Dilemma: Should we use pagination or 'Load More' Function
-
In the interest of pleasing Google with their recent updates and clamping down on duplicate content and giving a higher preference to pages with rich data, we had a tiny dilemma that might help others too.
We have a directory like site, very similar to Tripadvisor or Yelp, would it be best to:
A) have paginated content with almost 40 pages deep of data < OR >
B) display 20 results per page and at the bottom have "Load More" function which would feed more data only once its clicked.
The problem we are having now is that deep pages are getting indexed and its doing us no good, most of the juice and page value is on the 1st one, not the inner pages.
Wondering what are the schools of thought on this one.
Thanks
-
Thanks Irving.
Could you elaborate a bit on Load More being SEO friendly? Is there a way of doing it that is potentially damaging?
Also, if this is done, there wouldnt be a need to have paginated content, thus making the whole noindex part irrelevant, right?
-
if the load more is SEO friendly and all the content is on the first page AND the page speed (load time) is somewhat reasonable I would put it all on the one page and noindex,follow the paginated ones.
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
-
How much risk would there be with this 'repeating of a sentence' situation?
Hello, A business owner and design decision was made on a published article page to have a summary sentence/paragraph placed prominently with a unique font treatment in the article header along with the article's main imagery. Historical content that does not have this summary migrated with "the first sentence of the article" used for this introduction/summary sentence/paragraph. In both cases, where there is a unique summary and where the first sentence is used, the article text normally begins below a graphical element below the summary element. Thus, when the first sentence was used for the summary, the first sentence will repeat, relatively close together on each page where this happens. The question is: How much risk would i be taking on in allowing the first sentence of these articles to get repeated in close proximity on the page. I wanted to get some other perspectives on this unique situation. Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JennyTTGT0 -
Removing content from Google's Indexes
Hello Mozers My client asked a very good question today. I didn't know the answer, hence this question. When you submit a 'Removing content for legal reasons report': https://support.google.com/legal/contact/lr_legalother?product=websearch will the person(s) owning the website containing this inflammatory content recieve any communication from Google? My clients have already had the offending URL removed by a court order which was sent to the offending company. However now the site has been relocated and the same content is glaring out at them (and their potential clients) with the title "Solicitors from Hell + Brand name" immediately under their SERPs entry. **I'm going to follow the advice of the forum and try to get the url removed via Googles report system as well as the reargard action of increasing my clients SERPs entries via Social + Content. ** However, I need to be able to firmly tell my clients the implications of submitting a report. They are worried that if they rock the boat this URL (with open access for reporting of complaints) will simply get more inflammatory)! By rocking the boat, I mean, Google informing the owners of this "Solicitors from Hell" site that they have been reported for "hosting defamatory" content. I'm hoping that Google wouldn't inform such a site, and that the only indicator would be an absence of visits. Is this the case or am I being too optimistic?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | catherine-2793880 -
Using Canonical Attribute
Hi All, I am hoping you can help me? We have recently migrated to the Umbraco CMS and now have duplicate versions of the same page showing on different URLs. My understanding is that this is one of the major reasons for the rel=canonical tag. So am I right in saying that if I add the following to the page that I want to rank then this will work? I'm just a little worried as I have read some horror stories of people implementing this attribute incorrectly and getting into trouble. Thank you in advance
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Creditsafe0 -
Do Q&A 's work for SEO
If I create a good community in my particular field on my SEO site and have a quality Q&A section like this etc (ripping of MOZ's idea here sorry, I hope it's ok) will the long term returns be worth the effort of creating and man ageing this. Is the user created content of as much use as I think it will be?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mark_baird0 -
What's the best way to redirect categories & paginated pages on a blog?
I'm currently re-doing my blog and have a few categories that I'm getting rid of for housecleaning purposes and crawl efficiency. Each of these categories has many pages (some have hundreds). The new blog will also not have new relevant categories to redirect them to (1 or 2 may work). So what is the best place to properly redirect these pages to? And how do I handle the paginated URLs? The only logical place I can think of would be to redirect them to the homepage of the blog, but since there are so many pages, I don't know if that's the best idea. Does anybody have any thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kking41200 -
Client Can't Write His Own Articles
Hello, I'm helping a client put together an FAQ and 5 thorough, graphically stimulating, articles. The client can easily write his FAQ articles. However, he's not knowledgeable enough to write the 5 thorough articles, and hiring an expert to write them from scratch would cost a huge chunk of money. Should we have a writer put together an outline or rough draft and present that to the expert for editing? The client can afford that. Or what's the best way to move forward without costing a huge amount of money?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BobGW1 -
Anyone managed to change 'At a glance:' in local search results
On Google's local search results, i.e when the 'Google places' data is displayed along with the map on the right hand side of the search results, there is also an element 'At a glance:'
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DeanAndrews
The data that if being displayed is from some years ago and the client would if possible like it to reflect there current services, which they have been providing for some five years. According to Google support here - http://support.google.com/maps/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1344353 this cannot be changed, they say 'Can I edit a listing’s descriptive terms or suggest a new one?
No; the terms are not reviewed, curated, or edited. They come from an algorithm, and we do not help that algorithm figure it out. ' My question is has anyone successfully influenced this data and if so how.0 -
Google sees redirect when there isn't any?
I've posted a question previously regarding the very strange changes in our search positions here http://www.seomoz.org/q/different-pages-ranking-for-search-terms-often-irrelevant New strange thing I've noticed - and very disturbing thing - seems like Google has somehow glued two pages together. Or, in other words, looks like Google sees a 301 redirect from one page to another. This, actually, happened to several pages, I'll illustrate it with our Flash templates page. URL: http://www.templatemonster.com/flash-templates.php
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | templatemonster
Has been #3 for 'Flash templates' in Google. Reasons why it looks like redirect:
Reason #1
Now this http://www.templatemonster.com/logo-templates.php page is ranking instead of http://www.templatemonster.com/flash-templates.php
Also, http://www.templatemonster.com/flash-templates.php is not in the index.
That what would typically happen if you had 301 from Flash templates to logo templates page. Reason #2
If you search for cache:http://www.templatemonster.com/flash-templates.php Google will give the cahced version of http://www.templatemonster.com/logo-templates.php!!!
If you search for info:www.templatemonster.com/flash-templates.php you again get info on http://www.templatemonster.com/logo-templates.php instead! Reason #3
In Google Webmaster Tools when I look for the external links to http://www.templatemonster.com/logo-templates.php I see all the links from different sites, which actually point to http://www.templatemonster.com/flash-templates.php listed as "Via this intermediate link: http://www.templatemonster.com/flash-templates.php" As I understand Google makes this "via intermediate link" when there's a redirect? That way, currently Google thinks that all the external links we have for Flash templates are actually pointing to Logo templates? The point is we NEVER had any kind of redirect from http://www.templatemonster.com/flash-templates.php to http://www.templatemonster.com/logo-templates.php I've seen several similar situations on Google Help forums but they were never resolved. So, I wonder if anybody can explain how that could have happened, and what can be done to solve that problem?0