Product search URLs with parameters and pagination issues - how should I deal with them?
-
Hello Mozzers - I am looking at a site that deals with URLs that generate parameters (sadly unavoidable in the case of this website, with the resource they have available - none for redevelopment) - they deal with the URLs that include parameters with *robots.txt - e.g. Disallow: /red-wines/? **
Beyond that, they userel=canonical on every PAGINATED parameter page[such as https://wine****.com/red-wines/?region=rhone&minprice=10&pIndex=2] in search results.**
I have never used this method on paginated "product results" pages - Surely this is the incorrect use of canonical because these parameter pages are not simply duplicates of the main /red-wines/ page? - perhaps they are using it in case the robots.txt directive isn't followed, as sometimes it isn't - to guard against the indexing of some of the parameter pages???
I note that Rand Fishkin has commented: "“a rel=canonical directive on paginated results pointing back to the top page in an attempt to flow link juice to that URL, because “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).” **- yet I see this time again on ecommerce sites, on paginated result - any idea why? **
Now the way I'd deal with this is:
Meta robots tags on the parameter pages I don't want indexing (nofollow, noindex - this is not duplicate content so I would nofollow but perhaps I should follow?)
Use rel="next" and rel="prev" links on paginated pages - that should be enough.Look forward to feedback and thanks in advance, Luke
-
Hi Zack,
Have you configured your parameters in Search Console? Looks like you've got your prev/next tags nailed down, so there's not much else you need to do. It's evident to search engines that these types of dupes are not spammy in nature, so you're not running a risk of getting dinged.
-
Hi Logan,
I've seen your responses on several threads now on pagination and they are spot on so I wanted to ask you my question. We're an eCommerce site and we're using the rel=next and rel=prev tags to avoid duplicate content issues. We've gotten rid of a lot of duplicate issues in the past this way but we recently changed our site. We now have the option to view 60 or 180 items at a time on a landing page which is causing more duplicate content issues.
For example, when page 2 of the 180 item view is similar to page 4 of the 60 item view. (URL examples below) Each view version has their own rel=next and prev tags. Wondering what we can do to get rid of this issue besides just getting rid of the 180 and 60 item view option.
https://www.example.com/gifts/for-the-couple?view=all&n=180&p=2
https://www.example.com/gifts/for-the-couple?view=all&n=60&p=4
Thoughts, ideas or suggestions are welcome. Thanks!
-
I've been having endless conversations about this over the last few days and in conclusion I agree with everything you say - thanks for your excellent advice. On this particular site next/prev was not set up correctly, so I'm working on that right now.
-
Yes I agree totally - some wise words of caution - thanks.
-
thanks for the feedback - it is Umbraco.
-
To touch on your question about if you should follow or nofollow links...if the pages in question could help with crawling in any fashion at all...despite being useless for their own sake, if they can be purposeful for the sake of other pages in terms of crawling and internal pagerank distribution, then I would "follow" them. Only if they are utterly useless for other pages too and are excessively found throughout a crawling of the site would I "nofollow" them. Ideally, these URLs wouldn't be found at all as they are diluting internal pagerank.
-
Luke,
Here's what I'd recommend doing:
- Lose the canonical tags, that's not the appropriate way to handle pagination
- Remove the disallow in the robots.txt file
- Add rel next/prev tags if you can; since parameter'd URLs are not separate pages, some CMSs are weird about adding tags to only certain versions of parameter
- Configure those parameters in Search Console ('the last item under the Crawl menu) - you can specific each parameter on the site and its purpose. You might find that some of these have already been established by Google, you can go in and edit those ones. You should configure your filtering parameters as well.
- You don't want to noindex these pages, for the same reason that you might not be able to add rel next/prev. You could risk that noindex tag applying to the root version of the URL instead of just the parameter version.
Google has gotten really good at identifying types of duplicate content due to things like paginated parameters, so they don't generally ding you for this kind of dupe.
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
-
Magento 1.9 SEO. I have product pages with identical On Page SEO score in the 90's. Some pull up Google page 1 some won't pull up at all. I am searching for the exact title on that page.
I have a website built on Magento 1.9. There are approximately 290,000 part numbers on the site. I am sampling Google SERP results. About 20% of the keywords show up on page 1 position 5 thru 10. 80% don't show up at all. When I do a MOZ page score I get high 80's to 90's. A page score of 89 on one part # may show up on page one, An identical page score on a different part # can't be found on Google. I am searching for the exact part # in the page title. Any thoughts on what may be going on? This seems to me like a Magento SEO issue.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CTOPDS0 -
Consolidate URLs on Wordpress?
Hi Guys, On a WordPress site, we are working with currently has multiple different versions of each URL per page. See screenshot: https://d.pr/i/ZC8bZt Data example: https://tinyurl.com/y8suzh6c Right now the non-https version redirects to the equivalent https versions while some of the https versions don't redirect and are status code 200. We all want all of them to redirect to the highlighted blue version (row a).Is this easily doable in wordpress and how would one go about it? Cheers.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | wickstar1 -
Http - Https Issue
Hey there Mozzers, I have a site that few months ago went from being http - https. All the links redirect perfect but after scanning my site with Screaming Frog i get a bunch of 503 errors. After looking into my website I see that a lot of links in my content and menu have as a link the http url. For example my homepage has content that interlinks to the http version of the site. And even though when I test it it redirects correctly after scanning with Screaming frog it reports back as 503. Any ideas what's going on? Thanks in advance
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Angelos_Savvaidis0 -
WordPress Duplicate URLs?
On my site, there are two different category bases leading to the exact same page. My developer claims that this is a common — and natural — occurrence when using WordPress, and that there's not a duplicate content issue to worry about. Is this true? Here's an example of the correct url. and... Here's an example of the same exact content, but using a different url. Notice that one is coming from /topics and the other is coming from /authors base. My understanding is that this is bad. Am I wrong?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JasonMOZ1 -
Best url structure
I am making a new site for a company that services many cities. I was thinking a url structure like this, website.com/keyword1-keyword2-keyword3/cityname1-cityname2-cityname3-cityname4-cityname5. Will this be the best approach to optimize the site for the keyword plus 5 different cities ? as long as I keep the total url characters under the SeoMoz reccomended 115 characters ? Or would it be better to build separate pages for each city, trying to reword the main services to try to avoid dulpicate content.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jlane90 -
Pagination & SEO
I have the WP-Pagination plugin and I am wondering how to handle duplicate content issues and what's best for SEO. My developer initially downloaded the plugin to speed up loading for the home page. Now my home page has 21 pages of paginated content. But the pagination continues with each of my categories as well. Should I be placing a canonical reference to my home page, or category main page? My site name is gracessweetlife (dot) com
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | gracessweetlife0 -
Retailers Issue
Hi there, We have 20 retailers who are about to launch websites and are going to be selling our products on their websites, however with they have no content for these products they are wanting to take our content we have for our product pages on place the content on their websites, is this going to cause an issue for me? We are ranking well for competitive keywords in this niche and do not want to do anything to harm it. What I would say is the retailers in question of no intention short term anyway of doing anything with SEO. Thanks for any help
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Paul780 -
ECommerce products duplicate content issues - is rel="canonical" the answer?
Howdy, I work on a fairly large eCommerce site, shop.confetti.co.uk. Our CMS doesn't allow us to have 1 product with multiple colour and size options so we created individual product pages for each product variation. This of course means that we have duplicate content issues. The layout of the shop works like this; there is a product group page (here is our disposable camera group) and individual product pages are below. We also use a Google shopping feed. I'm sure we're being penalised as so many of the products on our site are duplicated so, my question is this - is rel="canonical" the best way to stop being penalised and how can I implement it? If not, are there any better suggestions? Also, we have targeted some long-tail keywords in some of the product descriptions so will using rel-canonical effect this or the Google shopping feed? I'd love to hear experiences from people who have been through similar things and what the outcome was in terms of ranking/ROI. Thanks in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Confetti_Wedding0