues. It's possible to combine it with rel next/prev but in very specific cases - example can be found here: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/1663744?hl=en :
rel="next" and rel="prev" are orthogonal concepts to rel="canonical". You can include both declarations. For example, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=2&sessionid=123 may contain:
=> as you can see the canonical is used to strip the sessionid which could cause duplicate content issues - not to solve the pagination issue
With rel next/previous you indicate to google that the sequence of pages should be considered as one page - which makes sense if you have like 4/5 pages max. If you have a huge number of pages in a pagination this doesn't really make sense. In that case you could just decide to do nothing - or only have the first page indexed - and the other pages have a noindex/follow tag.
Hope this clarifies.
Dirk
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
-
Possible issues with 301 redirecting to a new domain name
Ive got a current domain and after a bit of a rebrand Im considering 301 rediecting the current site to a newly purchased domain. Id redirect each age to idential pages. Am I likely to see any issues. I know this is the recomended way from Google but just wondering how smoothly it works and whether Im likely to see any ranking drops or other problems?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | paulfoz16090 -
Wondering if creating 256 new pages would cause duplicate content issues
I just completed a long post that reviews 16 landing page tools. I want to add 256 new pages that compare each tool against each other. For example: Leadpages vs. Instapage Leadpages vs. Unbounce Instapage vs. Unbounce, etc Each page will have one product's information on the left and the other on the right. So each page will be a unique combination BUT the same product information will be found on several other pages (its other comparisons vs the other 15 tools). This is because the Leadpages comparison information (a table) will be the same no matter which tool it is being compared against. If my math is correct, this will create 256 new pages - one for each combination of the 16 tools against each other! My site now is new and only has 6 posts/pages if that matters. Want to make sure I don't create a problem early on...Any thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | martechwiz0 -
Panda, rankings and other non-sense issues
Hello everyone I have a problem here. My website has been hit by Panda several times in the past, the first time back in 2011 (first Panda ever) and then another couple of times since then, and, lastly, the last June 2016 (either Panda or Phantom, not clear yet). In other words, it looks like my website is very prone to "quality" updates by big G: http://www.virtualsheetmusic.com/ Still trying to understand how to get rid of Panda related issues once for all after so many years of tweaking and cleaning my website of possible duplicate or thin content (301 redirects, noindexed pages, canonicals, etc), and I have tried everything, believe me. You name it. We recovered several times though, but once in a while, we are still hit by that damn animal. It really looks like we are in the so called "grey" area of Panda, where we are "randomly" hit by it once in a while. Interestingly enough, some of our competitors live joyful lives, at the top of the rankings, without caring at all about Panda and such, and I can't really make a sense of it. Take for example this competitors of ours: http://8notes.com They have a much smaller catalog than ours, worse quality of offered music, thousands of duplicate pages, ads everywhere, and yet... they are able to rank 1st on the 1st page of Google for most of our keywords. And for most, I mean, 99.99% of them. Take for example "violin sheet music", "piano sheet music", "classical sheet music", "free sheet music", etc... they are always first. As I said, they have a much smaller website than ours, with a much smaller offering than ours, their content quality is questionable (not cured by professional musicians, and highly sloppy done content as well as design), and yet they have over 480,000 pages indexed on Google, mostly duplicate pages. They don't care about canonicals to avoid duplicate content, 301s, noindex, robot tags, etc, nor to add text or user reviews to avoid "thin content" penalties... they really don't care about anything of that, and yet, they rank 1st. So... to all the experts out there, my question is: Why's that? What's the sense or the logic beyond that? And please, don't tell me they have a stronger domain authority, linking root domains, etc. because according to the duplicate and thin issues I see on that site, nothing can justify their positions in my opinion and, mostly, I can't find a reason why we instead are so much penalized by Panda and such kind of "quality" updates when they are released, whereas websites like that one (8notes.com) rank 1st making fun of all the mighty Panda all year around. Thoughts???!!!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fablau0 -
Pagination, Javascript & SEO
Hi I need some help identifying whether we need to rethink the way we paginated product pages, On this page http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches when clicking page 1,2, etc - we have javascript to sort the results, the URL displayed and the URL linked to are different. e.g. The URL for these paginated pages is for example: page2 http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches#productBeginIndex:30&orderBy:5&pageView:list& Then the arrows either side of pagination, link to the paginated landing page e.g. http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches?page=3 - this is where the rel/prev details are - done for Google However - when clicking on this arrow, the URL loaded is different again - http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches#productBeginIndex:60&orderBy:5&pageView:list& & doesn't take you http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches?page=3 I did not set this up, but I am concerned that the URL http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches?page=3 never actually loads, but it's linked to Google can crawl it. Is this a problem? I am looking to implement a view all option. Thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
Breadcrumbs for E Commerce Site
Hi, Does anyone have experience with Breadcrumb nodes for e-commerce? http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overstock.com%2FOffice-Supplies%2FOffice-Star-Professional-Air-Grid-Deluxe-Task-Chair%2F2605023%2Fproduct.html What happens if your product appears in more than one category? Should you let google spider the various breadcrumb routes to the category?? Which one would take preference in results? Right now, for ease of management, we have not enabled category URL paths to the product - so the product appears right after the domain, for example, www.mydomain.com/en/myproduct.html - If we do enable category URL paths, Any comments or opinions? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bjs20100 -
Crawl Issue Found: No rel="canonical" Tags
Given that google have stated that duplicate content is not penalised is this really something that will give sufficient benefits for the time involved?Also, reading some of the articles on moz.com they seem very ambivalent about its use – for example http://moz.com/blog/rel-confused-answers-to-your-rel-canonical-questionsWill any page with a canonical link normally NOT be indexed by google?Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fdmgroup0 -
Mobile Sitemap Issue
Hi there, I am having some difficulty with an error on Webmaster Tools. I'm concerned with a possible duplicate content penalty following the launch of my mobile site. I have attempted to update my sitemap to inform Google that a different mobile page exists in addition to the desktop page. I have followed Google's guidelines as outlined here:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DBC01
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=34648 I'm having problems with my sitemap.xml file. Webmaster tools is reporting that it is not able to read the file and when I validate it I am getting an error stating that the 'Namespace prefix xhtml on link is not defined'. All I am trying to do is to create a sitemap that uses the rel="alternate" to inform Google that their is a mobile version of that specific page in addition to the desktop version. An instance of the code I am using is below: xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="gss.xsl"?> <urlset< span="">xmlns="http://www.sitemaps.org/schemas/sitemap/0.9"xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.google.com/schemas/sitemap/0.84 http://www.sitemaps.org/schemas/sitemap/0.9/sitemap.xsd"> http://www.mydomain/info/detail/ <xhtml:link< span="">rel="alternate" media="only screen and (max-width: 640px)" href="http://m.mydomain.com/info/detail.html"/> <lastmod></lastmod>2013-02-01T16:03:48+00:00<changefreq></changefreq>daily0.50</xhtml:link<></urlset<> Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks0 -
Issues with Load Balancers?
Has anyone ran into SEO issues with sites utilizing load balancing systems? We're running into some other technical complications (for using 3rd party tracking services), but I'm concerned now that the setup could have a not-so-good impact from an SEO standpoint.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BMGSEO0