Duplicate title-tags with pagination and canonical
-
Some time back we implemented the Google recommendation for pagination (the rel="next/prev"). GWMT now reports 17K pages with duplicate title-tags (we have about 1,1m products on our site and about 50m pages indexed in Google)
As an example we have properties listed in various states and the category title would be "Properties for Sale in [state-name]".
A paginated search page or browsing a category (see also http://searchengineland.com/implementing-pagination-attributes-correctly-for-google-114970) would then include the following:
The title for each page is the same - so to avoid the duplicate title-tags issue, I would think one would have the following options:
- Ignore what Google says
- Change the canonical to http://www.site.com/property/state.html (which would then only show the first XX results)
- Append a page number to the title "Properties for Sale in [state-name] | Page XX"
- Have all paginated pages use noindex,follow - this would then result in no category page being indexed
Would you have the canonical point to the individual paginated page or the base page?
-
Dr. Pete,
Do you have any search/sort filters that may be spinning out other copies, beyond just the paginated series? That could be clouding the issue, and these things do get complicated. - How about this is the case? What would you recommend?
Gary
-
Since last week we have chosen to append the page number to the title. Let's see if/how GWMTs status changes.
I would think that the next possible flag would then be on the page-description on paginated pages
-
I suspect you're ok, then. I'd watch those GWT numbers, but unless you're seeing problems with indexation and ranking, then I'd just consider that a notice. I think you're handling it by the book, at least as well as currently possible with Google's changing and somewhat mixed signals on the subject.
-
Thanks for that answer. I am already using the pageNo in GWMT (as paginates). None of the searches spin out other copies - what I see in GWMT is only related to browsing through a product category and paginating.
-
Unfortunately, it can be really tough to tell if Google is honoring the rel=prev/next tags, but I've had gradually better luck with those tags this year. I honestly the GWT issue is a mistake on Google's part, and probably isn't a big deal. They do technically index all of the pages in the series, but the rel=prev/next tags should mitigate any ranking issues that could occur from near-duplicate content. You could add the page # to the title, but I doubt it would have any noticeable impact (other than possibly killing the GWT warning).
I would not canonical to the top page - that's specifically not recommended by Google and has fallen in disfavor over the past couple of years. Technically, you can canonical to a "View All" page, but that has its own issues (practically speaking - such as speed and usability).
Do you have any search/sort filters that may be spinning out other copies, beyond just the paginated series? That could be clouding the issue, and these things do get complicated.
I've had luck in the past with using META NOINDEX, FOLLOW on pages 2+ of pagination, but I've gradually switched to rel=prev/next. Google seems to be getting pickier about NOINDEX, and doesn't always follow the cues consistently. Unfortunately, this is true for all of the cues/tags these days.
Sorry, that's a very long way of saying that I suspect you're ok in this case, as long as the tags are properly implemented. You could tell GWT to ignore the page= parameter in parameter handling, but I'm honestly not sure what impact that has in conjunction with rel=prev/next. It might kill the warning, but the warning's just a warning.
-
I frequently use the page number in titles. It's not a bad solution where you want them all to get indexed.
Keep an eye on whether it affects CTR from the results though. I also like to ensure that there is always a link to the first page of results. This is useful for the user and also helps push more authority to that first page so that it is more likely to be the one that appears.
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
-
Duplicate content homepage - Google canonical 'N/A'?
Hi, I redesigned a clients website and launched it two weeks ago. Since then, I have 301 redirected all old URL's in Google's search results to their counterparts on the new site. However, none of the new pages are appearing in the search results and even the homepage has disappeared. Only old site links are appearing (even though the old website has been taken down ) and in GSC, it's stating that: Page is not indexed: Duplicate, Google chose different canonical than user However, when I try to understand how to fix the issue and see which URL it is claiming to be a duplicate of, it says: Google-selected canonical: N/A It says that the last crawl was only yesterday - how can I possibly fix it without knowing which page it says it's a duplicate of? Is this something that just takes time, or is it permanent? I would understand if it was just Google taking time to crawl the pages and index but it seems to be adamant it's not going to show any of them at all. 55.png
Technical SEO | | goliath910 -
Google ignoring the Title Tag?
Anybody seen this too? We have a webpage with tiny different title tag and H1. If you search for let's say "Renovatie", you get to see the title tag "De kostprijs van je renovatie". However, when you search with the search term "Wat kost een renovatie", we see the H1 title in the SERP, which is "Wat kost een renovatie". So that's normal when you search a term that's exact the same as the H1 tag, Google ignores the title tag? N.
Technical SEO | | nans0 -
Duplicate Title Tags How harmful is it?
I recently updated a site to use a new WordPress theme. This theme in conjunction with Yoast SEO plugin is causing duplicate Title tags. The tags have the same title in them. I discovered this when adding new keywords and pages to the page optimizer in moz. I have since turned off moz to stop the duplicate title tag issue however I am wondering if tuning off yoast is worse then the duplicate title tags. Any clarification on the duplicate page title issue and its consequences would be greatly appreciated.
Technical SEO | | donsilvernail0 -
Page title tags and joomla/JCE
I'm working with a joomla/JCE website. At the moment, the 'title' field in articels controls the page title, menu item name and H1 tag. I've read that I can stop this happening so that I can name each separately and get my Page title tag back! Is anyone using joomla/JCE and can give any advice on how to do this? Many thanks. Iain
Technical SEO | | iain0 -
Why Canonical error?
I just got my SEOMOZ run and it says I have a CANONICAL ERROR: Scorpio Earrings - 7mm Stud - Sterling Silver http://www.astrojewelry.com/jewelry/scorpio-the-scorpion-earrings-30502.htm I'm not sure why--I only changed the <title>tag--not the URL.</span></p> <p><span class="truncated sub-url" title="http://www.astrojewelry.com/jewelry/scorpio-the-scorpion-earrings-30502.htm">Why would this generate a canonical error?</span></p> <p><span class="truncated sub-url" title="http://www.astrojewelry.com/jewelry/scorpio-the-scorpion-earrings-30502.htm">Kathleen</span></p> <p><span class="truncated sub-url" title="http://www.astrojewelry.com/jewelry/scorpio-the-scorpion-earrings-30502.htm">astrojewelry.com</span></p> <p> </p> <p> </p></title>
Technical SEO | | spkcp1110 -
Can somebody explain Canonical tags and the technical elements of SEO?
Newbie here,and learning fast. But... I can't help but feel the technical elements of SEO (i.e. canonical tags, javascript amongst others) are holding me back. My knowledge of programming and coding is basic at best. Do I have to have an understanding of this to get ahead in SEO or is it simply a case of reading some more and knowing the techniques? What percentage of SEO is technical (e.g. html coding etc...) Thanks in advance. N. p.s. could someone explain what canonical tags are?
Technical SEO | | Buzzwords0 -
Catch 22 on duplicate page titles
Hi all, I'm quite new to the SEO space so I apologise if all the information below isn't technically perfect. I ran the SEOmoz pro tool for the first time a month ago (fantastic tool). It picked up a wealth of errors on our site that we are now working on. the problem: we use dynamic pages to display job listings pulled from our database that have picked up many duplicate page titles and content. For example: _Landing page: _http://www.arm.co.uk/jobs/it-contract-jobs/sec=itcontractjobs _Page 2: _http://www.arm.co.uk/jobs/1/-/-/2/itcontractjobs-/9999/2 _Page 3: _http://www.arm.co.uk/jobs/1/-/-/2/itcontractjobs-/9999/3 Following the results of the Moz tool we have now 'no indexed' and 'no followed' the dynamic pages and the errors have dramatically dropped, great! However, on reflection we generate quite a lot of traffic to individual job's listed on our website. By no following the pages we have restricted passing on any 'juice' to these pages, and by no indexing we may be taking them out of Googles index completely. These dynamic pages and individual job listings do generate a lot of traffic to our website via organic search. We do submit the site index to Google that should index the individual jobs that way. So, the question is (I hope this is making sense), are the gains of reducing errors picked up in the moz tool (to improve the overall site performance) likely to outweigh the traffic generated on these dynamically generated pages by being indexed and followed by Google. Ultimately we would like the static landing pages to retain a stronger page rank. Any guidance is very much appreciated. Best Regards,
Technical SEO | | ARMofficial
Sam.0 -
Canonical Tag
Does it do anything to place the Canonical tag on the unique page itself? I thought this was only to be used on the offending pages that are the copies. Thanks
Technical SEO | | poolguy0