Pagination with rel=“next” and rel=“prev”
-
Hey mozzers
Would be interested to know if anyone has used the rel=“next” and rel=“prev” attributes more info here http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2011/09/pagination-with-relnext-and-relprev.html
If you have used it, has it worked and what are your thoughts etc:?
And for those that have used it, is it a better way of handling pagination other than the obvious of Google saying so.
Thanks
-
Hey Craig,
We implemented it recently and saw immediate effect within 24 hours. Google indexed our priority landing pages, and our paginated pages were offered up as effectively 'sitelinks'.
In effect we got one of our landing pages ranking No.1 on a strong keyword phrase, and we gained 4 extra paginated links just below the meta description.
Seems to be the best way to handle pagination.
Truly awesome, and very happy.
Croozie.
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
-
Rel=Canonical Vs. 301 for blog articles
Over the last few years, my company has acquired numerous different companies -- some of which were acquired before that. Some of the products acquired were living on their previous company's parent site vs. having their own site dedicated to the product. The decision has been made that each product will have their own site moving forward. Since the product pages, blog articles and resource center landing pages (ex. whitepapers LPs) were living on the parent site, I'm struggling with the decision to 301 vs. rel=canonical those pages (with the new site being self canonicaled). I'm leaning toward take-down and 301 since rel=canonicals are simply suggestions to Google and a new domain can get all the help it can to start ranking. Are there any cons to doing so?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mfcb0 -
Pagination vs. Scroll for Ecommerce
Hi I wanted to see what opinions were on having a product listings on paginated pages vs. loading as the user scrolls? We use pagination but I have heard scroll may be better for SEO? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
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 -
How does Google index pagination variables in Ajax snapshots? We're seeing random huge variables.
We're using the Google snapshot method to index dynamic Ajax content. Some of this content is from tables using pagination. The pagination is tracked with a var in the hash, something like: #!home/?view_3_page=1 We're seeing all sorts of calls from Google now with huge numbers for these URL variables that we are not generating with our snapshots. Like this: #!home/?view_3_page=10099089 These aren't trivial since each snapshot represents a server load, so we'd like these vars to only represent what's returned by the snapshots. Is Google generating random numbers going fishing for content? If so, is this something we can control or minimize?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | sitestrux0 -
REL prev/next on pages with additional sort parameters
We need a bit of advice on a site we are working on. Currently, the site displays items in the categories in order of date and all of the pages of the category listing are rel prev/next tagged correctly. This is great, and works really well - however we want to include some more sorting options (by popularity, name, file size... etc) into the mix. What's the best way to go about this using the correct tags? Is it better to NOINDEX all of the sorting options and just leave the default by date listings indexed? Also, we cannot canonical the sorted options to their counterparts because the page content would be different. Any ideas? Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Peter2640 -
Use of rel="alternate" hreflang="x"
Google states that use of rel="alternate" hreflang="x" is recommended when: You translate only the template of your page, such as the navigation and footer, and keep the main content in a single language. This is common on pages that feature user-generated content, like a forum post. Your pages have broadly similar content within a single language, but the content has small regional variations. For example, you might have English-language content targeted at readers in the US, GB, and Ireland. Your site content is fully translated. For example, you have both German and English versions of each page. Does this mean that if I write new content in different language for a website hosted on my sub-domain, I should not use this tag? Regards, Shailendra Sial
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | IM_Learner0 -
Adding rel=next / prev to pagination that uses Ajax?
Hi I have just been informed that I should be using the rel=next / rel=prev markup on my category pages and search results pages that use pagination. How do i add these in? Is it just the simple case of adding rel=next in the<a href="" for="" item="" in="" the="" pagination?<="" p=""></a> <a href="" for="" item="" in="" the="" pagination?<="" p="">Also does this work if your are using AJAX - on page load it displays the search / category pages then uses AJAX for additional pages so there is no page refresh</a> <a href="" for="" item="" in="" the="" pagination?<="" p="">Many Thanks</a>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ocelot0 -
Any penalty for having rel=canonical tags on every page?
For some reason every webpage of our website (www.nathosp.com) has a rel=canonical tag. I'm not sure why the previous SEO manager did this, but we don't have any duplicate content that would require a canonical tag. Should I remove these tags? And if so, what's the advantage - or disadvantage of leaving them in place? Thank you in advance for your help. -Josh Fulfer
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mhans1