Whats the negative effect of incorrect canonical to first page in paginated set?
-
Hi,
I have a new client that has pagination handled incorrectly on their website....
They have it setup as follows:
- example.com/article?story=cupcake-news&page=1
- example.com/article?story=cupcake-news&page=2
- example.com/article?story=cupcake-news&page=3
etc etc
rel=canonical from page 2 to page 1
rel=canonical from page 3 to page 1
etc etci.e. they aren't using rel=prev, rel=next
To get them to invest in the development time need to change this I need to explain to the client how what they have is negatively affecting things? Anyone?
Thanks in advance!
-
Hi Dana,
Thanks for helping out! It's an ecommerce site.
You mention that "content not on Page 1 is not being crawled or indexed by search engines". Wouldn't the pages still be crawled and the products that they list still be crawled and indexed? It's just that Page 2/3/4/5 etc wont be indexed because of the canonical? If this is the case the only negative effect I can see is that if the product combination on a page 2/3/4/5 happened to convey relevance for a particular search query then the page wouldn't be returned in the listings?
-
Hi QubaSEO,
This is how I would explain this to a client whose knowledge of SEO is limited:
"The way your site is currently set up, all content located on pages that are not 'Page 1' in a series of pages, is not being crawled or indexed by search engines. It is being given zero value. As a result, you are missing out on gaining relevant traffic from searchers looking for the content that you have on pages other than page 1."
If they have spent money and time creating that content on pages 2, 3 etc), or if they are an eCommerce site and they care about selling all of their products (not just products displayed on page 1), then they are significantly inhibiting their return on that investment.
You probably already have this https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/1663744?hl=en
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
-
Pagination new pages vs parameters
I'm working on a site that currently handles pagination like this cars-page?p=1 cars-page?p=2 In webmaster tools I can then tell ?p= designates pagination However I have a plugin I want to add to fix other seo issues, among those it adds rel="prev" rel="next" and it modifies the pagination to this cars-page-1.html cars-page2.html Notice I lost the parameter here and now each page is a different page url, pagination is no longer a parameter. I will not longer be able to specify the pagination parameter in webmaster tools. Would this confuse google as the pagination is no longer a parameter and there will now be multiple urls instead of one page with parameters? My gut says this would be bad, as I haven't seen this approach often on ecommerce site, but I wanted to see what the community thought?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | K-WINTER0 -
Fresh page versus old page climbing up the rankings.
Hello, I have noticed that if publishe a webpage that google has never seen it ranks right away and usually in a descend position to start with (not great but descend). Usually top 30 to 50 and then over the months it slowly climbs up the rankings. However, if my page has been existing for let's say 3 years and I make changes to it, it takes much longer to climb up the rankings Has someone noticed that too ? and why is that ?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics0 -
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 -
On 1 of our sites we have our Company name in the H1 on our other site we have the page title in our H1 - does anyone have any advise about the best information to have in the H1, H2 and Page Tile
We have 2 sites that have been set up slightly differently. On 1 site we have the Company name in the H1 and the product name in the page title and H2. On the other site we have the Product name in the H1 and no H2. Does anyone have any advise about the best information to have in the H1 and H2
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CostumeD0 -
Duplicate page title at bottom of page - ok, or bad?
Can I get you experts opinion? A few years ago, we customized our pages to repeat the page title at the bottom of the page. So the page title is in the breadcrumbs at the top, and then it's also at the bottom of the page under all the contents. Here is a sample page: bit.ly/1pYyrUl I attached a screen shot and highlighted the second occurence of the page title. Am worried that this might be keyword stuffing, or over optimizing? Thoughts or advice on this? Thank you so much! ron ZH8xQX6
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | yatesandcojewelers0 -
Using unique content from "rel=canonical"ized page
Hey everyone, I have a question about the following scenario: Page 1: Text A, Text B, Text C Page 2 (rel=canonical to Page 1): Text A, Text B, Text C, Text D Much of the content on page 2 is "rel=canonical"ized to page 1 to signalize duplicate content. However, Page 2 also contains some unique text not found in Page 1. How safe is it to use the unique content from Page 2 on a new page (Page 3) if the intention is to rank Page 3? Does that make any sense? 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ipancake0 -
Why Is This Page Not Ranking?
Hi Mozzers, I can't rank (the page is nowhere on the Google grid that I can find) and I've not been able to move the needle at all on it. The page is http://www.lumber2.com/Western-Saddle-Pads-s/98.htm for keyword "western saddle pads." I'm inclined to think I'm cannabalizing the category with the products so I removed the word saddle from the majority of the product names on page. However, saddle pad or saddle pads is in the meta title for most if not all of the products. Do you think I'm cannabalizing with the product titles or is there something else going on? Thanks for any help.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AWCthreads0 -
Re-platform effects on Page Rank
We are performing a major replatform for an ecommerce client who has many top listings on page 1 in Google SERPs for very competitive terms. We are implementing a 301 redirect for all existing URLs that they have now to the appropriate new URLs, but the client is concerned with how deploying a new site with 100% new URLs and site structure will impact their Page Rank. From our experience, the 301 redirects should cover it but wanted to see if there is a way to predictively forecast page rank effects as a result of re-platforming.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Bucktown0
