Duplicate Page Content

[JAARON]

I've got several pages of similar products that google has listed as duplicate content. I have them all set up with rel="prev" and rel="next tags telling google that they are part of a group but they've still got them listed as duplicates. Is there something else I should do for these pages or is that just a short falling of googles webmaster tools?

One of the pages: http://www.jaaronwoodcountertops.com/wood-countertop-gallery/walnut-countertop-9.html

[Dr-Pete]

Oh, sorry - didn't catch that some were duplicated. Given the scope, I think I'd put the time into creating unique titles and single-paragraph descriptions. There's a fair shot these pages could rank for longer-tail terms, and the content certainly has value to visitors.

[JAARON]

Your right. There are a few pages with unique titles already but there are several that are dups.

[Dr-Pete]

I'm wondering if we're looking at two different things - I was looking at the pages like:

http://www.jaaronwoodcountertops.com/wood-countertop-gallery/walnut-countertop-8.html

http://www.jaaronwoodcountertops.com/wood-countertop-gallery/walnut-countertop-9.html

These already seem to have unique titles.

[JAARON]

Thanks. We try to make them nice. I'm going to work on adding some content to each page but it does get difficult when they're so similar. I may just do a few pages and have them indexed and the others noindex.

[JAARON]

The duplicate content is showing up as dup. titles and description tags. Do you think that if I added titles like "Photographs of J. Aaron Wood Countertops and Butcher Block | Image One" to all the pages and then changed just the image number that would be enough to eliminate the dup. title issues? Would that make any difference if the content is the same?

[JAARON]

It sounds like you're all pretty much saying the same thing as far as the options go. I was so happy when I learned about the rel=prev/next tags.

Do you guys think I should add noindex to all the pages now and as I add content remove the noindex or should I just leave them as they are and start adding the content as I get time? Which is worse for overall site rankings, loosing content or having duplicate content?

Dr. Meyers: The duplicate content is showing up as dup. titles and descriptions. Do you think that if I added titles like "Photographs of J. Aaron Wood Countertops and Butcher Block - Image One" to all the pages and then changed just the image number that would be enough to eliminate the dup. title issues? Would that make any difference if the content is the same?

Thanks guys.

[Dr-Pete]

This isn't a typical application of rel=prev/next, and I'm finding Google's treatment of those tags is inconsistent, but the logic of what you're doing makes sense, and the tags seem to be properly implemented. Google is showing all of the pages indexed, but rel=prev/next doesn't generally de-index paginated content (like a canonical tag can).

Where is GWT showing them as duplicates (i.e. title, META description, etc.)?

Long-term, there are two viable solutions:

(1) Only index the main gallery (NOINDEX the rest). This will focus your ranking power, but you'll lose long-tail content.

(2) Put in the time to write at least a paragraph for each gallery page. It'll take some time, but it's doable.

Given the scope (you're talking dozens of pages, not 1000s), I'd lean toward (2). These pages are somewhat unique and do potentially have value, but you need to translate more of that uniqueness into copy Google can index.

[giordanoshop]

in the duplicate page use meta tag no index follow.

[jim_cetin]

Hi

It seems that you have created pages just for the pictures you wanted to display and google possibly does not understand the content, as there isn't content. in a nutshell page 9 and 10 has almost the same content just with a different picture.

For your own sake a Title on each page will help you get better results and while you have already a page for each picture why not adding some details to it. google will like that more:-)

You might have a look into a proper CMS system in the future as pages will change!

I like your products:-)

Regards,

Jim Cetin