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
-
Check out topic from a few months ago-
http://moz.com/community/q/ecommerce-problem-with-canonicol-rel-next-rel-prev
How old is the site?
In my experience, I've found it best to first see how things are actually being indexed, which pages are showing up in SERPS, and what the user behavior is.
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
-
How specific do I have to be when adding keyword to the meta title which I am trying to rank for?
I am looking for some clarity on what exactly you need to spell out for google in the exact match and what google understands in terms of using keywords in your meta title which I am trying to rank for. For example if my category page is for women's top, with both printed and solid color options, would it be ok to write- "Women's Tops: Printed & Solid Shirts & Tunics" and be able to rank for women's tops, women's printed tops, women's solid shirts etc. or would I have to be more specific and use women's as the keyword modifier before each term and write- "Women's Tops, Women's Printed & Solid Shirts, Women's Tunics"?
On-Page Optimization | | whiteonlySEO0 -
Rel="canonical" link should they be to or from an "SEO friendly" url
Thanks for taking the time to review this. So for our example, lets use the following SEO friendly link: http://hiu.calibermediagroup.com/undergraduate-on-campus/academics/colleges/pacific-christian-college-of-ministry-and-biblical-studies/BA-biblical-studies We'll call this link the SEO VERSION The title of the college is" Pacific Christian College of Minstry and Biblical Studies" The title of the program is "BA Biblical Studies" The QUERY version of the link to this page would be something like: http://hiu.calibermediagroup.com/undergraduate-on-campus/academics/colleges/index.php?collegeid=22&programid=34 Keep in mind that the meta title, description, and keyword tags for the page are all administerable The SEO VERSION is automatically created from the title of the college, and the title of the program. Each one of these titles can be overidden with a URL slug individually. For instance, the admin could make the link: http://hiu.calibermediagroup.com/undergraduate-on-campus/academics/colleges/pacific-christian-college-of-ministry/biblical-studies by changing the slug for the college to "pacific-christian-college-of-ministry" and the slug for the program to "biblical-studies". Let's call this version the SLUG VERSION So now we have multiple ways to get to the same content. The question on the table is what is best practice for the rel="canonical" link to keep from getting dinged for duplicate content. Let's say that our SEO VERSION is the canonical link for 1 year. Then the choice was made to optimize the links thru the slugs creating the SLUG VERSION. My assumption is that we would keep the SEO VERSION as the canonical link. But then let's say 6 months later that the title of the program is changed in the admin. Now the SEO VERSION has changed and so has the canonical link. Do we lose the link juice garnered over the last 18 months? It would seem to me, that if we use the QUERY version as the canonical link, then any optimizations or changes affect everything except the canonical link, thus keeping the previous link juice earned. But is having an ugly URL as the canonical link detrimental to SEO? Please advise.
On-Page Optimization | | robertdonnell0 -
Dashes "-" in keyword?
Just running over the page/keyword analyzer and Moz picked up the fact that my link and title are not the same as the keyword I am targeting. I am targeting the keyword "Battlefield 4 CD Key" However my title (and therefore link) are Battlefield 4 CD-Key. Note the dash. Does the dashes matter in SEO or should I try to remove them and have continuity through all of the page.
On-Page Optimization | | MrPenguin0 -
Should "contact" and "Privacy Policy" pages be no-followed?
I have a few pages like the contact and privacy policy page that I could really care less about as far as whether people visit them, or whether the search engines index them. They also don't have any sort of unique content on them... pretty much duplicates of what you'd probably find on hundreds of other websites. Would it be logical then to just nofollow those pages? I just don't know if maybe there's something hidden that I'm not thinking of. For example, maybe Google wants to see that your website has a privacy policy, and by excluding it, you're actually hurting yourself.
On-Page Optimization | | JABacchetta0 -
What Next LOL? Dont know where to go from here
Hi, still new to SEO MOZ. So some of my keywords are showing my site went up the search engines and others went down. So what next? Theres no suggestions, so not quite sure why some pages went up, others down, or where to go from here. Thanks! lee
On-Page Optimization | | nexgraphics0 -
Danger of over optimizing
We have all read about the dangers of over optimizing our sites. Specially in regards to the latest google update. Every time we created a new landing-page we typically made sure that the page get an A-grade using the SEOmoz On-Page Optimization tool. Does this mean its not a good idea to do this? Maybe aim for a less perfect score? Hope to hear from you Fredrik
On-Page Optimization | | Resultify0 -
Does page "depth" matter
Would it have a negative effect on SEO to have a link from the home page to this page... http://www.website/com/page1deep/page2deep rather than to this page http://www.website/com/page1deep I'm hoping that made some sense. If not I'll try to clarify. Thanks, Mark
On-Page Optimization | | DenverKelly0 -
What's the best practice for implementing a "content disclaimer" that doesn't block search robots?
Our client needs a content disclaimer on their site. This is a simple "If you agree to these rules then click YES if not click NO" and you're pushed back to the home page. I have this gut feeling that this may cause an upset with the search robots. Any advice? R/ John
On-Page Optimization | | TheNorthernOffice790