Pagination and SEO: How do I fix it during search parameters?
-
Today, I have watched very interesting video on YouTube about Pagination and SEO.
I have implemented pagination with rel="next" and rel="prev" on my paginated page. You can get more idea by visit following pages.
www.vistastores.com/patio-umbrellas
www.vistastores.com/patio-umbrellas?p=2
www.vistastores.com/patio-umbrellas?p=3
I have added NOINDEX FOLLOW attribute to page 2, page 3 and so on. There is simple question from my side. Can I remove NOINDEX FOLLOW attribute from paginated page or not?
I have big confusion & issues when paginated URLs contain search parameters. You can get more idea by visiting following URLs.
http://www.vistastores.com/patio-umbrellas?dir=asc&order=name&p=2
http://www.vistastores.com/patio-umbrellas?dir=asc&order=name&p=3
What is best suggestion for this kind of pages?
-
Sorry for confusions. By search results I thought you might have been specifically talking about putting keywords into a site search and getting the results page. I've noindexed that page.
What you've said makes sense.
Thanks Peter.
-
Yes, it's the latter instance that I was talking about.
Thanks Peter.
-
Unless I'm misunderstanding, I think of "search results" pretty broadly - and category pages would apply. Each category page is a set of links to products (patio umbrellas, in this case), right? If you're talking about something totally different, please elaborate, because I may be missing something.
-
Thanks Peter.
Just to clarify: I'm not talking about search results pages. I'm talking about paginated category pages. I've honestly had a number of cases where sites have linked to those 2nd or 3rd pages. Weird, I know.
Anyway, it's only a few links so I'm not too concerned about it.
Cheers.
-
Sorry, my answer makes it sounds like link-juice would be completely cut-off, which isn't correct. If you have a NOINDEX,FOLLOW'ed path, some (most?) link-juice will travel down it. So, if there are links to Page 1 of search, and Pages 2-10 are NOINDEX,FOLLOW, then there are product pages, the product pages will get link juice.
I'm not 100% sure, though, what happens with links directly to NOINDEX,FOLLOW pages - I've heard some people suggest that it can disrupt link-juice flow. I suspect that may only be partial, but I've never seen much in the way of data.
-
Hi Alan, that wasn't my understanding of how it worked. I thought the "follow" part in this only permitted the bots to literally follow those links to other pages, and no link juice passes through. Maybe I misunderstood that?
-
As Dr pete stated that this is un-likely, but for arguments sake if you make the pages noindex,follow then the link juice would not be wasted.
-
Practically, I think people worry a bit too much about that, as it's very rare to get links to page 2+ of search results (people link to either the top-level pages or the deep, product pages). Theoretically, though, you're absolutely right.
-
Thanks Peter. One other advantage I can think that the rel=prev/next has: if someone is looking at products on a site and they are on the 2nd or 3rd page, they might decide to link to the page. This will pass the link juice to that page (or collection of pages) whereas if the page was noindexed, it would be a wasted link.
Cheers,
-
I haven't had a lot of problems with NOINDEX, FOLLOW leaking link-juice (in that pages below it ranked), but it's nearly impossible to ever test it both ways and measure which is better. The theoretically advantages of rel=prev/next are:
(1) Less link-juice disruption, as you said.
(2) That Google can choose to rank a different page in the series (like page 3 of results) if that page is more applicable.
I think, honestly, that rel=prev/next was really designed more for paginated articles, which have similar META data but unique content. Paginated search is a bit messier.
-
Thanks Peter. I hadn't seen Google's official advise on this. Having thought about it again, it does make more sense as I think it would be quite messy trying to get the rel next prev tags pointing to the non parameter urls. It's good to know that the canonical tag works in conjunction with these tags to point to the correct url.
I know it's easier to just no index those pages, but doesn't that mean you leak link juice that goes to those pages? Telling Google that they are a part of a series and having all that link juice combined into a single page should mean a more powerful page?
Thanks Peter.
-
Google's official advice is that rel=prev/next should include the additional parameters, but then you should rel-canonical to the non-parameterized URL for that individual page. Setting it up properly, unfortunately, is difficult and I feel that it's too confusing to be adopted by most sites.
You can META NOINDEX pages 2+ and sorts and see how it works, or you can also block parameters in Google Webmaster Tools (or tell them those parameters are for pagination). Unfortunately, the "right" answer often depends on the size of the site and the scope of the problem. In some cases, I've found that the by-the-book approach works fine, and in others we had to throw out Google's book and improvise. I wish I could tell you that there's a one-sized-fits-all answer, but there doesn't seem to be, in my experience.
-
When you say that you're not getting benefits, what do you mean, exactly? If you're not suffering from any particular indexation problems or something like Panda, you probably won't see much difference.
-
Thanks for your valuable reply. I'm waiting for your next blog post on this subject. Because, I'm not getting enough benefits after implement on my website. I have added my comment on Google's official blog and send my issue to Maile Ohye. Let's see what happen on this issue?
-
I have to admit I have mixed feelings about Google's recent advice, because it's very complex (and they've oversimplified it), and it doesn't work well for all scenarios. If you're using this as prevention and don't have any major problems (like a Panda penalty), then I think rel=prev/next is a good bet here.
As Alan said, you should be able to remove the Meta Robots (NOINDEX), and that's probably sending a mixed signal to the crawlers.
For the sorts and other additional parameters, Google recommends you use rel-canonical to the root page. So, a URL like:
http://www.vistastores.com/patio-umbrellas?dir=asc&order=name&p=2
...would have the following tags on it...
In other words, canonicalize to page 2 (with no additional parameters) but then rel=prev/next should reflect the sorts and other parameters of the current URL.
This is the main problem I have with the approach - it's extremely complicated.
Meta Robots (NOINDEX) is very effective for keeping the search pages out of the index and avoiding duplication problems, and it's much easier to implement. The advantage of rel=prev/next is that your other pages (2, 3, etc.) could potentially rank if they're a better fit. For internal search, like product search, I find that's almost never a big issue. It's much more important for article pagination (Google doesn't make this distinction very well in any of their recent statements).
Also, as Alan said, it's approved to just canonical to a "View All" version, if you have one and it's linked/available for users. That can create a huge page, though, so you have to take usability and load times into account.
Sorry, it's very complex - I need to do a write-up on this, as I'm frustrated with Google on the subject. Honestly, I still tell some folks to use NOINDEX, because it's just simpler and it's very effective and preventing duplication problems. Rel=prev/next is more subtle, but it does seem to work, if you can implement it properly.
-
I have to say i dont know.
i think in that case you should use the view all senario
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com.au/2011/09/pagination-with-relnext-and-relprev.html -
Good to know! And what case will happen If paginated pages will contain additional parameters which are explained by me in example?
-
no, it works like a canonical tag, all 3 pages will be seen as one big page, under the url and title of page 1
-
Here, I have big confusion. Page 2, Page 3 and so on have similar page title and meta description which is available on Page 1.
Will Google show me error about duplicate page title and meta description after remove NOINDEX FOLLOW?
-
Yes remove the noindex follow.
all the content on all the pagneated pages will be awarded to one page, usellly page 1. but if you have a no index, then only the content on page one will be used to rank you.
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
-
Duplicate Content Issues with Pagination
Hi Moz Community, We're an eCommerce site so we have a lot of pagination issues but we were able to fix them using the rel=next and rel=prev tags. However, our pages have an option to view 60 items or 180 items at a time. This is now causing duplicate content problems when for example page 2 of the 180 item view is the same as page 4 of the 60 item view. (URL examples below) Wondering if we should just add a canonical tag going to the the main view all page to every page in the paginated series to get ride of this issue. https://www.example.com/gifts/for-the-couple?view=all&n=180&p=2 https://www.example.com/gifts/for-the-couple?view=all&n=60&p=4 Thoughts, ideas or suggestions are welcome. Thanks
Technical SEO | | znotes0 -
Does an Apostrophe affect searches?
Does Google differentiate between keyphrase structures such as Mens Sunglasses & Men**'**s Sunglasses? I.e. does the inclusion/exclusion of an apostrophe make any difference when optimising your main keyword/phrase for a page? Keyword explorer appears to give different results..... I.e. no data for Men's Sunglasses, but data appears for Mens sunglasses. So if I optimise my page to include the apostrophe, will it screw the potential success for that page? Thanks 🙂 Bob
Technical SEO | | SushiUK1 -
JavaScript page loader - SEO impact
Hello all,
Technical SEO | | Lvet
I am working on a site that has a bizarre page load system. All pages get loaded trough the same Javascript snippet, for example: Changing the values in the form changes the page that is loaded. The most incredible thing is that, against my expectations, pages do get indexed by Google.
My question is: "Does loading pages dynamically using JavaScript affect the overall SEO performance?" Why are pages getting indexed? Thank you for shedding light on this.
Cheers
Luca0 -
Should all pagination pages be included in sitemaps
How important is it for a sitemap to include all individual urls for the paginated content. Assuming the rel next and prev tags are set up would it be ok to just have the page 1 in the sitemap ?
Technical SEO | | Saijo.George0 -
Duplication, pagination and the canonical
Hi all, and thank you in advance for your assistance. We have an issue of paginated pages being seen as duplicates by pro.moz crawlers. The paginated pages do have duplicated by content, but are not duplicates of each other. Rather they pull through a summary of the product descriptions from other landing pages on the site. I was planing to use rel=canonical to deal with them, however I am concerned as the paginated pages are not identical to each other, but do feature their own set of duplicate content! We have a similar issue with pages that are not paginated but feature tabs that alter the URL parameters like so: ?st=BlueWidgets ?st=RedSocks ?st=Offers These are being seen as duplicates of the main URL, and again all feature duplicate content pulled from elsewhere in the site, but are not duplicates of each other. Would a canonical tag be suitable here? Many Thanks
Technical SEO | | .egg0 -
SEO Ultimate Plug in problems for SEO MOZ
Hi Newbee here! SEO ultimate seems to work ok for other url I have on this problem. http://www.pureescapism.co.uk and performing the on page grader for hair salon broadstairsI have canonicalizer on for the plug in and I have made it the rel=canonical targetIt tells me I haven't.Further down I don't get a tick also and am told : Remove all but a single canonical URL tag.Not aware I have more than one.I am also told : No More Than One Meta Description Element ( Cant see how I can do that either as I havent changed any code)Help please
Technical SEO | | Agentmorris0 -
SEO for Interspire Relic
Hi All, Does anyone know of optimization best practices for the now largely defunct Interspire Web Publisher? Specifically, I'm looking for a canonical plugin or workaround to try and get rid of a few duplicate content issues (most importantly root vs. index.php). I'd like to just redo the site with a cms that has better support...unfortunately client budget constraints are a little tight at the moment. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | G2W0 -
Pageflip SEO friendly?
Client of mine utilizes pageflip for their product brochures and would love to have this content be crawl-able by search engines. Is there a way to make them SEO friendly so I may utilize this content?
Technical SEO | | richn330