Pagination, Canonical Tag & Best Practices
-
I have an eCommerce site that dynamically creates category pages, which produce canonical tags in the header. For multiple page categories, it adds the page number to the URL. For example, this category has 3 pages....
Because most categories have too many products, I can't follow Googles suggestion of creating a "view all" page. Furthermore since all these pages use the same template, I'm unable to insert a NOINDEX tag in all the pages after the first page. Also, in this scenario, I'm unable to insert the discreet code for Next/Previous, which is also suggested by Google.
My only option for maintaining these dynamically generated category pages would be to hardcode the first conical tag in the template, which would then be produced on all subsequent paginated pages.
Consequently, every paginated page in this category would have the same canonical tag pointing to the first page. Would this incur the wrath of Google and would I'd be better off leaving the pagination they way it is?
-
PDG-Commerce
-
Yes it doesn't surprise me you'd be having problems on those higher page categories. Testing is always the way to go when in doubt. Out of curiosity, what e-commerce system are you using?
-
Thanks for your insight Marty. What I've discovered, that categores with the most pages, are the ones most adversely affected. For instance, if a category has 20 pages, it ranks horribly, whereas a category with only 1 to 3 pages does good. Consequently, I think I'm running into a duplication threshold penalty on the larger categories. Figure since I have nothing to lose, I may try hard coding on a couple of the 20+ page categories and sees what happens.
-
Greetings alrockn!
You do have quite the dilemma here. I actually think you will have problems if you leave it all as-is; you're between a rock and a hard place!
Most e-commerce programs do a terrible job on the technical SEO front out of the box and require some degree of customization to get it all straightened out. The pagination of category pages is a very common problem. I will take your word for it that you cannot modify your template(s) but any reasonable suggestion I think is going to require some degree of template modification.
The problem you're most likely going to run into is a thin content issue on your category pages. I'm assuming all of those paginated page versions would also have the same category description (if any) and if there is nothing unique about your main page Google is likely to ignore it.
To address your question on hard coding the first page as the canonical, I think that is really the only option you have. You'll want to make sure that category page does have some level of unique content on it (ie: category description text) so it is unique enough to attract Google's attention.
Could you not do some conditional coding to check the page version and modify the canonical accordingly?
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
-
Rel canonical tag from shopify page to wordpress site page
We have pages on our shopify site example - https://shop.example.com/collections/cast-aluminum-plaques/products/cast-aluminum-address-plaque That we want to put a rel canonical tag on to direct to our wordpress site page - https://www.example.com/aluminum-plaques/ We have links form the wordpress page to the shop page, and over time ahve found that google has ranked the shop pages over the wp pages, which we do not want. So we want to put rel canonical tags on the shop pages to say the wp page is the authority. I hope that makes sense, and I would appreciate your feeback and best solution. Thanks! Is that possible?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | shabbirmoosa0 -
Question on AMP
I'd like to utilize AMP for faster loading for one of my clients. However, it is essential that this client have chat. My developer is having trouble incorporating chat with AMP, and he claims that it isn't possible to integrate the two. Can anyone advise me as to whether this is accurate? If it is true that AMP and chat aren't compatible, are there any solutions to this issue? I'd appreciate any leads on this. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Joseph-Green-SEO0 -
Rel=canonical Question
Alright, so let's say we've got an event coming up. The URL is website.com/event. On that page, you can access very small pages with small amounts of information, like website.com/event/register, website.com/event/hotel-info, and website.com/event/schedule. These originally came up as having missing meta descriptions, and I was thinking a rel=canonical might be the best approach, but I'm not sure. What do you think? Is there a better approach? Should I have just added a meta description and moved on?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MWillner0 -
What are the best practices for microdata?
Not too long ago, Dublin Core was all the rage. Then Open Graph data exploded, and Schema seems to be highly regarded. In a best-case scenario, on a site that's already got the basics like good content, clean URLs, rich and useful page titles and meta descriptions, well-named and alt-tagged images and document outlines, what are today's best practices for microdata? Should Open Graph information be added? Should the old Dublin Core be resurrected? I'm trying to find a way to keep markup light and minimal, but include enough microdata for crawlers to get a better sense of the content and its relationships to other subdomains and sites.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | WebElaine0 -
Pros & Cons of Switching Your Main Domain to Mask Links & Combat EMDs
Hello Mozzers, I'd love to receive some advice for a client of mine and insights you may have regarding pros and cons on changing your main domain to mask links. Within a competitive niche there are about 4 different sites that routinely rank 1-4. Our site crushes all three on just about all metrics except we have a high volume of nofollow links and our site remains at #4. Our site is much older so we have significantly more links than these smaller sites, including pre-penguin penalty spammy links (like blog comments that make up 50+ nofollow links from 1 comment per domain). Obviously we are attempting to remove any toxic links and disavow, however the blog comment nofollow links skew our anchor text ratio pretty intensely and we are worried that we aren't going to make a dent in removing this type of links. Just disavowing them hasn't worked alone, so if we are unable to remove the bulk of these poor quality links (nofollow, off-topic anchor text, etc..) we are considering 301 redirecting the current domain to a new one. We've seen success with this in a couple of scenarios, but wanted to see other insights as to if masking links with a 301 could send fresh signals and positively effect rankings. Also wanted to mention, 2 of the 3 competitors that outrank us have EMD's for the primary keywords. Appreciate your time, insights, and advice on this matter.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Leadhub0 -
Webmaster Tools Content Keywords & Meta Tagging
In Webmaster tools , Content keywords give an indication of what Google thinks a site is about. This site is a health site ( online shopping - health supplements ) - but one of the terms it thinks the site is about is "Dollar" . I'm guessing this is because on every page there is Currency Selection from multiple currencies. How do I tell Google that this part of the page is nothing to do with what my site is about? Thanks for your reply in advance!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | s_EOgi_Bear0 -
Is it ok to add rel=CANONICAL into the desktop version on top of the rel="alternate" Tag (Mobile vs Desktop version)
Hi mozzers, We launched a mobile site a couples months ago following the parallel mobile structure with a URL:m.example.com The week later my moz crawl detected thousands of dups which I resolved by implementing canonical tags on the mobile version and rel=alternate onto the desktop version. The problem here is that I still also got Dups from that got generated by the CMS. ?device=mobile ?device=desktop One of the options to resolve those is to add canonicals on the desktop versions as well on top of the rel=alternate tag we just implemented. So my question here: is it dangerous to add rel=canonical and rel=alternate tags on the desktop version of the site or not? will it disrupt the rel=canonical on mobile? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Ideas-Money-Art0 -
Backlinking from a Canonical Page to the Non-Canonical Doman - Wrong Signals?
Hi Mozzers, Let's say you have www.mysite.com/page, which is a duplicate of www.yoursite.com/page. www.yousite.com/page has a rel canonical link identifying www.mysite.com/page as the original source. www.mysite.com/page has a followed backlink going towards www.yousite.com/home-page. mysite.com has a DA of 44
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Travis-W
yoursite.com has a DA of 33 Google has chosen to index www.yoursite.com/page instead of www.mysite.com/page. Is the followed backlink responsible for the wrong page being indexed? Thanks!0