Please help me articulate why broken pagination is bad for SEO...
-
Hi fellow Mozzers.
I am in need of assistance. Pagination is and has been broken on the Website for which I do SEO in-house...and it's been broken for years.
Here is an example: http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category/audio-technica
This category has 122 products, broken down to display 24 at a time across paginated results. However, you will notice that once you enter pagination, all of the URLs become this: http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/IAFDispatcher
Even if you hit "Previous" or "Next" or your browser back button, the URL stays: http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/IAFDispatcher
I have tried to explain to stakeholders that this is a lost opportunity. That if a user or Google were to find that a particular paginated result contained a unique combination of products that might be more relevant to a searcher's search than the main page in the series, Google couldn't send the searcher to that page because it didn't have a unique URL. In addition, this non-unique URL most likely is bottle-necking the flow of page authority internally because it isn't unique. This is not to mention that 38% of our traffic in Google Analytics is being reported as coming from this page...a problem because this page could be one of several hundred on the site and we have no idea which one a visitor was actually looking at.
How do I articulate the magnitude of this problem for SEO? Is there a way I can easily put it in dollars and cents for a business person who really thinks SEOs are a bunch of snake oil salesmen in the first place?
Does anyone have any before and after case studies or quantifiable data that they would be willing to share with me (even privately) that can help me articulate better how important it is to address this problem. Even more, what can we hope to get out of fixing it? More traffic, more revenue, higher conversions?
Can anyone help me go to the mat with a solid argument as to why pagination should be addressed?
-
Thanks so much Gianluca for this thoughtful and valuable advice.
Yes, page load speed is definitely something that's been a concern. This is why we went back to 24 products displayed per page instead of 50 a few months ago. However, since then we've made some significant improvements in page load times and we think we can probably go up to 100 products per page and still be fairly fast. We will have to test.
On the up side, we only have 7 categories with more than 100 products, and only 24 with more than 50. The biggest problem we have effecting speed isn't so much the images. It's the fact that the website does real-time pricing calls on every product to ou business back end every time the page loads. This may be a sticking point.
I have also thought about the canonical tag problem. Of course, it's a problem now too, but if the "View All" page just ends up getting that generic URL and no proper canonical tag...then we really are back to square one.
The possibility of no-indexing all of the categories that are related to paginated series is something that crossed my mind yesterday, so it's interesting that you mentioned that. While it would solve certain issues, wouldn't this be a problem in terms of having valuable content in Google? Granted, some of our category pages are purely there for navigation purposes, in which case, I suppose there's no harm in no-indexing them. However, with the roll-out of Hummingbird I began looking at our category pages as valuable opportunities for "topics" pages that could act as a hub for visitors searching for products or information around specific uses or brands.
Wouldn't there be a significant risk in losing valuable market share for key terms by removing so many category pages from Google's index?
If I am understanding your last suggestion you are saying to have the page default to "View All" and noindex everything else...You are right, not a great scenario, but you are also right in that this may be the only solution given management's steadfast stance on not wanting to pay to fix it.
Lot's to think about, but your comment has been extremely helpful. Thanks again!
-
Dana,
just few tips about the view all option.
While it surely is the best solution, even when a real pagination exists, you should always remember few things:
- a view all list with tens of snippets (photo + text + link) can be like a block of reinforced concrete for the PageSpeed of your site: imagine those listings with 100+ products.
In that case using a view all can be not the correct solution, because googlebot won't ever be able to go through all the code and give up following all the URLs present in the view all page.
-
in fact, the ideal should be having a view all page uploading completely within 4 seconds
-
for that reason, if the only solution you have is having a view all page, then you should seriously thinking in implementing the lazy loading for the images, so that the written content (links included) will have priority in rendering and Google will see them all, and images are uploaded only when needed (i.e.: when the users, scrolling down, arrives to the image that must appear).
Then, there's doubt - a big one: if the paginated list always have this URL http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/IAFDispatcher, how can you put as its canonical the view all of http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category/audio-adapters-audio-connectors when it should have also as canonical http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category/audio-technica?
Maybe the only solution you have is this:
-
forcing that the view all URL is the default one;
-
all the paginated pages (also the the first page) are noindex
Not really a wonderful solution, but - from what I understood about the stubborness of your bosses - the only one. But one that must be executed properly in order to avoid worse issues.
-
....is like hiring an astronaut, handing them a box of toothpicks and some gunpowder and saying you expect them to land on the moon
ha ha ha... that is really funny.
Thanks for the laugh.
-
Thanks so much EGOL. I always love your candor.
Believe me, when I went home last night to ponder solutions to this problem, everything you mentioned crossed my mind. It was a thoroughly frustrating conversation to have. It simply amazes me that Google can tell the world very clearly all the things that will help their sites do better in the SERPs, yet people continue to ignore all of that advice, do what they want (or whatever is "easy" or cheap), and then whine about why their sites aren't doing well.
Making the commitment to hire an in-house SEO without equipping them with good tools and refusing to take their advice is like hiring an astronaut, handing them a box of toothpicks and some gunpowder and saying you expect them to land on the moon.
-
Thanks so much Andy. Agreed on all points. I think I have convinced the powers that be that at the very least we should add a "View All" option. This would give both end-users and Google a useful means to access all of the products in a category at once, without having to resort to pagination if they didn't want to. It is something we can add fairly easily and at little to no cost. Since only 8 of our category pages have more than 100 products, and none go higher than 200, this seems like a very reasonable compromise, at least for now.
I very much appreciate you taking the time to respond It was a frustrating day and a frustrating conversation to have to have.
-
I don't have an answer for you... but I will say that it would really bother me that I would have to jump through hoops with a pogo stick to get stakeholders to want to address this.
I'll skip my rant and get right to the analysis.....
What's going on? Are these stakeholders: A) dumb? B) lazy? C) short of resources? D) frying bigger fish?
If it is A or B then I am probably looking for another job before the company goes bankrupt.
If it is D then I might decide if I should resign and go into competition with them to cash in on the bonanza.
If it is C then you have a dilema that could involve going to the stakeholders boss, other creative solutions or looking for a new job.
Really, you should not have to ask this question.
-
Hi Dana,
I can certainly understand your problem, and whilst I have no data to give you, you should certainly be looking at this not only as a lost opportunity from and SEO perspective, but also as the inability to report back just how well the site is converting traffic. Without this data, no site can see where changes can be made and where improvements will result to an increase in revenue.
I would also look at the fact that anything that is broken on a site might not be having an observable negative issue right now, but what happens with the next algorithm update? Will something be spotted at some point? Do you want to wait for Google to penalise the site before realising it should have been corrected?
Also, does it make for a poor user experience? If someone comes to the site and then bookmarks of of these pages, how are they going to get back again? Are they then likely to just navigate away because they didn't land where they intended.
I am sure there will be a loss in revenue from this - quantifying it will be difficult for an outsider though. There is no doubt that this should be resolved, and I would say ASAP as well.
-Andy
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
-
A campaign ghost keeps returning to my Google Analytics - Help!
A couple of campaign tracking links were created on my homepage (leading to internal pages), these were removed a few weeks ago (100% removed from the site). I understand there is a 6 month window and as long as a user returns (no matter from which source) they will be counted as a session against that campaign. Since these campaign links were set-up in error, I hoped creating a fresh new view within Google Analytics would stop them appearing. However they are still showing as sessions even in the new view (created after removing the campaign links in question). Is there anyway to stop this happening!? I want to be able to report on sessions correctly. Thanks, Sam
Web Design | | Sam.at.Moz0 -
Is having copy above the fold still beneficial for SEO
Many sites nowadays are approaching a section based approach with copy further down the page. Is it still valid to keep copy above the fold now for SEO. Will it impact on SEO if you have to scroll down the page?
Web Design | | vortexuk0 -
Can anyone help me detect some SEO improvements onpage please...
Can anyone help me detect some SEO improvements onpage please... I have shortened the website URl so its not easily found when searched via search engines.. http://goo.gl/GlfMRl Please have a look and give me some tips. Thanks
Web Design | | Nettv0 -
Multi-page articles, pagination, best practice...
A couple months ago we mitigated a 12-year-old site -- about 2,000 pages -- to WordPress.
Web Design | | jmueller0823
The transition was smooth (301 redirects), we haven't lost much search juice. We have about 75 multi-page articles (posts); we're using a plugin (Organize Series) to manage the pagination. On the old site, all of the pages in the series had the same title. I've since heard this is not a good SEO practice (duplicate titles). The url's were the same too, with a 'number' (designating the page number) appended to the title text. Here's my question: 1. Is there a best practice for titles & url's of multi-page articles? Let's say we have an article named: 'This is an Article' ... What if I name the pages like this:
-- This is an Article, Page 1
-- This is an Article, Page 2
-- This is an Article, Page 3 Is that a good idea? Or, should each page have a completely different title? Does it matter?
** I think for usability, the examples above are best; they give the reader context. What about url's ? Are these a good idea? /this-is-an-article-01, /this-is-an-article-02, and so on...
Does it matter? 2. I've read that maybe multi-page articles are not such a good idea -- from usability and SEO standpoints. We tend to limit our articles to about 800 words per page. So, is it better to publish 'long' articles instead of multi-page? Does it matter? I think I'm seeing a trend on content sites toward long, one-page articles. 3. Any other gotchas we should be aware of, related to SEO/ multi-page? Long post... we've gone back-and-forth on this a couple times and need to get this settled.
Thanks much! Jim0 -
Which Hat of SEO (Black/White) Goes with this Green Lace Dress?
Doing some research (honestly) I came across this page: http://www.modcloth.com/th/green-lace-dress That page ranks very well for the phrase "green lace dress" - #2 in Google for me. I'm sure there's a good amount of links coming into it, but on the surface there's only 1 mention of green on the page and 2 mentions of lace. Looking at the code, you can see ModCloth is using the Quick View links below the products to display a more detailed description of the product - wherein lies many more instances of green and lace. So I ask: Which color of SEO hat goes with this green lace dress - Black or White? Is it good SEO to only show the product descriptions when the user initiates the Quick View? Or is it shady SEO to hide so much text from the immediate view of the user? Please select one and explain why.
Web Design | | rball10 -
Keywords in the page url for best SEO
Hello all, I am working in the keywors structure of a web and I have the following doubt: If I want to target these keywords: great food madrid and my website is: http://www.madridlive.com I do not know if I should keep either: OPTION 1: page url: www.madridlive.com/great-food-madrid or OPTION 2: page url www.madridlive.com/great-food I do not know if the search engines "understands" madrid in "madridlive", therefore I can avoid the "madrid" keyword, dicarding option 1 and going for option 2. Additionally I avoid duplication of the madrid keyword that can be seen as redundancy and also have a shorter page url. Thank you very much and sorry for such a question but I am new in this SEO field...just the excellent SEOMOZ's SEO Guide for beginners! Best regards, Antonio
Web Design | | aalcocer20030 -
Best Wordpress Themes or Theme Creators for Best SEO Results
Hi, I just recently joined SEOMOZ and am excited to be apart of the community. I am launching a blog to educate mu readers on a variety of topics. Is there any specific themes or theme creators that do a great job at structuring their themes from a technical perspective for the best SEO results? Thanks!
Web Design | | ROYINOW0 -
Effects of HTML layout on Arabic websites and SEO
Hi all, I was hoping someone may be able to help. We are putting together an Arabic website and due to reading right to left as opposed to left to right, the site HTML layout is mirrored compared to normal with everything flipped over. What we are wondering is, will this effect SEO and what are the SEO implications of this? Do the search engine bots automaticlaly know to read the content etc differently and understand that everything is purposely mirrored / the HTML is in a different location compared to a site in the UK / US etc? Any help on this would be most appreciated. Cheers!
Web Design | | marcelo-2753980