Pagination: rel="next" rel="prev" in ?
-
With Google releasing that instructional on proper pagination I finally hunkered down and put in a site change request.
I wanted the rel="next" and rel="prev" implemented… and it took two weeks for the guy to get it done. Brutal and painful.
When I looked at the source it turned out he put it in the body above the pagination links… which is not what I wanted. I wanted them in the .
Before I respond to get it properly implemented I want a few opinions - is it okay to have the rel="next" in the body? Or is it pretty much mandatory to put it in the head?
(Normally, if I had full control over this site, I would just do it myself in 2 minutes… unfortunately I don't have that luxury with this site)
-
Guys I have just joined seo moz and I ended up with 3600 crawl errors and after speaking with abe from seo moz it soon became clear it was to do with the on page pagination we then asked our developer to add rel=”next” & rel=”prev” Within a few minutes my rankings on certain keywords started to drop some ranking on page 1 in the top 5 have now dropped out of the top 50.
I'm a retailer with a certain amount of knowledge regarding seo but this stuff im completely puzzled could anyone help. my site is www.maximumsports-nutrition.com
Cheers
Andy
-
Ah thanks for that Matthew! You gave me exactly what I needed for my email…
Now to wait another two weeks for this web developer. (beyond frustrating)
-
Matthew is spot on here. Has to be in the head or it wont work properly. All the rel/link tags exist in the head (same with rel=canonical, etc...)
-
It does need to be in the head tag. I was in a similar situation on another site where the rel next/prev was put in the . We saw no results from it (in terms of pages indexed) but as soon as those were moved back to the , life was good.
If you need documentation proof for your change request (which I was asked for!), these might help:
Google's blog post about this says "rel=”next” and rel=”prev” only need to be declared within the section, not within the document ."
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2011/09/pagination-with-relnext-and-relprev.html
At a more basic level, the tag only works in the . See the "Tips & Notes" section.
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
-
Will "repurposing" a keyword on our website affect rankings gained over time?
Hi team! Thinking of "repurposing" a keyword on our website. Reason: when researching this particular keyword, GMS are quite high, however, the new content we're creating is more up to date, better in general, than the old content this keyword is attached to. How will this affect rankings we've gained over time? (i.e., will any "age" benefits gained as that keyword has been in use on our website for a few years, be lost?) Will Google see the keyword/URL as totally new because it's attached to new content/something that has gone live recently? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MariaPuche-Jimenez_Parker0 -
Strange 404s in GWT - "Linked From" pages that never existed
I’m having an issue with Google Webmaster Tools saying there are 404 errors on my site. When I look into my “Not Found” errors I see URLs like this one: Real-Estate-1/Rentals-Wanted-228/Myrtle-Beach-202/subcatsubc/ When I click on that and go to the “Linked From” tab, GWT says the page is being linked from http://www.myrtlebeach.com/Real-Estate-1/Rentals-Wanted-228/Myrtle-Beach-202/subcatsubc/ The problem here is that page has never existed on myrtlebeach.com, making it impossible for anything to be “linked from” that page. Many more strange URLs like this one are also showing as 404 errors. All of these contain “subcatsubc” somewhere in the URL. My Question: If that page has never existed on myrtlebeach.com, how is it possible to be linking to itself and causing a 404?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Fuel0 -
Does my website have an Exact Match Domain or a "brand"?
I'd like to get some input from the Moz community about the domain name I use on a travel website I run as a hobby. I got heavily whacked by an update in September 2012 which some have said was because my site is an EMD. Others said it was because I had poor quality backlinks (but in fact I hardly had any). With the benefit of hindsight, I'd love to know what really happened. The website is www.traveltipsthailand.com (now www.asiantraveltips.com) and the "brand" I use is "Travel Tips Thailand.The traffic penalty I incurred was around 80% and despite a LOT of work overhauling the site and trying to build some better quality links, I don't believe it has really recovered much. It ranks for non-competitive, low-traffic key phrases (which means it's not penalised as such), but struggles to rank anywhere meaningful on any phrase likely to drive traffic to the site. At this stage I really just want to know whether to persist with the site (it's heartbreaking, to be honest) or drop it an build something new from scratch. I monitor the site's progress using Moz Pro, so I can see all the search ranking, authority and backlink data. 5254ab15dcaa91-52423790
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Gavin.Atkinson0 -
Change of URLs: "little by little" VS "all at once"
Hi guys, We're planning to change our URLs structure for our product pages (to make them more SEO friendly) and it's obviously something very sensitive regarding the 301 redirections that we have to take with... I'm having a doubt about Mister Google: if we slowly do that modification (area by area, to minimize the risk of problems in case of bad 301 redirection), would we lose rankings in the search engine? (I'm wondering if they might consider our website is not "coherent" -> not the same product page URLs structure for all the product pages during some time) Thanks for your kind opinion 😉
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kuantokusta0 -
301 redirect a old site that has been "dead" for a while?
Hi guys, A quick question. I have a client who has an old business website that had some great links (Forbes.com, CocaCola.com, etc). The problem is that he knew nothing about SEO and let the hosting expire. He still owns the domain, but the site is no longer listed in Google. He did no SEO, so I am not worried about being hit by any artificial anchor text penalties, since the links are as natural as it gets. So my questions is, would there be any benefit from 301 redirecting that site to his new business? The new business is in almost exactly the same niche as the old site. I am thinking of 301'ing to a sub-page which will refer to his past venture with the old business, not to the homepage of the new site. Thanks in advance for your help.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rayvensoft0 -
"Starting Over" With A New Domain & 301 Redirect
Hello, SEO Gurus. A client of mine appears to have been hit on a non-manual/algorithm penalty. The penalty appears to be Penguin-like, and the client never received any message (not that that means it wasn't manual). Prior to my working with her, she engaged in all kinds of SEO fornication: spammy links on link farms, shoddy article marketing, blog comment spam -- you name it. There are simply too many tens of thousands of these links to have removed. I've done some disavowal, but again, so much of the link work is spam. She is about to launch a new site, and I am tempted to simply encourage her to buy a new domain and start over. She competes in a niche B2B sector, so it is not terribly competitive, and with solid content and link earning, I think she'd be ok. Here's my question: If we were to 301 the old website to the new one, would the flow of page rank outperform any penalty associated with the site? (The old domain only has a PR of 2). Anyone like my idea of starting over, rather than trying to "recover?" I thank you all in advance for your time and attention. I don't take it for granted.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RCNOnlineMarketing0 -
Whats Next, noobie needs some help :)
Hey Everyone, I have been a member of SEOMOZ for about 4 months and love it, it really has helped me out. my first website I am trying to get well ranked in the new zealand market is www.shopezy.co.nz I have chosen: sell online free ecommerce website ecommerce website builder Are paid links the way forward for me? should I aim for more keywords? should I pay for help? Just looking for a lttle direction, if someone could help. thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bonmaklad0 -
If google ignores links from "spammy" link directories ...
Then why does SEO moz have this list: http://www.seomoz.org/dp/seo-directory ?? Included in that list are some pretty spammy looking sites such as: <colgroup><col width="345"></colgroup>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | adriandg
| http://www.site-sift.com/ |
| http://www.2yi.net/ |
| http://www.sevenseek.com/ |
| http://greenstalk.com/ |
| http://anthonyparsons.com/ |
| http://www.rakcha.com/ |
| http://www.goguides.org/ |
| http://gosearchbusiness.com/ |
| http://funender.com/free_link_directory/ |
| http://www.joeant.com/ |
| http://www.browse8.com/ |
| http://linkopedia.com/ |
| http://kwika.org/ |
| http://tygo.com/ |
| http://netzoning.com/ |
| http://goongee.com/ |
| http://bigall.com/ |
| http://www.incrawler.com/ |
| http://rubberstamped.org/ |
| http://lookforth.com/ |
| http://worldsiteindex.com/ |
| http://linksgiving.com/ |
| http://azoos.com/ |
| http://www.uncoverthenet.com/ |
| http://ewilla.com/ |0
