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
-
The rel next prev is not for duplicated content - it just shows google how the parts relate to the whole.
An alternative to the rel next prev is the "Classic Pagination for SEO" that uses noindex another article by Adam
http://searchengineland.com/the-latest-greatest-on-seo-pagination-114284
If you have a duplicate issue, this would solve it as you would noindex all the duplicate pages.
What you need to do (and I can't do this for you), is to look at all the crawl paths that you are providing Google. As I mention above, you are not doing any favors to Google or to your site when you show Google an infinite number of paths to get to the same content. It just wastes Google's time and you don't want to do that when Google also has to crawl the rest of the internet. If you solve this issue, you will solve your duplicate issue.
AJ Kohn just posted an article on the concept of crawl budget that talks about this. I think the article is quite good and it explains why we need to look at all the topics of noindex, nofollow, robots, canonical and rel next prev http://www.blindfiveyearold.com/crawl-optimization
-
Thanks CleverPhD,
That's a very interesting read by Adam Audette too, thanks.
I should say that there's no internal search, each tab has a series of duplicated 'blurbs' taken from the product's unique landing page, while the body copy remains the same across the slight variations in the URL. So with:
example.com/example/?st=BlueWidgets
example.com/example/?st=RedSocks
all of these will feature the same body copy, while the last two will have a series of small descriptions from other landing pages in the site. Would the canonical tag be appropriate in this case? We only need to index 'example.com/example'.
Also, does the rel next prev take into account duplicate content? We want only the main URL indexed as all the paginated pages feature duplicate content, there is no view all page however.
Many thanks
-
If I am understanding the question - I think pulling in some body copy from each search result (and not just the whole page) would be fine. I think Google will see that this is a search result and that you are pointing to other pages. You are probably going to pull in text from the title too. This is common practice in search results - heck Google does it!
If you are still concerned about the pulled in descriptions, your option is to setup the system to have an alternate description for each page. Use the alternate description when you pull it into your main page. It is more work, but it will eliminate this issue.
Separately, paginated pages no longer need to be canonicaled to the index page. You can use rel next and prev.
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2011/09/pagination-with-relnext-and-relprev.html
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/1663744?hl=en
It explains to Google the relationship between P1 and P2,3,4,5,n etc.
Beyond that, you need to watch that you do not get into too many paginated pages to get to the exact same product pages. Lets say you had 1,000 widgets that were blue, red and green and also were Free, Expensive or Cheap. You would have several sets of paginated pages (one set for Blue, one for Red, Green, Free, Cheap, Expensive, one for Red and Expensive) etc. It gets to be a little crazy as they all lead to the same set of widget product pages. You need to manage how to have Google crawl all that and not have your Paginated Category pages look like duplicated. Adam Audette writes great stuff on this. Look here for things to consider
http://www.rimmkaufman.com/blog/site-search-dynamic-content-and-seo/01032013/
-
Thank you Robert, and for the helpful link.
You did read my question correctly, however I failed to ask it ask entirely correctly. Just to complicate matters, I neglected to mention that there is body copy on each page, which technically will be duplicated.
It sits above the tabs and does not change, while the tabbed pages - under new URL parameters - pull in a sentence or two of product description from elsewhere (a unique landing page).
So,
?st=BlueWidgets
?st=RedSocks
?st=Offers
will all feature the same body copy and different duplicate content. For obvious reasons, we only want the SE to index the main URL.
Any ideas?
Thanks again
-
Hi
It doesn't sound like rel=canonical is the solution, as each one of your pages might feature multiple pieces of content from various other parts of your website (if I've read your question correctly) - so which would be the canonical version of the page?
You could use Parameter Handling in Webmaster Tools to ensure Google knows what to do with your various parameters. Moz doesn't matter here, as long as Search Engines are aware of how to handle your pages correctly.
There's a good overview here.
I hope that's helpful
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
-
Purchasing duplicate content
Morning all, I have a client who is planning to expand their product range (online dictionary sites) to new markets and are considering the acquisition of data sets from low ranked competitors to supplement their own original data. They are quite large content sets and would mean a very high percentage of the site (hosted on a new sub domain) would be made up of duplicate content. Just to clarify, the competitor's content would stay online as well. I need to lay out the pros and cons of taking this approach so that they can move forward knowing the full facts. As I see it, this approach would mean forgoing ranking for most of the site and would need a heavy dose of original content as well as supplementing the data on page to build around the data. My main concern would be that launching with this level of duplicate data would end up damaging the authority of the site and subsequently the overall domain. I'd love to hear your thoughts!
Technical SEO | | BackPack851 -
Duplicate content or an update ???
Buying Guide and Product Category page competing for the same keyword ? Got a “nuts and bold website” selling basic stuff. Imagine selling simple nuts, bolts and washers (the little ring that goes in between) in different metals. Imagine a website with a very wide and deep line of these simple products. For long tail keywords we rank well (Example: 0.25 inch bolts). For the keyword: “Nuts bolts” our main category page use to rank well low 1<sup>st</sup> page to second page up against the big guys (Amazon, Walmart, Target, Costco, some drug store who may have a mix pack of nuts and bolts, but still Google don’t see the difference and list 2 pages each for these guys). But then in mid-February there were an update and suddenly our “Buying guide for nuts and bolts” rank higher and started to compete with our own product category page. That was never our intention. These two pages now compete for the ranking on page 4<sup>th</sup>. Clearly there were more words on the buying guide page but no changes had been made to it for well months or years. To make up for it some more words were added to the category page, but of cause there is only so many way you can fraise words about “nuts and bolts” without sounding a bit duplicate/re-writing. So what do I do now ?? Clearly the product category page is the one we like to rank highest with the guide a close 2nd. Most customer don’t need the buying guide but it is good to have and great support as we got lot of good comments from customer who read it. Made a link to the buying guide from the category page and wise verses. The category page got an embedded video. Moz list the page authority for the category page to 16 and 1 for the buying guide but clearly G see it differently. Already tried to change the Meta Tag Title and Description a little but it is hard to do if the word “Nuts Bolts” is to appear in the description or people don’t know what to expect. Could just insert a “do not index” for the buying guide but not a good long term solution. Unfortunately I am out of imagination at this point. Any good suggestions ?? Thanks, Kim Any good suggestions ???
Technical SEO | | KimX0 -
Duplicate Content
HI There, Hoping someone can help me - before i damage my desk banging my head. Getting notifications from ahrefs and Moz for duplicate content. I have no idea where these weird urls have came from , but they do take us to the correct page (but it seems a duplicate of this page). correct url http://www.acsilver.co.uk/shop/pc/Antique-Vintage-Rings-c152.htm Incorrect url http://www.acsilver.co.uk/shop/pc/vintage-Vintage-Rings- c152.htm This is showing for most of our store categories 😞 Desperate for help as to what could be causing these issues. I have a technical member of the ecommerce software go through the large sitemap files and they assured me it wasn't linked to the sitemap files. Gemma
Technical SEO | | acsilver0 -
Duplicate Content Question
I have a client that operates a local service-based business. They are thinking of expanding that business to another geographic area (a drive several hours away in an affluent summer vacation area). The name of the existing business contains the name of the city, so it would not be well-suited to market 'City X' business in 'City Y'. My initial thought was to (for the most part) 'duplicate' the existing site onto a new site (brand new root domain). Much of the content would be the exact same. We could re-word some things so there aren't entire lengthy paragraphs of identical info, but it seems pointless to completely reinvent the wheel. We'll get as creative as possible, but certain things just wouldn't change. This seems like the most pragmatic thing to do given their goals, but I'm worried about duplicate content. It doesn't feel as though this is spammy though, so I'm not sure if there's cause for concern.
Technical SEO | | stevefidelity0 -
Duplicate Title Tags
Hi, Are these 2 title tags different enough? Notice only the 's' on Templates is switched <colgroup><col width="559"></colgroup>
Technical SEO | | Studio33
| Invoice Templates | Invoice Template | invoicing Software | Invoice Software Invoice Template | Invoice Templates | invoicing Software | Invoice Software | Thanks0 -
Duplicate Content
Many of the pages on my site are similar in structure/content but not exactly the same. What amount of content should be unique for Google to not consider it duplicate? If it is something like 50% unique would it be preferable to choose one page as the canonical instead of keeping them both as separate pages?
Technical SEO | | theLotter0 -
Duplicate Page Content
Hi within my campaigns i get an error "crawl errors found" that says duplicate page content found, it finds the same content on the home pages below. Are these seen as two different pages? And how can i correct these errors as they are just one page? http://poolstar.net/ http://poolstar.net/Home_Page.php
Technical SEO | | RouteAccounts0 -
Canonical Tag
Does it do anything to place the Canonical tag on the unique page itself? I thought this was only to be used on the offending pages that are the copies. Thanks
Technical SEO | | poolguy0