Should I implement pagination(rel=next, rel=prev) if I have duplicate meta tags?
-
Hi,
I just want to ask if it is necessary to implement pagination(rel=next, rel=prev) to my category pages because Google webmaster tools is telling me that these pages are having similar meta title and meta description. Ex.
page1: http://www.site.com/iphone-resellers/1
meta title:Search for iphone resellers in US
page2:http://www.site.com/iphone-resellers/2
meta title:Search for iphone resellers in US
page3:http://www.site.com/iphone-resellers/3
meta title:Search for iphone resellers in US
Thanks in advance.
-
I agree with you one hundred percent Dr Pete. Thanks for your detailed insight. Always helps
-
This is a constantly changing area of SEO the past couple of years, but my general feeling is that the rel=next/prev tags are working pretty well. They're low risk, and it can help you reduce duplication in Google's eyes without de-indexing the pages (page 3 could still rank, for example).
The biggest downside of the tags is that they're a bit tricky to implement, especially if you have search filters and sorts (in which case the proper tags get pretty complicated fast). Another option (as Nakul mentioned) is to NOINDEX pages 2+, which is simpler but would knock those extra pages out of ranking contention. That's a route I'd go only if you seemed to be getting hit hard for thin content.
The only area where I'll disagree slightly with Nakul is that handling pagination for SEO isn't always one of those areas where usability considerations help much. From a core architecture and internal search perspective, give your users a good experience, absolutely. From the standpoint of how to index those search pages, though, it's almost all about how Google views near-duplicate content. This is an area of SEO that is getting more technical and really comes down to the quirks of how Google indexes content.
-
Hi Nakul,
I don't have a view-all page. Both suggestions are great but they have disadvantages, based on what I read in Google, and it would really depend on what's the purpose. And a big YES, that's what I am thinking since user experience is more important.
Thanks a lot!
-
I see you have 2 responses from SWD and SanketPatel. They are both different strategies and you need to decide what you want to do as a Business. Here's why:
If you adopt SWD's solution, you could technically get rid of the problem, by telling Google that do not index page 2, page 3 and so on and just index your page 1. My question would be, do you have a View All page ? Do you want search engines to index and rank each one of your paginated pages ? Do they have unique collection of products and does it help the user if they land directly on Page 2 or would you rather then have land on Page 1 always ?
SanketPatel's solution definitely gets rid of the problem from a GWT perspective, however, the bigger question is, what you are trying to achieve and what your users would prefer.
Instead of looking it it from what's right in GWT or SEO, find what's right for your user first and then implement that in an SEO Friendly way.
I hope that helps and makes sense.
-
Its not necessary but its advisable if you implement it, to get out of duplication errors. If you don't want to do that then you can change title on page 2 like "Search for iphone resellers in US - Page 2". Same as you can implement for 3rd, 4th... page
-
I think it would be better for you if implement pagination and canonical url of ../1, ../2, ../3 as http://www.site.com/iphone-resellers. Google always prefer a good herarchy in every website.
I hope it can help 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
-
Canonical Tags - Do they only apply to internal duplicate content?
Hi Moz, I've had a complaint from a company who we use a feed from to populate a restaurants product list.They are upset that on our products pages we have canonical tags linking back to ourselves. These are in place as we have international versions of the site. They believe because they are the original source of content we need to canonical back to them. Can I please confirm that canonical tags are purely an internal duplicate content strategy. Canonical isn't telling google that from all the content on the web that this is the original source. It's just saying that from the content on our domains, this is the original one that should be ranked. Is that correct? Furthermore, if we implemented a canonical tag linking to Best Restaurants it would de-index all of our restaurants listings and pages and pass the authority of these pages to their site. Is this correct? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | benj20341 -
Meta descriptions and h1 tags during a 301 redirect
My employer is shifting to a new domain and i am in the midst of doing URL mapping. I realize that many of the meta descriptions and H1 tags are different on the new pages - is this a problem ? Thank you.
Technical SEO | | ptapley0 -
Duplicate Meta Titles and Descriptions Issue in Google Webmaster Tool
Hello All, We have one site named http://www.bargains-online.com.au/ & have some categories along with filter option on left side like filter by price & by brand, ect. We have already set rel canonical tags on all filtered pages, but still those all pages showing duplicate page titles and description warning in HTML Improvements section in Google Webmaster Tool. For Example: http://www.bargains-online.com.au/pressure-cleaners.html We've set rel canonical tag on below pages. http://www.bargains-online.com.au/pressure-cleaners/l/manufacturer:black-eagle.html http://www.bargains-online.com.au/pressure-cleaners/l/price:2,100.html http://www.bargains-online.com.au/pressure-cleaners/l/price:3,100.html Kindly request if anybody has any solutions for the same, please share with us. Thanks, Akshay
Technical SEO | | akshaydesai0 -
Rel = prev next AND canonical?
I have product category pages that correctly have the prev next but the moz crawl is giving me duplicate content errors. I would not think I also need to have canonical - but do I ?
Technical SEO | | JohnBerger0 -
Logos and H1 Tags
Would you ever wrap a Logo in an H1 tag? The logo is an image, but is in an area that would cause it to make the most sense when forming my page into a proper hierarchy format. Thanks in advance for any help!
Technical SEO | | smilingbunny0 -
Canonical Tag Here?
Hello, I have a client who I have taken on (different to my other client in another question), My client has a ecommerce website and in nearly all of his products (around 30-40) he has a little information checklist like.. Made in the UK
Technical SEO | | Prestige-SEO
Prices from 9.99
Top quality
Free delivery on orders over.. This is the duplicate content, what is the best practise for this as the SEOmoz crawler is giving me a multiple of errors.0 -
Are all duplicate pages bad?
I just got my first Crawl Report for my forum and it said I have almost 9,000 duplicate pages. When I looked at a sample of them though I saw that many of them were "reply" links. By this I mean the "reply" button was clicked for a topic yet since the crawler was not a member, it just brought them to the login/register screen. Since all the topics would bring you to the same login page I'm assuming it counted all these "reply" links as duplicates. Should I just ignore these or is there some way to fix it? Thanks in advance.
Technical SEO | | Xee0 -
Implementing Schema within Existing CSS tags
In implementing Schema with a site using CSS and containing existing tags, I want to be sure that we are (#1) using the tags effectively when used within a product detail template and (#2) not actually harming ourselves by telling Google that all products are named or described by the SS tag and not actually the product name or description (which obviously could be disasterous). An example of what we are looking at implementing is the following: Old: <ss:value source="$product.name"></ss:value> New: <ss:value source="$product.name"></ss:value> Old: <ss:value source="$product.description">New: <ss:value source="$product.description"></ss:value> Basically, is Schema at the point where the SS tag be replaced (in the eyes of the search engines) with the actual text and not the tag itself?</ss:value>
Technical SEO | | TechMama0