Duplication, pagination and the canonical
-
Hi all, and thank you in advance for your assistance.
We have an issue of paginated pages being seen as duplicates by pro.moz crawlers.
The paginated pages do have duplicated by content, but are not duplicates of each other. Rather they pull through a summary of the product descriptions from other landing pages on the site.
I was planing to use rel=canonical to deal with them, however I am concerned as the paginated pages are not identical to each other, but do feature their own set of duplicate content!
We have a similar issue with pages that are not paginated but feature tabs that alter the URL parameters like so:
?st=BlueWidgets
?st=RedSocks
?st=Offers
These are being seen as duplicates of the main URL, and again all feature duplicate content pulled from elsewhere in the site, but are not duplicates of each other. Would a canonical tag be suitable here?
Many Thanks
-
The rel next prev is not for duplicated content - it just shows google how the parts relate to the whole.
An alternative to the rel next prev is the "Classic Pagination for SEO" that uses noindex another article by Adam
http://searchengineland.com/the-latest-greatest-on-seo-pagination-114284
If you have a duplicate issue, this would solve it as you would noindex all the duplicate pages.
What you need to do (and I can't do this for you), is to look at all the crawl paths that you are providing Google. As I mention above, you are not doing any favors to Google or to your site when you show Google an infinite number of paths to get to the same content. It just wastes Google's time and you don't want to do that when Google also has to crawl the rest of the internet. If you solve this issue, you will solve your duplicate issue.
AJ Kohn just posted an article on the concept of crawl budget that talks about this. I think the article is quite good and it explains why we need to look at all the topics of noindex, nofollow, robots, canonical and rel next prev http://www.blindfiveyearold.com/crawl-optimization
-
Thanks CleverPhD,
That's a very interesting read by Adam Audette too, thanks.
I should say that there's no internal search, each tab has a series of duplicated 'blurbs' taken from the product's unique landing page, while the body copy remains the same across the slight variations in the URL. So with:
example.com/example/?st=BlueWidgets
example.com/example/?st=RedSocks
all of these will feature the same body copy, while the last two will have a series of small descriptions from other landing pages in the site. Would the canonical tag be appropriate in this case? We only need to index 'example.com/example'.
Also, does the rel next prev take into account duplicate content? We want only the main URL indexed as all the paginated pages feature duplicate content, there is no view all page however.
Many thanks
-
If I am understanding the question - I think pulling in some body copy from each search result (and not just the whole page) would be fine. I think Google will see that this is a search result and that you are pointing to other pages. You are probably going to pull in text from the title too. This is common practice in search results - heck Google does it!
If you are still concerned about the pulled in descriptions, your option is to setup the system to have an alternate description for each page. Use the alternate description when you pull it into your main page. It is more work, but it will eliminate this issue.
Separately, paginated pages no longer need to be canonicaled to the index page. You can use rel next and prev.
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2011/09/pagination-with-relnext-and-relprev.html
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/1663744?hl=en
It explains to Google the relationship between P1 and P2,3,4,5,n etc.
Beyond that, you need to watch that you do not get into too many paginated pages to get to the exact same product pages. Lets say you had 1,000 widgets that were blue, red and green and also were Free, Expensive or Cheap. You would have several sets of paginated pages (one set for Blue, one for Red, Green, Free, Cheap, Expensive, one for Red and Expensive) etc. It gets to be a little crazy as they all lead to the same set of widget product pages. You need to manage how to have Google crawl all that and not have your Paginated Category pages look like duplicated. Adam Audette writes great stuff on this. Look here for things to consider
http://www.rimmkaufman.com/blog/site-search-dynamic-content-and-seo/01032013/
-
Thank you Robert, and for the helpful link.
You did read my question correctly, however I failed to ask it ask entirely correctly. Just to complicate matters, I neglected to mention that there is body copy on each page, which technically will be duplicated.
It sits above the tabs and does not change, while the tabbed pages - under new URL parameters - pull in a sentence or two of product description from elsewhere (a unique landing page).
So,
?st=BlueWidgets
?st=RedSocks
?st=Offers
will all feature the same body copy and different duplicate content. For obvious reasons, we only want the SE to index the main URL.
Any ideas?
Thanks again
-
Hi
It doesn't sound like rel=canonical is the solution, as each one of your pages might feature multiple pieces of content from various other parts of your website (if I've read your question correctly) - so which would be the canonical version of the page?
You could use Parameter Handling in Webmaster Tools to ensure Google knows what to do with your various parameters. Moz doesn't matter here, as long as Search Engines are aware of how to handle your pages correctly.
There's a good overview here.
I hope that's helpful
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
-
Canonical or hreflang?
I have four English sites for four different countries, UK, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand and I want to share some content between the sites. On the pages that share the content, which is essentially exactly the same on all 4 sites, do I use the hreflang tags like: or do I add a canonical tag to the other three pointing to the "origin", which would be the UK site? I believe it is best practice to use one or the other, but I'm not sure which make sense in this situation.
Technical SEO | | andrew-mso0 -
Content Duplication - Zencart
Hi Guys !!! Based on crawler results, it shows that I have 188 duplicate content pages, out of which some are those in which I am not able to understand where the duplication is ??? The page created is unique. All the URL's are static, all titles, metat tags are unique. How do I remove this duplication !!! I am using Zencart as a platform. Thanks in advance for the help !!! 🙂
Technical SEO | | sidjain4you0 -
Pagination/Crawl Errors
Hi, Ive only just joined SEO moz and after they crawled my site they came up with 3600 crawl errors mostly being duplicate content and duplicate urls. After researching this it soon became clear it was due to on page pagination and after speaking with Abe from SEO mozhe advised me to take action by getting our developers to implement rel=”next” & rel=”prev” to review. soon after our developers implemented this code ( I have no understanding of this what so ever) 90% of my keywords I had been ranking for in the top 10 have dropped out the top 50! Can anyone explain this or help me with this? Thanks Andy
Technical SEO | | beck3980 -
Why are these pages duplicates when canonical is defined?
The SEOmoz reports indicate that the following pages are duplicates even though the canonical tag has been added. http://www.designquotes.com.au/dq/web/get-quotes/quotes http://www.designquotes.com.au/dq/web/get-quotes/brief Is this normal?
Technical SEO | | designquotes0 -
Duplicate page error
SEO Moz gives me an duplicate page error as my homepage www.monteverdetours.com is the same as www.monteverdetours.com/index is this actually en error? And is google penalizing me for this?
Technical SEO | | Llanero0 -
Duplicate Page Content
I've got several pages of similar products that google has listed as duplicate content. I have them all set up with rel="prev" and rel="next tags telling google that they are part of a group but they've still got them listed as duplicates. Is there something else I should do for these pages or is that just a short falling of googles webmaster tools? One of the pages: http://www.jaaronwoodcountertops.com/wood-countertop-gallery/walnut-countertop-9.html
Technical SEO | | JAARON0 -
The Bible and Duplicate Content
We have our complete set of scriptures online, including the Bible at http://lds.org/scriptures. Users can browse to any of the volumes of scriptures. We've improved the user experience by allowing users to link to specific verses in context which will scroll to and highlight the linked verse. However, this creates a significant amount of duplicate content. For example, these links: http://lds.org/scriptures/nt/james/1.5 http://lds.org/scriptures/nt/james/1.5-10 http://lds.org/scriptures/nt/james/1 All of those will link to the same chapter in the book of James, yet the first two will highlight the verse 5 and verses 5-10 respectively. This is a good user experience because in other sections of our site and on blogs throughout the world webmasters link to specific verses so the reader can see the verse in context of the rest of the chapter. Another bible site has separate html pages for each verse individually and tends to outrank us because of this (and possibly some other reasons) for long tail chapter/verse queries. However, our tests indicated that the current version is preferred by users. We have a sitemap ready to publish which includes a URL for every chapter/verse. We hope this will improve indexing of some of the more popular verses. However, Googlebot is going to see some duplicate content as it crawls that sitemap! So the question is: is the sitemap a good idea realizing that we can't revert back to including each chapter/verse on its own unique page? We are also going to recommend that we create unique titles for each of the verses and pass a portion of the text from the verse into the meta description. Will this perhaps be enough to satisfy Googlebot that the pages are in fact unique? They certainly are from a user perspective. Thanks all for taking the time!
Technical SEO | | LDS-SEO0 -
Is this considered as duplicate content?
One of my clients has a template page they have used repeatedly each time they have a new news item. The template includes a two-paragraph customer quote/testimonial for the company. So, they now have 100+ pages with the same customer quote. The rest of the page content / body copy is unique. Is there any likelihood of this being considered duplicate content?
Technical SEO | | bjalc20110