Pagination with parameter and rel prev rel next
-
Hi there:
I have a doubt about how using the pagination and rel prev | rel next, I will try to sum up this example of pagination:
the page number 1 is SEO friendly in order to index it, It also gets metarobots: index, follow.
The other ones (pagination), instead, have noindex, follow. In fact, these URLs are not SEO friendly because of they have the parameter "?" to set up pagination, so for this reason, in the past, It has been decided not to index them.
Would you suggest also to use rel="prev" rel="next" in this situation? Or would it be better to set up the others ones (pagination) in "SEO friendly" and then, to set up the rel prev | rel next?
Thanks a lot in advance for helping
Greetings
Francesca
-
Thank you very much!
Francesca
-
Ah... you're saying have a "View All" page but then not canonical to it? I guess my only concern about that is that then you've got another crawl path and possible duplicates. In that case, you might want to Noindex the "View All" and only have it available to users. It depends a lot on the scope of pages we're talking, as always.
-
I also agree with you, however if your view all page use more than acceptable time to load, I would still suggest having both a view all page and rel next/prev (but not the canonical aswell). By doing so you simply send your visitors hot your first page in the series, however maintaining the ability for users to view all the content.
-
Just one note here - I generally wouldn't use "View All" and rel=prev/next. It's a bit of a mixed signal. If you can create a friendly, fast-loading "View All" page, then rel=canonical the paginated URLs back to the "View All" page.
Agreed, though, that your Nofollow, Noindex is basically overriding the rel=prev/next. I've honestly heard mixed signals from people (including prominent SEOs who handle very large media sites) about how effective rel=prev/next is. I think Meta-robots is a stronger signal, so if you're really worried about duplicates, it's probably doing fine. If you want page 3 of 8 (for example) to rank for some reason, then rel=prev/next opens up that possibility, but it may also be a bit weaker cue in terms of duplication. It's a bit of a trade-off. If your currently approach is keeping pages out of the index, I'd probably leave it alone.
-
Hi Jørgen.
At the moment, I will apply rel ="prev" | rel="next" in order to set up pagination...currently pagination has "noindex, follow". I agree with you about "view all", I think it's the best option, in the future I'd like to set it up...
Thx for replying!!
Francesca
-
Hi @Red_educativa S.L.,
I would suggest using rel="prev/next" in this situation, yes.
When you are specifying a "rel" attribute you are specifying a relationship between the current document and the linked one. The value "prev" and "next" is specifying the relationship to be "The next [previous] document in a selection".
If you instead would use nofollow, google's spiders will not crawl the page. A nofollow value is "Links to an unendorsed document, like a paid link.".
However, this being said, it would be good for SEO to include a "view all" page. This will include all the content on a single page. You should then use rel="canonical" on the link to the view-all page (this will send users from search results to your view-all page. If you instead wish to use your first page in the series, you should only use rel next and prev (not rel canonical).
Have a look at this video from google for more information: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njn8uXTWiGg
I hope this helps.
--
Jørgen Juel
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 = no follow?
I am redoing a clients website. They previous company that built it have a page with links linking back to over 30 articles on webmd Question is this doing any good for SEO and if I recreate, should these have the rel=no follow attribute?
On-Page Optimization | | scott315
Here is is current page http://www.forestparkdental.com/links/ Thanks0 -
Rel Conical - Mobile page
I have two pages that have essentially the same content, same page title etc. however one is the mobile version of the other. Is it appropriate to use the rel canonical tag with these two pages? So the pages are: www.example.com/product www.example.com/mobile/product If rel canonical is not appropriate what, if anything should I do?
On-Page Optimization | | cbarron0 -
I'm using Canonical URL but still receiving message - Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical
Hello, I checked my site and it looks like everything is setup correctly for canonical url but I keep getting the message that it's not. Am I doing something wrong? SORRY I FIGURED IT OUT! THANK YOU! HOW DO I DELETE THIS?
On-Page Optimization | | seohlp440 -
What is the danger of adding rel="prev" and rel="next"...
Our search results pages are, unfortunately, heavily indexed by Google. While the long term plan is to replace these somehow with our product pages, in the short term we are doing all we can to improve things. One of our issues is that we don't have a canonical link or rel="next" or rel="prev" on these pages. Would like to add these to consolidate duplicate content as well as help Google drill down within these pages to crawl the links within them. The concern is... If ten people arrive at our site via: http://www.oursite.com/?goodstuff=puppies&page=1 and 10 people also arrive at our site via: http://www.oursite.com/?goodstuff=puppies&page=2 Would adding rel="next" and rel="prev" potentially have a damaging effect on us by removing one of these entry points and therefore removing 10 potential visitors? Or would it still show both links, but instead would show the canonical in both locations? In short, could adding these tags actually backfire? Thanks very much! Craig
On-Page Optimization | | TheCraig0 -
What if Paginated Pages all have PageRank?
Paginated Pages, page 2,3,4 etc.... they aren't supposed to have a PageRank, right? If they are only linked to from themselves, only the original page, Page 1, is supposed to be showing PageRank? I'm trying to double check that I am handling this right. I'm not using canonical, or noindex or any of that... just using rel next and prev, which I thought would be fine. Thoughts?
On-Page Optimization | | MadeLoud0 -
Pagination for image galleries
We have photo galleries that load new URLs with new content/photo on each page, yet I'm still seeing "duplicate meta description" in GWT for each separate URL in the gallery. Will rel="next" rel="prev" take care of this? Just want to confirm as it requires a CMS upgrade/release.
On-Page Optimization | | Aggie0 -
Rel Canonical - Could someone please help confirm something?
Morning Mozzers, I'm looking at a site (www.zitan.co.uk) and making a few recommendations for SEO, one of the things I've spotted is something weird with rel canonical. It looks (to me) as if they've got almost every single page set with this tag: rel="canonical" href="http://www.zitan.co.uk" /> I'm 99% certain that this means that every page on the site (that has this tag) is pointing all link juice / authority back to the homepage? If someone could please check and just confirm that, I'd really appreciate it. Thanks in advance, James
On-Page Optimization | | JamesMio0 -
Is rel=canonical used only for duplicate content
Can the rel-canonical be used to tell the search engines which page is "preferred" when there are similar pages? For instance, I have an internal page that Google is showing on the first page of the SERPs that I would prefer the home page be ranked for. Both the home and internal page have been optimized for the same keyword. What is interesting is that the internal page has very few backlinks compared to the home page but Google seems to favor it since the keyword is in the URL. I am afraid a 301 will drop us from the first page of the SERPs.
On-Page Optimization | | surveygizmo0