How To Implement Pagination Properly? Important and Urgent!
-
I have seen many instructions but I am still uncertain. Here is the situation
We will be implementing rel prev rel next on our paginted pages.
The question is:
- Do we implement self referencing canonical URL on the main page and each paginated page?
- Do we implement noindex/follow meta robots tag on each paginated page?
- Do we include the canonical URL for each paginated page in the sitemap if we do not add the meta robots tag?
- We have a view all but will not be using it due to page load capabilities...what do we do with the viewl all URL? Do we add meta robots to it?
- For website search results pages containing pagination should we just put a noindex/follow meta robots tag on them?
- We have seperate mobile URL's that also contain pagination. Do we need to consider these pages as a seperate pagination project? We already canonical all the mobile URL's to the main page of the desktop URL.
Thanks!
-
Hello SEO32,
I apologize for the delayed response. There are several good questions here. They're also complicated questions, which don't really always have a single "correct" answer. So much revolves around the specific situation, and without seeing your website it is difficult to say what is best for you. Also, much of what we think we know about this kind of stuff is either based on what Google tells us (which isn't always the truth) and what we've observed and deduced from our own experiences (which aren't always the same). True "testing" of this stuff one variable at a time isn't always possible so we rely on best practices and our own experience.
That said, I will attempt to answer your questions with what I would probably do in most situations, including links to more information when possible.
Do we implement self referencing canonical URL on the main page and each paginated page?
Here's what Rand says, and he's probably seen way more data than I have:
"Whatever you do, DO NOT:
- Put a rel=canonical directive on paginated results pointing back to the top page in an attempt to flow link juice to that URL. You'll either misdirect the engines into thinking you have only a single page of results or convince them that your directives aren't worth following (as they find clearly unique content on those pages).
- Add nofollow to the paginated links on the results pages. This tells the engines not to flow link juice/votes/authority down into the results pages that desperately need those votes to help them get indexed and pass value to the deeper pages.
- Create a conditional redirect so that when search engines request paginated results, they 301 redirect or meta refresh back to the top page of results."
Keep in mind that post is from 2010, and I think before Google said a "View All" canonical <a>was their preference</a>.
I have seen plenty of sites do well ranking the canonical category page, and with indexing most of the product pages, while all paginated pages had a rel canonical that referenced the first page in the series (i.e. .com/category/ or .com/categry1/category2/). It probably helps that they had good XML sitemaps for product pages, and plenty of internal linking, unique content on category pages, etc.
I have also seen sites do well using rel next/prev without rel canonical, or rel next/prev with self-referencing canonicals on paginated category pages.
I think where you run into problems is when you also allow the facet/filter/sort versions to have self-referencing rel canonical tags.
Here is what I advise in most cases:
Use rel next/prev (not because I think it works, but because Google says to and I don't think it hurts) along with self-referencing rel canonical tags, and "follow,noindex" robots meta tags on paginated pages.
Always include a followable link to the first page in the series from every subsequent page. For example:
<previous>first...1...25...26...27...last...</previous>
I recommend always having a first and last page link. The first is obvious because it means pagerank is going to flow into it from every other page in the set, giving it the most internal links of all. The last is more of a crawlability and usability thing. For users it helps us figure out how much further we have to go. It does the same thing for search engines. Instead of blindly following a path that may or may not have an end, a message is sent that tells a spider how much further it has to go. I don't know if Google takes advantage of that signal or not, but it just makes sense to include it. If you want to get fancy you can try making the 'last' link flash or javascript or something so it doesn't pass (as much?) page rank.
The category root pages usually have links from site-wide navigation, unlike the paginated versions, which further establishes it as the page that should be ranked highest.
Make sure the first page in each series is indexable, and has content that does not appear on the paginated versions. Also, make sure that ?p=1 doesn't have a self-referencing canonical tag, but references the root page for that series (e.g. /category1/category2/).
All subsequent variations (e.g. color, size) should rel canonical back to their root page. For example:
/category1/category2/?page=2&size=s&color=blue would have the following URL in the rel canonical tag:
/category1/category2/?page=2
Which happens to be followable, but not-indexable, and has a self-referencing rel canonical tag.In this way you give search engines a strong signal about which URL in the whole set is the strongest (i.e. /category1/category2/) because it is indexable, has its own content, has the most internal and external links, is the simplest version of this URL pattern, and is at the root of the directory. You're telling search engines which page is next in the series, and that this page is first in the series. You're telling search engines which page is last in the series, as well. Google usually does an awesome job figuring it out from there. There are always exceptions.
Do we implement noindex/follow meta robots tag on each paginated page?
I would. Consider this from Google's perspective, or from that of a searcher. Someone types "Blue Flower Dress" into Google. Is the best page to return a deep category page full of blue dresses, one of which happens to have flowers? Or would it be the Blue Flower Dress product page? I can't think of any reason why I would want to land on page 3, where what I'm looking for is listed among dozens of other things, when I could just go straight to the thing I'm looking for.
Likewise, if someone searches for "Blue Dresses" is the best page /dresses/blue/?page=3 (paginated page in the Blue Dresses category), OR /dresses/blue/ (the very first page of the Blue Dresses category), which also has useful content about blue dresses?
Long story short, when it comes to transactional eCommerce queries, they're usually either looking for a product page or the first page of a specific category or sub-category. Or sometimes the home page. Therefore, I don't see any reason for allowing paginated URLs to be indexable in most cases. Non-transactional eCommerce content is different (e.g. buying guides, comparison charts, reviews...) but I still wouldn't allow paginated pages to be indexed in most cases.
Slightly Off Topic - Filters/Facets/Sorts
Or perhaps the category is "casual dresses" and "blue" is specified in the "color" attribute. In this case, would the best page be /dresses/casual/?color=blue , /dresses/casual/ or /dresses/casual/?color=blue&page=4 for someone who Googled "blue dresses"? I've bolded the one I'd prefer as a searcher.
Here again, as with the internal search results, there is an opportunity to use real data to inform your decision. Pay attention to the facet/filter/sort URLs most accessed by shoppers and consider turning those into category or collections pages with their own URL pattern (e.g. /dresses/casual/blue/). One example I come across all the time is when "Brand" is a filter instead of its own limb in the category structure. If people are shopping by brand, as they do with most consumer products, then you should have a brand subcategory under each major top-level category. If I search for Levi Jeans Google doesn't want to send me to a "pants" page where I have to set a filter to see only Levis. I should go to pants/brand/levi/ . If I Google Chefmate Pots I want to see cookware/pots/brands/chefmate so I don't have to set a filter after I get there.
This doesn't mean all filter pages should be turned into category pages either. Use your best judgement based on the pages most of your users are accessing from the navigation and filters.
Do we include the canonical URL for each paginated page in the sitemap if we do not add the meta robots tag?
I would add the robots meta tag. Please let me know if I've misunderstood the question.
We have a view all but will not be using it due to page load capabilities...what do we do with the view-all URL? Do we add meta robots to it?
I would add a meta robots "index,nofollow" tag, and would also use the canonical page's URL (e.g. /category1/category2) in the rel canonical tag.
For website search results pages containing pagination should we just put a noindex/follow meta robots tag on them?
This is one of those situations involving crawl budget potentially being eaten up by an infinite amount of pages. I would consider blocking the internal search result URLs in the robots.txt file. They are of no use to Google, as they consider a search engine returning search results with links to more search results somewhere else a bad user experience. This is also what Google recommends in their Webmaster Guidelines:
"Use robots.txt to prevent crawling of search results pages or other auto-generated pages that don't add much value for users coming from search engines."
However, I would also make use of those pages internally. Rather than relying on a search result page for things people often look for, track what is being searched for and create static, indexable pages. For example, try "Collections" pages on eCommerce sites, as well as FAQ pages, or "Industries" or "Use Case"-type pages on lead generation sites. This is a much better user experience for someone arriving on that page from a search engine.
We have separate mobile URL's that also contain pagination. Do we need to consider these pages as a separate pagination project? We already canonical all the mobile URL's to the main page of the desktop URL.
I think you should if that's the way you're handling it. Here is a post I did on mobile best practices. It covers some other options. I would also add a rel=”alternate” tag in the HTML header of the desktop page, which alerts search engines to the corresponding mobile URL and helps define the relationship between the two pages.
The bottom line for me is to always think about what would be the best experience for someone searching from Google for something, and to try and use all of the various technical options to ensure that is the page I'm telling Google they should rank for that query, or those types of queries. The 'best practice' changes, depending on the situation.
I hope others will join the discussion with their own experiences and findings.
-
Hi,
Please check this moz article on this @ SEO Guide to Google Webmaster Recommendations for Pagination
Hope this helps you.
Thanks
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
-
If I use content from DomainA on DomainB, but spread it - how do I implement the canoncial tag?
Hey community, I have a question regarding canonical tags.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ElliPirelli
I used the content of one of my domains (nameA.com/ContentA) and copied it to another domain, but on several pages: nameB.com/ContentA1
nameB.com/ContentA2
nameB.com/ContentA3
and so on). So I divided the content from domainA to several pages of domainB. The reason is, that my client wants to build a new business on domainB and wants to use the exact same content from domainA, because he can't afford another copywriter at the moment (and he doesn't want to rewrite it himself). Problem: DomainA is ranking for this content and he wants to keep the rankings, until domainB ranks similar (for the same keywords, of course). So my question is: Can I put a canonical tag on domainA?
My thoughts are: Not a single page of domainB is 100% duplicate content, as it's always only partialy the same. Can I just choose one of those pages from domainB to put as link-goal for the canonical tag? Or do I need to create a "view-all" page on domainB, with all the content put together, so it's 100% duplicate to domainA, and then put a canonical tag to domainA and link to this "view-all" page? If I do so, do I need to also put canonicals on every single page from domainB, to link to this "view-all" page?
IMPORTANT: Would the other pages of domainB then be ranked/listed in the SERRPs, or only the "view-all" site? I would really appreciate your help, as I have been seaching for answers to this specific problem since more than a week... Thank you! Best regards0 -
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
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | QubaSEO
etc etc rel=canonical from page 2 to page 1
rel=canonical from page 3 to page 1
etc etc i.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!0 -
Importance of external links in 2018
How important are external links in 2018. How much of a percentage do they represent when deciding to rank a page. I imagine it depends on the query but I was wondering it if 10 % of of 60 % ? My feeling is that with good content you can get on almost any query on the 1 st page without links because that would be too penalising to small business if they had no possibility to rank with just content. Looking forward to getting some feedback.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics2 -
Fast/Easy Way to Implement Canonical tags in Bulk in Magento CMS?
Hello Amazing SEO Community! Quick Q for a client with a TON of duplicate content. (yikes!) My client is currently undertaking a large SEO project around canonical tagging for their thousands of duplicate pages. Currently, one product sits on multiple URLs and they are being indexed as different pages (with the same content). The issue is found across all products and other pages, and across their international sites as well. One core challenge they face now is lack of time/resources from their developer side. The solution we see to the duplicate content is to manually add a canonical tag to each of our tens of thousands of pages. Their content management system is Magento. Has anyone ever tackled canonicalization for a large site that uses Magento? Any more efficient solutions to manual tagging is ideal. Thanks in advance for your input. -Bonnie
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | accpar0 -
Implementation of structured data = a significant drop in positions in the results
Hi friends,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | zkouska
In one of our websites (ecommerce) with the implementation of structured data we noticed a significant drop in positions in the results.
Does anyone have a similar experience? Thanks... 🙂0 -
Pitfalls when implementing the “VARY User-Agent” server response
We serve up different desktop/mobile optimized html on the same URL, based on a visitor’s device type. While Google continue to recommend the HTTP Vary: User-Agent header for mobile specific versions of the page (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=va6qtaiZRHg), we’re also aware of issues raised around CDN caching; http://searchengineland.com/mobile-site-configuration-the-varies-header-for-enterprise-seo-163004 / http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2249533/How-Googles-Mobile-Best-Practices-Can-Slow-Your-Site-Down / http://orcaman.blogspot.com/2013/08/cdn-caching-problems-vary-user-agent.html As this is primarily for Google's benefit, it's been proposed that we only returning the Vary: User-Agent header when a Google user agent is detected (Googlebot/MobileBot/AdBot). So here's the thing: as the server header response is not “content” per se I think this could be an okay solution, though wanted to throw it out there to the esteemed Moz community and get some additional feedback. You guys see any issues/problems with implementing this solution? Cheers! linklater
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | linklater0 -
Pagination, Canonical, Prev & Next
Hello All
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Vitalized
I have a question about my Magento setup. I have lots of categories which have many products so the categories paginate. I've seen info about making sure the Canonical tag doesn't simply send Search Engines back to the first page meaning the paginated pages won't get indexed. I've also seen info about using the rel=next & rel=prev to help Search Engines understand the category pages are paginated... Is it okay to use both? I've made sure that: category/?p=1 has a canonical of category/ to make sure there isn't duplicate content. Here's an example of category/?p=2 meta data:
http://website.com/category/?p=2" />
http://website.com/category/" />
http://website.com/category/?p=3" />0 -
Proper use and coding of rel = "canonical" tag
I'm working on a site that has pages for many wedding vendors. There are essentially 3 variations of the page for each vendor with only slightly different content, so they're showing up as "duplicate content" in my SEOmoz Campaign. Here's an example of the 3 variations: http://www.weddingreportsma.com/MA-wedding.cfm/vendorID/4161 http://www.weddingreportsma.com/MA-wedding.cfm?vendorID=4161&action=messageWrite http://www.weddingreportsma.com/MA-wedding.cfm?vendorID=4161&action=writeReview Because of this, we placed a rel="canoncial" tag in the second 2 pages to try to fix the problem. However, the coding does not seem to validate in the w3 html validator. I can't say I understand html well enough to understand the error the validator is pointing out. We also added a the following to the second 2 types of pages <meta name="robots" content="noindex"> Am I employing this tag correctly in this case? Here is a snippet of the code below. <html> <head> <title>Reviews on Astonishing Event, Inc from Somerset MAtitle> <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="[/includes/style.css](view-source:http://www.weddingreportsma.com/includes/style.css)"> <link href="[http://www.weddingreportsma.com/MA-wedding.cfm/vendorID/4161](view-source:http://www.weddingreportsma.com/MA-wedding.cfm/vendorID/4161)" rel="canonical" /> <meta name="robots" content="noindex">
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jeffreytrull1
<meta name="keywords" content="Astonishing Event, Inc, Somerset Massachusetts, Massachusetts Wedding Wedding Planners Directory, Massachusetts weddings, wedding Massachusetts ">
<meta name="description" content="Get information and read reviews on Astonishing Event, Inc from Somerset MA. Astonishing Event, Inc appears in the directory of Somerset MA wedding Wedding Planners on WeddingReportsMA.com."> <script src="[http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js](view-source:http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js)" type="text/javascript">script> <script type="text/javascript"> _uacct = "UA-173959-2"; urchinTracker(); script> head>0