Have Your Thoughts Changed Regarding Canonical Tag Best Practice for Pagination? - Google Ignoring rel= Next/Prev Tagging

[Joe_Stoffel]

Hi there,

We have a good-sized eCommerce client that is gearing up for a relaunch. At this point, the staging site follows the previous best practice for pagination (self-referencing canonical tags on each page; rel=next & prev tags referencing the last and next page within the category).

Knowing that Google does not support rel=next/prev tags, does that change your thoughts for how to set up canonical tags within a paginated product category? We have some categories that have 500-600 products so creating and canonicalizing to a 'view all' page is not ideal for us. That leaves us with the following options (feel it is worth noting that we are leaving rel=next / prev tags in place):

1. Leave canonical tags as-is, page 2 of the product category will have a canonical tag referencing ?page=2 URL
2. Reference Page 1 of product category on all pages within the category series, page 2 of product category would have canonical tag referencing page 1 (/category/) - this is admittedly what I am leaning toward.

Any and all thoughts are appreciated! If this were in relation to an existing website that is not experiencing indexing issues, I wouldn't worry about these. Given we are launching a new site, now is the time to make such a change.

Thank you!

Joe

[Promoverity]

An old question, but thought I'd weigh in with to report that Google seems to be ignoring self-referring pagination canonicals on a news site that I'm working on.

Pages such as /news/page/36/ have themselves as declared canonicals, but Search Console reports that Google is selecting the base page /news/ as the canonical instead.

Would be interested to know if anyone else is seeing that.

[Mat_C]

Hi,

I'm also very interested in what the new best approach for pagination would be.

In a lot of webshops, option 2 is used. However, in this article the possible negative outcome of this option is described (search the article for 'Canonicalize to the first page'). In my opinion, this is particularly true for paginated blog articles, and less so for paginated results of products per category in webshops. I think the root page is the one you want to rank in the end.

What you certainly don't want, is create duplicate content. Yes, your products (and of course their links to the product pages) are different for each page. And yes, there will be also more internal links pointing to the root category page, and not to the second or third results page. But if you invested time in writing content for your category, and invested time in all the other on page optimizations, these will be the same across all your result pages.

So in the end, we leave it to Google and hope that they do recognize your pagination. Is this the best option? Maybe, maybe not. Anyway, we didn't know that they didn't use rel=next/prev for several years, and mostly it worked fine.

So I think in the end EffectDigital is right, just do nothing. If you see problems, I would try option 2, using your first results page as canonical.

[effectdigital]

The only thing it changes IMO is delete rel=prev / next tags to save on code bloat. Other than that, nothing changes in my opinion. It's still best to allow Google to rank paginated URLs if Google chooses to do so - as it usually happens for a reason!

I might lift the self referencing canonicals, maybe. Just leave them without directives of any kind, and force Google to determine what to do with them via URL structure ('?p=', '/page/', '?page=' etc). If they're so confident they don't need these tags now, maybe using any directives at all is just creating polluting signals that will unnecessarily interfere

In the end I think I'd just strip it all off and monitor it, see what happened