Is it a problem that Google's index shows paginated page urls, even with canonical tags in place?
-
Since Google shows more pages indexed than makes sense, I used Google's API and some other means to get everything Google has in its index for a site I'm working on.
The results bring up a couple of oddities.
It shows a lot of urls to the same page, but with different tracking code.The url with tracking code always follows a question mark and could look like:
http://www.MozExampleURL.com?tracking-example
http://www.MozExampleURL.com?another-tracking-examle
http://www.MozExampleURL.com?tracking-example-3
etc
So, the only thing that distinguishes one url from the next is a tracking url. On these pages, canonical tags are in place as:
<link rel="canonical<a class="attribute-value">l</a>" href="http://www.MozExampleURL.com" />
So, why does the index have urls that are only different in terms of tracking urls? I would think it would ignore everything, starting with the question mark. The index also shows paginated pages. I would think it should show the one canonical url and leave it at that. Is this a problem about which something should be done? Best... Darcy
-
Hi Samuel,
Thank you for the detailed answer. A couple of things;
My two "L" typo is just as written here... not on the site. Sorry about that.
On the use of the url parameters indexed, those are used internally, but they're set in GWT as having no effect and to only look at the representative url,.. everything before the question mark.
On your point about rel canonicals, one way we use them is in a category pages which are long lists of other pages. In that case it looks at page one of the long list as the canonical.
With that in mind, along with all the duplicate stuff in the index (paginated page #s, ignored url parameters), what would you suggest I change?
Thanks... Darcy
-
A couple of things. First, a rel=canonical tag -- like many other things -- is only a suggestion to search engines. Google and others can choose to ignore it, though they rarely do. In your post above, you have "canonicall" spelled with two "l"s -- so it might be as simple as changing that!
Second, just to clarify your teminology: What you are showing is not "tracking code" but "URL paramaters." I'm curious as to why the pages with tracking paramaters are being indexed -- normally, this should not happen at all. How are you using the paramaters? Usually, it should only be used to track traffic from external websites. For example: If I run a Facebook ad campaign, I can add a parameter to the ad's destination URL to track the results of the campaign. Google, however, would not index that special URL as a separate page. I'd review Google's information and recommendations on URL paramaters and perhaps change any settings in Google Webmaster Tools.
Third, the recommended practice for paginated pages is to have a "single page" version of the article and make that canonical for search engines (have all paginated pages point to that single-page one with a rel=canonical tag). This can be done whether you want to show a single-page version for users -- though I'd recommend it because most pagination is a cheap attempt just to get more pageviews for advertising revenue, and it's annoying.
Good luck -- I hope this helps!
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
-
Advice needed on canonical paginated pages
Hi there. I use Genesis and StudioPress themes. I recently noticed that the canonical link for blog pages points to the first page on all paginated pages, which I understand is an SEO no-no. I found some code here that adds a unique canonical link to each paginated page but for categories only. It works fine. I only have one category for my site. My question is: is there a downside (or even upside) to not having a blog page and placing a link to my category page in the navigation bar instead, using the category page as the blog page? It looks good and works. What do you think? I find it odd that this seems to be an issue across the Internet and the only solution that comes up relies on the Yoast plugin, which I don't want to use (don't want to use a plugin for SEO). Thanks in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Nobody16165422281340 -
My url disappeared from Google but Search Console shows indexed. This url has been indexed for more than a year. Please help!
Super weird problem that I can't solve for last 5 hours. One of my urls: https://www.dcacar.com/lax-car-service.html Has been indexed for more than a year and also has an AMP version, few hours ago I realized that it had disappeared from serps. We were ranking on page 1 for several key terms. When I perform a search "site:dcacar.com " the url is no where to be found on all 5 pages. But when I check my Google Console it shows as indexed I requested to index again but nothing changed. All other 50 or so urls are not effected at all, this is the only url that has gone missing can someone solve this mystery for me please. Thanks a lot in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Davit19850 -
Can 'follow' rather than 'nofollow' links be damaging partner's SEO
Hey guys and happy Monday! We run a content rich website, 12+ years old, focused on travel in a specific region, and advertisers pay for banners/content etc alongside editorial. We have never used 'nofollow' website links as they're no explicitly paid for by clients, but a partner has asked us to make all links to them 'nofollow' as they have stated the way we currently link is damaging their SEO. Could this be true in any way? I'm only assuming it would adversely affect them if our website was peanalized by Google for 'selling links', which we're not. Perhaps they're just keen to follow best practice for fear of being seen to be buying links. FYI we now plan to change to more full use of 'nofollow', but I'm trying to work out what the client is refering to without seeming ill-informed on the subject! Thank you for any advice 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SEO_Jim0 -
How will changing my website's page content affect SEO?
Our company is looking to update the content on our existing web pages and I am curious what the best way to roll out these changes are in order to maintain good SEO rankings for certain pages. The infrastructure of the site will not be modified except for maybe adding a couple new pages, but existing domains will stay the same. If the domains are staying the same does it really matter if I just updated 1 page every week or so, versus updating them all at once? Just looking for some insight into how freshening up the content on the back end pages could potentially hurt SEO rankings initially. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Bankable1 -
Why isn't Google caching our pages?
Hi everyone, We have a new content marketing site that allows anyone to publish checklists. Each checklist is being indexed by Google, but Google is not storing a cached version of any of our checklists. Here's an example:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Checkli
https://www.checkli.com/checklists/ggc/a-girls-guide-to-a-weekend-in-south-beach Missing Cache:
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:DfFNPP6WBhsJ:https://www.checkli.com/checklists/ggc/a-girls-guide-to-a-weekend-in-south-beach+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us Why is this happening? How do we fix it? Is this hurting the SEO of our website.0 -
Magento: Should we disable old URL's or delete the page altogether
Our developer tells us that we have a lot of 404 pages that are being included in our sitemap and the reason for this is because we have put 301 redirects on the old pages to new pages. We're using Magento and our current process is to simply disable, which then makes it a a 404. We then redirect this page using a 301 redirect to a new relevant page. The reason for redirecting these pages is because the old pages are still being indexed in Google. I understand 404 pages will eventually drop out of Google's index, but was wondering if we were somehow preventing them dropping out of the index by redirecting the URL's, causing the 404 pages to be added to the sitemap. My questions are: 1. Could we simply delete the entire unwanted page, so that it returns a 404 and drops out of Google's index altogether? 2. Because the 404 pages are in the sitemap, does this mean they will continue to be indexed by Google?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | andyheath0 -
Product Pages not indexed by Google
We built a website for a jewelry company some years ago, and they've recently asked for a meeting and one of the points on the agenda will be why their products pages have not been indexed. Example: http://rocks.ie/details/Infinity-Ring/7170/ I've taken a look but I can't see anything obvious that is stopping pages like the above from being indexed. It has a an 'index, follow all' tag along with a canonical tag. Am I missing something obvious here or is there any clear reason why product pages are not being indexed at all by Google? Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Update I was told 'that each of the product pages on the full site have corresponding page on mobile. They are referred to each other via cannonical / alternate tags...could be an angle as to why product pages are not being indexed.'
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RobbieD910 -
How to take out international URL from google US index/hreflang help
Hi Moz Community, Weird/confusing question so I'll try my best. The company I work for also has an Australian retail website. When you do a site:ourbrand.com search the second result that pops up is au.brand.com, which redirects to the actual brand.com.au website. The Australian site owner removed this redirect per my bosses request and now it leads to a an unavailable webpage. I'm confused as to best approach, is there a way to noindex the au.brand.com URL from US based searches? My only problem is that the au.brand.com URL is ranking higher than all of the actual US based sub-cat pages when using a site search. Is this an appropriate place for an hreflang tag? Let me know how I can help clarify the issue. Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | IceIcebaby
-Reed0