Experiences with pagination rel=next and prev
-
I have read about people saying that using the rel next and prev tags did not take any positive effect on their sites...
In my case I do not have a typical pagination 1,2,3 but a site about tours in the amazon where each tour-description is divided into a page with
- an overview,
- itinerary,
- Dates & Prices
so instead of Site 1,2,3 Buttons I have the Btns: Tour Overview, Itinerary, Prices
So as all the of pages belong together I thought the rel=next & prev tags will be useful.
Also I want to avoid duplicate content when the page title of the three is pretty similar. Right now the Title is like this:
Amazon Tour XXX YYYY
Amazon Tour XXX - itinerary
Amazon Tour XXX - pricesThe description text is more different...
Is this the best practice in my case?
Thanks for all your opinions!
best regards,
Holger -
Hi Everett,
thanks a lot you your input!
Holger
-
Having looked at the site I can see that the content is more than unique and useful enough. Great job on that!
By using "rel next / prev" in this way you are giving Google the signal that you want the first page (i.e. rio-negro-amazonas-regenwald-expedition-uebersicht.php ) to rank higher than the other two pages for most searches, but that the other pages are unique and should stay indexed. If this is what you intend then I think it is a great plan. However, if all of the pages are equally important, and if each has its own search terms to target, it may be better to let the subsequent pages stand on their own.
It sounds like this is working for you at the moment. Thank you for sharing your findings with us!
-
Hi Everett,
yes you are right, the URLs have their own self-referencing rel canonical.
The URLs are:Rio Negro Expedition
Overview-Page:
http://www.amazonasabenteuer.de/amazonas-expeditionen/rio-negro-amazonas-regenwald-expedition-uebersicht.phpItinerary-Page:
http://www.amazonasabenteuer.de/amazonas-expeditionen/rio-negro-amazonas-regenwald-expedition-reiseablauf.phpDates & Prices Page:
http://www.amazonasabenteuer.de/amazonas-expeditionen/rio-negro-amazonas-regenwald-expedition-reisedaten-preise.php -
Thank you for sharing your direct experience with this strategy.
Do all of these URLs share the same rel canonical tag, or do they each have their own self-referencing rel canonical? I am assuming they each have their own if they are all showing up for searches.
It would really help if you could share the domain so we could have a look. However, as long as the content on each page is not "thin" and is mostly unique to that page I think this strategy would be fine.
-
Hi Everett,
thanks for answering. I also thought just using one page but each subject gets pretty long so using pagination with rel=next / prev as I also want to "indicate the relationship between component URLs" seems to be the best practice in this case.
I'm also using the canonical tag... so the otherway round, what could be a negative effect in my case? I put now one tour online and I can't see any negative effect. The pages have been indexed and google shows them up for my keywords.
I was hoping that somebody has done experiences and can talk about. At this moment I have no negative effects about this practice and a would recommend it.
-
Hello Holger,
I apologize for the wait on this. We rely on the community to help answer questions, but sometimes nobody is able to help out in a timely manner so we answer them ourselves as well.
I do not think rel next/prev is the best solution for the situation described. I think the best practice would be to have all of that content on one page. You could change the view of the content (such as when someone clicks the "itinerary" tab) by adding a hash symbol (#) to the URL (e.g. amazon-tour/#itinerary amazon-tour/#prices) to avoid duplicate content issues and make the landing page more robust and useful. You might combine this with the use of a rel canonical tag for that page.
Please let me know if you still need assistance with this question. Again, sorry about the wait!
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
-
Query for paginated URLs - Shopify
Hi there, /collections/living-room-furniture?page=2
On-Page Optimization | | williamhuynh
/collections/living-room-furniture?page=3
/collections/living-room-furniture?page=4 Is that ok to make all the above paginated URLs canonicalised with their main category /collections/living-room-furniture Also, does it needs to be noindex, follow as well? Please advice, thank you!1 -
Can you use the canonical tag and rel=next and rel=prev on category pages.
We have a conflict of information between our web developers and our SEO company. We are an on-line retail company hence we have a fair number of different categories. Our site is set up with the rel=next and rel=prev tags. Our SEO company have asked us to implement canonical links on our category pages and leave the rel=next and rel=prev tags as they are. Our web developers are saying by doing this we are asking Google to ignore all of our products on all of the pages except page 1 which would mean Google would not index a lot of our products. I have looked at a few articles but I am struggling to understand which way to go. Any advice would be appreciated. Thank you in advance.
On-Page Optimization | | Palmbourne0 -
Rel-canonical
Hi, I am a bit confused. A potential clients website has three versions: http://www. http:// http://dev. In each version they have used the rel=canonical back to each base version. So http://www." http://" http://dev." I would have expected duplicate content but I see only one version of the content when I check using "....." in Google. Using the site: tool I see that all three versions are indexed. When moving through the navigation on them, they all redirect to the one home page - the www version. Any idea what is going on and what should be recommended?Redirecting all versions to the www. version? Is it a problem?
On-Page Optimization | | AL123al0 -
Pagination on related content within a subject
A client has come to us with new content and sections for their site. The two main sections are "Widget Services" - the sales pages, and "Widget Guide" - a non-commercial guide to using the widgets etc. Both the Services and Guide pages contain the same pages (red widgets, blue widgets, triangle widgets), and - here's the problem - the same first paragraph. i.e. ======== Blue widget services Blue widgets were invented in 1906 by Professor Blue. It was only a coincidence that they were blue. We stock a full range of blue widgets, we were voted best blue widget handler at widgetcon 2013. Buy one now See our guide to blue widgets here Guide to blue widgets Blue widgets were invented in 1906 by Professor Blue. It was only a coincidence that they were blue. The thing about blue widgets as they're not at all like red widgets at all. For starters, they're blue. Find more information about our blue widgets here ======== In all of these pages, the first paragraph is ~200 words and provides a great introduction to the subject, and the rest of the page is 600-800 words, making these pages unique enough to justify being different pages. We want to deal with this by declaring each page as a paginated version of a two page article on each type of widget (using rel=prev/next). Our thinking is that Google probably handles introuctions/headers on paginated content in a sensible way. Has anyone experienced this before? Is there any issues on using rel="prev" and rel="next" when they're not strictly paginated?
On-Page Optimization | | BabelPR0 -
Which pages should use rel="canonical" links?
I have many pages showing up as multiple content. Most of the them belong to product pages for my store, login pages that show up everywhere on the site, etc. I know that I need to use the rel=canonical link in the header but after searching the forum I'm still unsure of what pages need it. Is it the pages that I don't want searched/crawled by Google or the other way around? Thanks! Crystal
On-Page Optimization | | COfashionista0 -
Should I worry about duplicate titles on pages where there is paginated content?
LivingThere.com is a real estate search site and many of our content pages are "search result" - ish in that a page often provides all the listings that are available and this may go on for multiple pages. For example, this is a primary page about a building: http://livingthere.com/building/31308-Cocoa-Exchange Because of the number of listings, the listings paginate to a second page: http://livingthere.com/building/31308-Cocoa-Exchange?MListings_page=2 Both pages have the same Page Title. Is this a concern? If so is there a "best practice" for giving paginated content different titles? Thanks! Nate
On-Page Optimization | | nate1230 -
Next on-page steps for an SEO newbie
Hi there! I'm new to Seomoz and am really pleased with the service so far. I've been doing some On-page optimizations and am gradually getting most of my pages to an A grade, but I wondered what the next steps would be? For example I have been looking at the search term "the shins fans". I have an A grade for my page (http://tastebuds.fm/artists/the+shins) but it lists on the 2nd page of SERPS for the term (in the UK at least). Can anyone recommend any tips for taking my page to the 1st page of SERPS? This site seems to do well: http://www.fanpop.com/spots/the-shins I am aware of the importance of link-building, but I'm specifically looking for tips on optimizing the page itself. Many Thanks, Alex
On-Page Optimization | | AlexParish0 -
My report also notes that I have 176 Rel Canonical. What does this mean and how do I fix it. Thanks
My report also notes that I have 176 Rel Canonical. What does this mean and how do I fix it. Thanks http://pro.seomoz.org/campaigns/95663/issues/18
On-Page Optimization | | cyaindc0