Exclude sorting options using nofollow to reduce duplicate content
-
I'm getting reports of duplicate content for pages that have different sorting options applied, e.g:
/trips/dest/africa-and-middle-east/
/trips/dest/africa-and-middle-east/?sort=title&direction=asc&page=1
/trips/dest/africa-and-middle-east/?sort=title&direction=des&page=1I have the added complication of having pagination combined with these sorting options. I also don't have the option of a view all page.
I'm considering adding rel="nofollow" to the sorting controls so they are just taken out of the equation, then using rel="next" and rel="prev" to handle the pagination as per Google recommendations(using the default sorting options).
Has anyone tried this approach, or have an opinion on whether it would work?
-
Ben, it sounds like it should work--but there are preferred methods that I would try before you use nofollow. Ideally, you should use the canonical tag on those pages, and not the nofollow tag. If someone were to link to one of those pages (sorting options), then you wouldn't get any credit passed onto the main page of the category. Using a canonical tag accomplishes what you're trying to do, and has greater benefits in the long run.
Another option would be to get rid of the sorting options entirely, and not allow anyone to sort them (and remove the links to those sorting options, as well. If the sorting options don't exist, then there won't be any duplicate content generated.
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
-
Should I use 'Click here' as an inbound link for my cornerstone content?
Hello Should I use 'Click here' as an inbound link for my cornerstone content? Example: For a full selection of our Facebook Event Attendee packages, please click here. OR Example: Please click the following link for a selection of our Facebook Event Attendee packages. This is my product page to help you better understand the context: LikeChimp
On-Page Optimization | | xdunningx0 -
Duplicate content - "Same" profile-information
Hi, I own a casting website with lots of profiles. Some of these profiles only typed in their firstname, email and age, when they registered on the site, and they haven't added more information ever since. From Crawl Diagnostics, I can see that there is "lots" of these profiles, which looks exactly the same (only showing age and firstname), allthought they are not the same. I could add which day the profile were created on the site, to maybe avoid these "duplications". The email will always be hidden. Or, how big an issue is this? Crawl Diagnostics tells me, that there is around 200 of these, and they are "marked" as High Priority. Any ideas on what to do? /Kasper
On-Page Optimization | | KasperGJ0 -
What is the best way to resolve duplicate content issue
Hi I have a client whose site content has been scraped and used in numerous other sites. This is detrimental to ranking. One term we wish to rank for is nowhere. My question is this: what's the quickest way to resolve a duplicate content issue when other sites have stolen your content? I understand that maybe I should firstly contact these site owners and 'appeal to their better nature'. This will take time and they may not even comply. I've also considered rewriting our content. Again this takes time. Has anybody experienced this issue before? If so how did you come to a solution? Thanks in advance.
On-Page Optimization | | sicseo0 -
Mobile website content
What is the point of optimizing (on-page SEO) a parallel mobile website if the mobile search results are taken from the general (desktop) index?
On-Page Optimization | | echo10 -
Meta descriptions better empty or with duplicate content?
I am working with a yahoo store. Somehow all of the meta description fields were filled in with random content from throughout the store. For example, a black cabinet knob product page might have in its description field the specifications for a drawer slide. I don't know how this happened. We have had a programmer auto populate certain fields to get them ready for product feeds, etc. It's possible they screwed something up during that, this was a long time ago. My question. Regardless of how it happened. Is it better for me to have them wipe these fields entirely clean? Or, is it better for me to have them populate the fields with a duplicate of our text from the body. The site has about 6,500 pages so I have and will make custom descriptions for the more important pages after this process, but the workload to do them all is too much. So, nothing or duplicate content for the pages that likely won't receive personal attention?
On-Page Optimization | | dellcos1 -
Duplicate Content- Best Practise Usage of the canonical url
Canonical urls stop self competition - from duplicate content. So instead of a 2 pages with a rank of 5 out of 10, it is one page with a rank of 7 out of 10.
On-Page Optimization | | WMA
However what disadvantages come from using canonical urls. For example am I excluding some products like green widet, blue widget. I have a customer with 2 e-commerce websites(selling different manufacturers of a type jewellery). Both websites have massive duplicate content issues.
It is a hosted CMS system with very little SEO functionality, no plugins etc. The crawling report- comes back with 1000 of pages that are duplicates. It seems that almost every page on the website has a duplicate partner or more. The problem starts in that they have 2 categorys for each product type, instead of one category for each product type.
A wholesale category and a small pack category. So I have considered using a canonical url or de-optimizing the small pack category as I believe it receives less traffic than the whole category. On the original website I tried de- optimizing one of the pages that gets less traffic. I did this by changing the order of the meta title(keyword at the back, not front- by using small to start of with). I also removed content from the page. This helped a bit. Or I was thinking about just using a canonical url on the page that gets less traffic.
However what are the implications of this? What happens if some one searches for "small packs" of the product- will this no longer be indexed as a page. The next problem I have is the other 1000s of pages that are showing as duplicates. These are all the different products within the categories. The CMS does not have a front office that allows for canonical urls to be inserted. Instead it would have to be done going into the html of the pages. This would take ages. Another issue is that these product pages are not actually duplicate, but I think it is because they have such little content- that the rodger(seo moz crawler, and probably googles one too) cant tell the difference.
Also even if I did use the canonical url - what happened if people searched for the product by attributes(the variations of each product type)- like blue widget, black widget, brown widget. Would these all be excluded from Googles index.
On the one hand I want to get rid of the duplicate content, but I also want to have these pages included in the search. Perhaps I am taking too idealistic approach- trying to optimize a website for too many keywords. Should I just focus on the category keywords, and forget about product variations. Perhaps I look into Google Analytics, to determine the top landing pages, and which ones should be applied with a canonical. Also this website(hosted CMS) seems to have more duplicate content issues than I have seen with other e-commerce sites that I have applied SEO MOZ to On final related question. The first website has 2 landing pages- I think this is a techical issue. For example www.test.com and www.test.com/index. I realise I should use a canonical url on the page that gets less traffic. How do I determine this? (or should I just use the SEO MOZ Page rank tool?)0 -
Sliders and Content Above the Fold
I was just inspecting a wire frame that is going out to a client and realized that the slider may interfere with the "content above the fold." Can't believe this had not struck me on others. If the Header has basic business info, etc. in it and you place a slider to display images in the area just beneath the Header or slightly down from it, does that decrease the amount of content seen a being above the fold? Or, is content above the fold established by virtue of H1,2, 3, etc.?
On-Page Optimization | | RobertFisher0 -
Using Transcriptions
Hi everyone, I've spent a long time trying to figure this one out, so I'm looking forward to your insights. I've recently started having our videos transcribed and keyworded. The videos are hosted on youtube and already embedded on our website. Each embedded video is accompanied by an existing keyword-rich article that covers pretty much the same content of the video, but in a little more detail. I'm now going back and having these videos transcribed. The reason I started doing this was to essentially lengthen the article and get more keywords on the page. Question A. My concern is that the transcription covers the same content as the article, so doesn't add that much for the reader. That's why when I post the transcription (below the embedded video), I use a little javascript link for people to click if they want to read it. Then it becomes visible. Otherwise it's not visible. Note that I am NOT trying to hide it from google by doing this - and it will still show up for people who don't have javascript on - so I'm not trying to cheat google at all and I think I'm doing it based on how they want it done. You can see an example here: http://www.healthyeatingstartshere.com/nutrition/healthy-diet-plan-mistakes So my first question is: do you think the javascript method is a good way of doing it? Question B. Does anyone have any insight on whether it would be better to put the transcription:
On-Page Optimization | | philraymond
1. On the same page as the embedded video/article (which I am doing now), or
2. On a different page, linked to from the above page, or
3. On various other websites (wordpress, blogspot, web2.0 sites) that link back to the video/article on our site. I know it's usually best practice to put it on the same page as the video, but I'm wondering from an <acronym title="Search Engine Optimization">SEO</acronym> point of view if I'm wasting a 500 word transcription by posting it on the same page as a 500 article that covers the same topic and uses the same keywords, and I wonder if it would be better to use the transcription elsewhere. Do you have any thoughts on which of the above methods would be best? Thanks so much for reading and any advice you may have.0