Solving pagination issues for e-commerce
-
I would like to ask about a technical SEO issue that may cause duplicate content/crawling issues.
For pagination, how the rel=canonical, rel="prev" rel="next" and noindex tag should be implemented.
Should all three be within the same page source?
Say for example, for one particular category we may have 10 pages of products (product catalogues). So we should noindex page 2 onwards, rel canonical it back to the first page and also rel="prev" and rel="next" each page so Google can understand they contain multiple pages.
If we index these multiple pages it will cause duplicate content issues. But I'm not sure whether all 3 tags need adding.
It's also my understanding that the search results should be noindexed as it does not provide much value as an entry point in search engines.
-
I have found this useful in the past: https://www.ayima.com/guides/conquering-pagination-guide.html
-
Thanks for your advice, I will take a look at the Google webmaster video you've referenced. As we try to rank for specific search terms in our main categories, we put content in there so it can be indexed and it's great for user experience. That's why I was thinking to also implement the rel=canonical tag so the content wasn't duplicated over a series of 10 pages, but if we noindex and use the rel=prev and next tags, that should solve the issue. It's the same for filterable results really, as the content on the page can be duplicated when users choose to filter by specific options, such as size or colour.
-
Hi Joshua,
You will need all 3 of those tags to properly markup your pagination, just not all at the same time.
Page=1 should have a canonical to the base URL (no page=X), and a rel="next" for page 2. Page 2 will have prev tag for the base level URL, and next for page 3. And so on.
Google says they don't index paginated URLs anymore, but I prefer to play it safe and implement these tags anyway.
Regarding this comment: "It's also my understanding that the search results should be noindexed as it does not provide much value as an entry point in search engines." There is some validity to this, but honestly, it's your preference. I lean on the side of preventing indexing of search results. I don't see much value in those pages being indexed, and if you're doing SEO properly, you're already providing solid entry points. Those pages will also use up a lot of your crawl budget, so that's something to consider too. Chances are, there are better sections of your site that you'd prefer bots spend their time on.
-
You shouldn't use rel canonical for pagination - it's main use is to avoid duplicate content issues. It's possible to combine it with rel next/prev but in very specific cases - example can be found here: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/1663744?hl=en :
rel="next" and rel="prev" are orthogonal concepts to rel="canonical". You can include both declarations. For example, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=2&sessionid=123 may contain:
=> as you can see the canonical is used to strip the sessionid which could cause duplicate content issues - not to solve the pagination issue
With rel next/previous you indicate to google that the sequence of pages should be considered as one page - which makes sense if you have like 4/5 pages max. If you have a huge number of pages in a pagination this doesn't really make sense. In that case you could just decide to do nothing - or only have the first page indexed - and the other pages have a noindex/follow tag.
Hope this clarifies.
Dirk
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
-
Self referencing canonicals and paginated content - advice needed
Hi, I help manage a large site that uses a lot of params for tracking, testing and to help deal with paginated content e.g. abc.com/productreview?page=2. The paginated review content correctly uses rel next and rel prev tags to ensure we get the value of all of the paginated review content that we have. The volume of param exclusions I need to maintain in Google & Bing Webmaster tools is getting clunky and frustrating. I would like to use self referencing canonicals, which would make life a lot easier. Here's my issue: If I use canonicals on the review pages the paginated content urls would also use the same canonical e.g. /productreview?page=2 pointing to /productreview I believe I am going to lose the value of those reviews, even though they use the rel next rel prev tags. BTW airbnb do this - do they know something I don't, don't care about the paginated reviews, or are they doing it incorrectly, see http://d.pr/i/14mPU Is my assertion above correct about losing the value of the paginated reviews if I use self referencing canonicals? Any thoughts on a solution to clearing up the param problem or do I have to live with it? Thanks in advance, Andy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AndyMacLean0 -
Client wants to show 2 different types of content based on cookie usage - potential cloaking issue?
Hi, A client of mine has compliance issues in their industry and has to show two different types of content to visitors: domain.com/customer-a/about-us domain.com/customer-b/about-us Next year, they have to increase that to three different types of customer. Rather than creating a third section (customer-c), because it's very similar to one of the types of customers already (customer-b), their web development agency is suggesting changing the content based on cookies, so if a user has indentified themselves as customer-b, they'll be shown /customer-b/, but if they've identified themselves as customer-c, they'll see a different version of /customer-b/ - in other words, the URL won't change, but the content on the page will change, based on their cookie selection. I'm uneasy about this from an SEO POV because: Google will only be able to see one version (/customer-b/ presumably), so it might miss out on indexing valuable /customer-c/ content, It makes sense to separate them into three URL paths so that Google can index them all, It feels like a form of cloaking - i.e. Google only sees one version, when two versions are actually available. I've done some research but everything I'm seeing is saying that it's fine, that it's not a form of cloaking. I can't find any examples specific to this situation though. Any input/advice would be appreciated. Note: The content isn't shown differently based on geography - i.e. these three customers would be within one country (e.g. the UK), which means that hreflang/geo-targeting won't be a workaround unfortunately.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | steviephil0 -
Can anyone see any issues with the canonical tags on this web site?
The main domain is: http://www.eumom.ie/ And these would be some of the core pages: http://www.eumom.ie/pregnancy/ http://www.eumom.ie/getting-pregnant/ Any help from the Moz community is much appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | IcanAgency0 -
Duplicate Page Content Issues Reported in Moz Crawl Report
Hi all, We have a lot of 'Duplicate Page Content' issues being reported on the Moz Crawl Report and I am trying to 'get to the bottom' of why they are deemed as errors... This page; http://www.bolsovercruiseclub.com/about-us/job-opportunities/ has (admittedly) very little content and is duplicated with; http://www.bolsovercruiseclub.com/cruise-deals/cruise-line-deals/explorer-of-the-seas-2015/ This page is basically an image and has just a couple of lines of static content. Also duplicated with; http://www.bolsovercruiseclub.com/cruise-lines/costa-cruises/costa-voyager/ This page relates to a single cruise ship and again has minimal content... Also duplicated with; http://www.bolsovercruiseclub.com/faq/packing/ This is an FAQ page again with only a few lines of content... Also duplicated with; http://www.bolsovercruiseclub.com/cruise-deals/cruise-line-deals/exclusive-canada-&-alaska-cruisetour/ Another page that just features an image and NO content... Also duplicated with; http://www.bolsovercruiseclub.com/cruise-deals/cruise-line-deals/free-upgrades-on-cunard-2014-&-2015/?page_number=6 A cruise deals page that has a little bit of static content and a lot of dynamic content (which I suspect isn't crawled) So my question is, is the duplicate content issued caused by the fact that each page has 'thin' or no content? If that is the case then I assume the simple fix is to increase add \ increase the content? I realise that I may have answered my own question but my brain is 'pickled' at the moment and so I guess I am just seeking assurances! 🙂 Thanks Andy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TomKing0 -
RSS and rel = prev/next for pagination
I've noticed on moz report an alert about having to many links on my rss page. http://disneyticketsfree.com/rss/news-updates.html Is using google pagination the way to go? http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2011/09/pagination-with-relnext-and-relprev.html If you look at entries they are all about Orlando travel related topics. Thanks to the community in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | touristips0 -
E- commerce websites - Best method for earning links ?
Hello everyone, Lots of my clients are e-commerce websites and I would like to know if some of you would like to share a good method to earn backlinks so I can share with them all some sort of roadmap. Thank you Regards
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Amadeus_eBC0 -
Duplicate Content / 301 redirect Ariticle issue
Hello, We've got some articles floating around on our site nlpca(dot)com like this article: http://www.nlpca.com/what-is-dynamic-spin-release.html that's is not linked to from anywhere else. The article exists how it's supposed to be here: http://www.dynamicspinrelease.com/what-is-dsr/ (our other website) Would it be safe in eyes of both google's algorithm (as much as you know) and with Panda to just 301 redirect from http://www.nlpca.com/what-is-dynamic-spin-release.html to http://www.dynamicspinrelease.com/what-is-dsr/ or would no-indexing be better? Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BobGW0 -
Rel canonical issues on wordpress posts
Our site has 500 rel canonical issues. This is the way i understand the issues. All our blog posts automatically include a rel=canonical to themselves.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | acs111
eg a blog about content marketing has: Should this tag point to one of the main pages instead so the link juice is sent back to our home page?0