Category Pages - Canonical, Robots.txt, Changing Page Attributes
-
A site has category pages as such: www.domain.com/category.html, www.domain.com/category-page2.html, etc...
This is producing duplicate meta descriptions (page titles have page numbers in them so they are not duplicate). Below are the options that we've been thinking about:
a. Keep meta descriptions the same except for adding a page number (this would keep internal juice flowing to products that are listed on subsequent pages). All pages have unique product listings.
b. Use canonical tags on subsequent pages and point them back to the main category page.
c. Robots.txt on subsequent pages.
d. ?
Options b and c will orphan or french fry some of our product pages.
Any help on this would be much appreciated. Thank you.
-
I see. I think the concern is with duplicate content though, right?
-
Either way, it will be tough to go that route and still get indexed. Its a pagination issue that everyone would like a solution to, but there just isnt one. It wont hurt you to do this, but wont ultimately get all those pages indexed like you want.
-
Disagree. I think you are missing out big time here- category pages are the bread and butter for eCommerce sites. Search engines have confirmed that these pages are of high value for users, and it gets you a chance to have optimized static content on a page that also shows product results. All the major e retailers heavily rely on these pages (Amazon, ebay, zappos, etc...)
-
Sorry, I don't think I clarified. The page title and meta descriptions would be unique, however they would be almost the same except for it saying "Page [x}" somewhere within it.
-
Option A doesnt do anything for you. I think the search engines flag duplicated title tags, even with different products on the page.
-
Thanks for the comprehensive response, Ryan; really great info here!
Would option A be out of the question in your mind due to the fact that the page attributes would be too similar even though unique content is on all the subsequent category pages? I know this method isn't typical, however, it would be the most efficient way to address.
Note: A big downside to this is also the fact that we will have multiple pages targeting the same keyword, however, since internally and externally, the main category pages are getting more link love, would it still hurt to have all those subsequent pages getting indexed?
-
Ahh... the ultimate IA question that still doesnt have a clear anwer from the search engines. A ton of talk about this at the recent SMX Advanced at Seattle (as is with almost every one). I will try and summarize the common sentiment that i gathered from other pros. I will not claim that this is the correct way, but for now this is what i heard a bunch of people agree on:
- No index, follow the pagination links for all except page 1
- Do not block/hand it with robots.txt (in your case, you realyl cant since you have no identifying parameters in your url)
- If you had paginated parameters in the url you can also manage those in the Google & Bing WMT by telling the SE to ignore those certain parameters.
- Canonical to page 1 was a strategy that some retailers were using, and other want to try. Google reps tried to say this is not the way to do it, but others claim success from it.
- If you have a "View All" link that would display all the products in a longer form on a single page, canonical to that page (if its reasonable)
Notes: Depending on how your results/pages are generated, you will need to remember that they probably arent passing "juice". Any dynamic content is usually not "flow through" links from an SEO perspective (or even crawled sometimes).
The better approach to not orphaning your product pages is finding ways to link to them from other sources besides the results pages. For larger sites, its a hassle, buts thats a challenge we all face Here are some SEO tips for attacking the "orphan" issue:
- If you have product feeds, create a "deal" or "price change" feed. Create a twitter account that people can sign up for to follow these new deals or price changes on products. Push in your feed into tweets, and these will link to your product page, hence creating an in-link for search engines to follow.
- Can do the same with blogs or facebook, but not on a mass scale. Something a bit more useful for users like "top 10 deals of the week) and link to 10 products, or "Favorites for gifts" or something. over time, you can keep track of which product you recommend, and make sure you eventually hit all your products. Again, the point is creating at least 1 inbound link for search engines to follow.
- Create a static internal "product index page" (this is not for your sitemap page FYI) where either by category or some other structure, you make a static link to every product page you have on the site. Developers can have these links dynamically updated/inserted with some extra effort which will avoid manually needing to be updated.
- Create a xml sitemap index. Instead of everything being clumped into 1 xml sitemap for your site, try creating a sitemap index and with your product pages in their own sitemap. This may help with indexing those pages.
Hope that helps? Anyone else want to chime in?
-
I think that generally speaking you want to block search engines from indexing your category pages (use your sitemap and robots.txt to do this). I could be totally wrong here but that is how I setup my sites.
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
-
Pillar pages and blog pages
Hello, I was watching this video about pillar pages https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Db3TpDZf_to and tried to apply it to my self but find it impossible to do (but maybe I am looking at it the wrong way). Let's say I want to rank on "Normandy bike tou"r. I created a pillar page about "Normandy bike tour" what would be the topics of the subpages boosting that pillar page. I know that it should be questions people have but in the tourism industry they don't have any, they just want us to make them dream !! I though about doing more general blog pages about things such as : Places to rent a bike in Normandy or in XYZ city ? ( related to biking) Or the landing sites in Normandy ? (not related to biking) Is it the way to do it, what do you recommend ? Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics0 -
Best way to link to 1000 city landing pages from index page in a way that google follows/crawls these links (without building country pages)?
Currently we have direct links to the top 100 country and city landing pages on our index page of the root domain.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lcourse
I would like to add in the index page for each country a link "more cities" which then loads dynamically (without reloading the page and without redirecting to another page) a list with links to all cities in this country.
I do not want to dillute "link juice" to my top 100 country and city landing pages on the index page.
I would still like google to be able to crawl and follow these links to cities that I load dynamically later. In this particular case typical site hiearchy of country pages with links to all cities is not an option. Any recommendations on how best to implement?0 -
302 to a page and rel=canonical back to the original (to preserve url juice)?
Bit of a weird case, but let me explain. We use unbounce.com to create our landing pages, which are on a separate sub-domain (get.domain.com).
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dragonlawhq
Some of these landing pages have a substantial amount of useful information and are part of our content building strategy (our content marketers are able to deploy them without going through the dev team cycle). We'd like to make sure the seo page-juice is counting towards our primary domain and not the subdomain.
(It would also help if we one day stop using unbounce and just migrate our landing page content to our primary website). Would it be an SEO faux-pas to do the following:
domain.com/awesome-page ---[302]---> get.domain.com/awesome-page
get.domain.com/awesome-page ---[rel=canonical]---> domain.com/awesome-page My understanding is that our primary domain would hold all the "page juice" whilst sending users to the unbounce landing page - and the day we stop using unbounce, we just kill the redirect and host the content on our primary domain.0 -
Robots.txt vs noindex
I recently started working on a site that has thousands of member pages that are currently robots.txt'd out. Most pages of the site have 1 to 6 links to these member pages, accumulating into what I regard as something of link juice cul-d-sac. The pages themselves have little to no unique content or other relevant search play and for other reasons still want them kept out of search. Wouldn't it be better to "noindex, follow" these pages and remove the robots.txt block from this url type? At least that way Google could crawl these pages and pass the link juice on to still other pages vs flushing it into a black hole. BTW, the site is currently dealing with a hit from Panda 4.0 last month. Thanks! Best... Darcy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
I've seen and heard alot about city-specific landing pages for businesses with multiple locations, but what about city-specific landing pages for cities nearby that you aren't actually located in? Is it ok to create landing pages for nearby cities?
I asked here https://www.google.com/moderator/#7/e=adbf4 but figured out ask the Moz Community also! Is it actually best practice to create landing pages for nearby cities if you don't have an actual address there? Even if your target customers are there? For example, If I am in Miami, but have a lot of customers who come from nearby cities like Fort Lauderdale is it okay to create those LP's? I've heard this described as best practice, but I'm beginning to question whether Google sees it that way.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RickyShockley2 -
Should I use rel=canonical on similar product pages.
I'm thinking of using rel=canonical for similar products on my site. Say I'm selling pens and they are al very similar. I.e. a big pen in blue, a pack of 5 blue bic pens, a pack of 10, 50, 100 etc. should I rel=canonical them all to the best seller as its almost impossible to make the pages unique. (I realise the best I realise these should be attributes and not products but I'm sure you get my point) It seems sensible to have one master canonical page for bic pens on a site that has a great description video content and good images plus linked articles etc rather than loads of duplicate looking pages. love to hear thoughts from the Moz community.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mark_baird0 -
Can use of the id attribute to anchor t text down a page cause page duplication issues?
I am producing a long glossary of terms and want to make it easier to jump down to various terms. I am using the<a id="anchor-text" ="" attribute="" so="" am="" appending="" #anchor-text="" to="" a="" url="" reach="" the="" correct="" spot<="" p=""></a> <a id="anchor-text" ="" attribute="" so="" am="" appending="" #anchor-text="" to="" a="" url="" reach="" the="" correct="" spot<="" p="">Does anyone know whether Google will pick this up as separate duplicate pages?</a> <a id="anchor-text" ="" attribute="" so="" am="" appending="" #anchor-text="" to="" a="" url="" reach="" the="" correct="" spot<="" p="">If so any ideas on what I can do? Apart from not do it to start with? I am thinking 301s won't work as I want the URL to work. And rel=canonical won't work as there is no actual page code to add it to. Many thanks for your help Wendy</a>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Chammy0 -
Why is noindex more effective than robots.txt?
In this post, http://www.seomoz.org/blog/restricting-robot-access-for-improved-seo, it mentions that the noindex tag is more effective than using robots.txt for keeping URLs out of the index. Why is this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline0