Need help with some duplicate content.
-
I have some duplicate content issues on my blog I'm trying to fix. I've read lots of different opinions online about the best way to correct it, but they all contradict each other. I was hoping I could ask this community and see what the consensus was.
It looks like my category and page numbers are showing duplicate content. For instance when I run the report I see things like this:
http://noahsdad.com/resources/
http://noahsdad.com/resources/page/2/
http://noahsdad.com/therapy/page/2/
I'm assuming that is just the categories that are being duplicated, since the page numbers only show on the report at the end of a category.
What is the best way to correct this? I don't use tags at all on my blog, using categories instead. I also use the Yoast SEO plug in. I have a check mark in the box that disables tags. However it says, "If you're using categories as your only way of structure on your site, you would probably be better off when you prevent your tags from being indexed."
There is a box that allows you to disable categories also, but the description above makes it seem like I don't want to block both tags and categories.
Any ideas what I should do?
Thanks.
-
I didn't mention "prev" and "next" as they are already implemented in the head tag, would you add them directly to the links as well? Also, I think Google is the only search engine that supports them at the moment.
-
Gianluca is correct. prev next would work here, but i thought this would be too confusing, i did not know there were plugins that can do this for you. also, this would make page one rank for all the content, this may confuse users when they dont find the content the searched for on that page. so technicaly it would work, but foor the user i dont know if it is the right solutions, this works best for one article over many pages.
-
The correct answer to your kind of issue, which is related to psgination, is this one: Use the rel="prev" rel="next" tags. These are the tags Google suggest to use in order to specify that a set of pages are paginated, hence it will just consider the first one. Check these links: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com.es/2011/09/pagination-with-relnext-and-relprev.html http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com.es/2012/03/video-about-pagination-with-relnext-and.html http://www.seomoz.org/q/need-help-with-some-duplicate-content There are several plugins for Wordpress about this solution.
-
Yes, I have about 60 404's and 403's I'm trying to correct...
Thanks for the feedback by the way.
-
I've never used Wordpress but does this help?
http://www.malcolmcoles.co.uk/blog/avoid-duplicate-meta-descriptions-in-pages-2-and-higher-of-the-wordpress-loop/It's strange how it's possible to add canonical page numbers, but not add the same thing to the title tag, I think.
-
You look like you're doing a good job, you even have unique text content for each video on the pages, so I can't see why they're flagging as duplicates. Is this in the SEOmoz software? That takes into account the whole structure of the page rather than just the content. Like Alan says, add the page number to the title tag if possible, though I'd add it at the beginning of the tag - it just helps show the search engines that page 1 is the most important.
P.S. this is still a good article a couple of years later: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/pagination-best-practices-for-seo-user-experience
-
Thats why i said if it is difficult then i would not worry.
i would not no-index them,
if you had unique titles, you may rank a bit better, you ae not going to get punished for it if they dont. but if you no-index, you are punishing yourself.
not only do no-indexed pages not appear in search results, but any link pointing to them is wasting link juice.
-
I'm not sure how you would give the author pages different titles on a Wordpress powered site...
Should I check some of the no index settings within the plugin?
-
OK, then yes try to give them unique page titles, even add page 2 on the end, if this is difficault to do then i would not worry too much about it.
-
On my reports they show up as duplicate page titiles....
-
Maybe i am not understading you, but these pages dont apear to be duplicates top me
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
-
Tens of duplicate homepages indexed and blocked later: How to remove from Google cache?
Hi community, Due to some WP plugin issue, many homepages indexed in Google with anonymous URLs. We blocked them later. Still they are in SERP. I wonder whether these are causing some trouble to our website, especially as our exact homepages indexed. How to remove these pages from Google cache? Is that the right approach? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Fresh content..how important to SERP position?
I've heard that fresh content helps boost your position in the serps. If i wrote all new unique content on some of my pages that havent been changed in several years, would i see a boost in the rank? If so, how many positions?
Algorithm Updates | | Ron100 -
Content, for the sake of the search engines
So we all know the importance of quality content for SEO; providing content for the user as opposed to the search engines. It used to be that copyrighting for SEO was treading the line between readability and keyword density, which is obviously no longer the case. So, my question is this, for a website which doesn't require a great deal of content to be successful and to fullfil the needs of the user, should we still be creating relavent content for the sake of SEO? For example, should I be creating content which is crawlable but may not actually be needed / accessed by the user, to help improve rankings? Food for thought 🙂
Algorithm Updates | | underscorelive0 -
Large number of thin content pages indexed, affect overall site performance?
Hello Community, Question on negative impact of many virtually identical calendar pages indexed. We have a site that is a b2b software product. There are about 150 product-related pages, and another 1,200 or so short articles on industry related topics. In addition, we recently (~4 months ago) had Google index a large number of calendar pages used for webinar schedules. This boosted the indexed pages number shown in Webmaster tools to about 54,000. Since then, we "no-followed" the links on the calendar pages that allow you to view future months, and added "no-index" meta tags to all future month pages (beyond 6 months out). Our number of pages indexed value seems to be dropping, and is now down to 26,000. When you look at Google's report showing pages appearing in response to search queries, a more normal 890 pages appear. Very few calendar pages show up in this report. So, the question that has been raised is: Does a large number of pages in a search index with very thin content (basically blank calendar months) hurt the overall site? One person at the company said that because Panda/Penguin targeted thin-content sites that these pages would cause the performance of this site to drop as well. Thanks for your feedback. Chris
Algorithm Updates | | cogbox0 -
Advice / Help with simliar post titles
Does anyone know if the new google ove optimisation penalties would be actioned for similar post titles? We have a back catalouge of our magazines online and each title is very simliar ie magazine name - issue number - month. These have been flagged up by the SEO Moz pro service as being duplicate content but although each post is laid out the same each has different content with int it. the titles however are all very simliar - is this a bad idea and also if so what would be a better way of grouping the posts so that the titles are different enough - would the main subject of each magazine included be enough? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | luwhosjack0 -
Help, I am in Local Search Results!
I do not know what to do with this... and could use a bit of advice on this issue: "Doing things right", resulted in great organic rankings and a bonus by showing top of local search results for our area. Sounds great... until Google decides it was time to mix things up a little. I do not know if this applies to all types of businesses, but for ours it means that you will no longer get any organic page 1 listing if you are a local business that (un)luckily ranks in local results too. One day G will include local results on a keyword, the next they won't... making our SEOMoz Campaign rankings weekly a true yo-yo of "50 keywords declined by >48 and >49 places", and "30 keywords improved by <47 and <49". It turned this feature in campaigns completely useless for me (ever since SEOMoz decided to include the local result light bulb that is) Some traffic dropped from 240 a day for one keyword, to 30 now for that same keyword. Frustrated? You bet. I do not understand why Google seems to create a war with local businesses. Should we get out of Local results or does anyone have any ideas, suggestions? Thanks a bunch guys!
Algorithm Updates | | Discountvc3 -
Google and Content at Top of Page Change?
We always hear about how Google made this change or that change this month to their algorithm. Sometimes it's true and other times it's just a rumor. So this week I was speaking with someone in the SEO field who said that this week a change occurred at Google and is going to become more prevalent where content placed at the "top of the fold" on merchant sites with products are going to get better placement, rather than if you have your products at top with some content beneath them at the bottom of the page. Any comments on this?
Algorithm Updates | | applesofgold0 -
Is this the best way to get rid of low quality content?
Hi there, after getting hit by the Panda bear (30% loss in traffic) I've been researching ways to get rid of low quality content. From what I could find the best advise seemed to be a recommendation to use google analytics to find your worst performing pages (go to traffic sources - google organic - view by landing page). Any page that hasn't been viewed more than 100 times in 18 months should be a candidate for a deletion. Out of over 5000 pages and using this report we identified over 3000 low quality pages which I've begun exporting to excel for further examination. However, starting with the worst pages (according to analytics) I'm noticing some of our most popular pages are showing up here. For example: /countries/Panama is showing up as zero views but the correct version (with the end slash) countries/Panama/ is showing up as having over 600 views. I'm not sure how google even found the former version of the link but I'm even less sure how to proceed now (the webmaster was going to put a no-follow on any crap pages but this is now making him nervous about the whole process). Some advise on how to proceed from here would be fantastico and danke <colgroup><col width="493"></colgroup>
Algorithm Updates | | BrianYork-AIM0