Is it necessary to have unique H1's for pages in a pagination series (i.e. blog)?
-
A content issue that we're experiencing includes duplicate H1 issues within pages in a pagination series (i.e. blog). Does each separate page within the pagination need a unique H1 tag, or, since each page has unique content (different blog snippets on each page), is it safe to disregard this?
Any insight would be appreciated. Thanks!
-
Read what EGOL wrote. It depends upon the nature of your blog pagination
There are a few reasons you could have pagination within the blog area of your site
-
Your articles have next buttons and different parts of the article are split across multiple URLs. The content across the paginated elements is distinct
-
Your post feeds are paginated, purely so people can browse to pages of 'older posts' and see what your wrote way back into your archives
-
Your blog posts exist on a single URL, but when users comment on your posts, your individual posts gain paginated iterations so that users to browse multiple pages of UGC comments (as they apply to an individual post)
In the case of 2 or 3 it's not necessarry to have unique H1s or Page Titles on such paginated addresses, except under exceptional circumstances. In the case of #1 you should make the effort!
-
-
This is very true for multi-section articles (which span multiple addresses), and less true of articles which have only one address yet break down into multiple addresses in terms of UGC comment-based pagination
-
I wouldn't worry about it as search bots "should" understand that these pages are part of a paginated series.
However, I would recommend you ensure that "rel=next/prev" is properly implemented (despite Google announcing that they don't support it). Once the pagination is properly implemented & understood, bots will see the pages as a continuation of a series, and therefore will not see duplicate H1s as a problem.
-
In some instances, not using unique
and unique <title>is a huge opportunity loss.</p> <p>Let's say you have a fantastic article about Widgets and you break it up over several pages. The sections of your article are:</p> <ul> <li>wooden widgets</li> <li>metal widgets</li> <li>plastic widgets</li> <li>stone widgets</li> </ul> <p>... if you make custom <h1> and <title> tags for these pages (and post them on unique URLs) you are going to get your article into a lot more SERPs and haul in a lot more traffic.</p></title>
-
Best practice is a unique H1 - only one H1 to describe a page.
-
Don't worry about it. You're not trying to rank your /blog/2 or /blog/17 for any specific terms. Those pages are pretty much for site visitors not the search engines.
As an example, Moz has the same h1 tag on all their blog pages.
All of the following URL's have "The Moz Blog" as the h1 tag:
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
-
Does Google's Information Box Seem Shady to you?
So I just had this thought, Google returns information boxes for certain search terms. Recently I noticed one word searches usually return a definition. For example if you type in the word "occur" or "happenstance" or "frustration" you get a definition information box. But what I didn't see is a reference to where they are getting or have gotten this information. Now it could very well be they built their own database of definitions, and if they did great, but here is where it seems a bit grey to me... Did Google hire a team of people to populate the database, or did they just write an algorithm to comb a dictionary website and stick the information in their database. The latter seems more likely. If that is what happened then Google basically stole the information from somebody to claim it as their own, which makes me worry, if you coin a term, lets say "lumpy stumpy" and it goes mainstream which would entail a lot of marketing, and luck. Would Google just add it to its database and forgo giving you credit for its creation? From a user perspective I love these information boxes, but just like Google expects us webmasters to do, they should be giving credit where credit is due... don't you think? I'm not plugged in to the happenings of Google so maybe they bought the rights, or maybe they bought or hold a majority of shares in some definition type company (they have the cash) but it just struck me as odd not seeing a reference to a site. What are your thoughts?
Algorithm Updates | | donford1 -
Ecommerce SEO: Is it bad to link to product/category pages directly from content pages?
Hi ! In Moz' Whiteboard friday video Headline Writing and Title Tag SEO in a Clickbait World, Rand is talking about (among other things) best practices related to linking between search, clickbait and conversion pages. For a client of ours, a cosmetics and make-up retailer, we are planning to build content pages around related keywords, for example video, pictures and text about make-up and fashion in order to best target and capture search traffic related to make-up that is prevalent earlier in the costumer journey. Among other things, we plan to use these content pages to link directly to some of the products. For example a content piece about how to achieve full lashes will to link to particular mascaras and/or the mascara category) Things is, in the Whiteboard video Rand Says:
Algorithm Updates | | Inevo
_"..So your click-bait piece, a lot of times with click-bait pieces they're going to perform worse if you go over and try and link directly to your conversion page, because it looks like you're trying to sell people something. That's not what plays on Facebook, on Twitter, on social media in general. What plays is, "Hey, this is just entertainment, and I can just visit this piece and it's fun and funny and interesting." _ Does this mean linking directly to products pages (or category pages) from content pages is bad? Will Google think that, since we are also trying to sell something with the same piece of content, we do not deserve to rank that well on the content, and won't be considered that relevant for a search query where people are looking for make-up tips and make-up guides? Also.. is there any difference between linking from content to categories vs. products? ..I mean, a category page is not a conversion page the same way a products page is. Looking forward to your answers 🙂0 -
If our link profile is too "blog link" heavy, will that be all that bad?
We own a site that lends itself extremely well to getting boat loads of links, only down side is that those on the boat are all bloggers. We are selling a product that retails for $6.89 per unit. They are for women. Our target market is any woman/girl who is between 14 and 50. Even better, our cost per unit is only about $0.40. So what we've been doing is sending them out by the hundreds to legit fashion blogs all the way down to blogspot mommy bloggers and the reviews have poured in, literally all of them positive. Moral of the story, we have a good product, and no shortage of bloggers that would be willing to write us up a legit, human written (by a red-blooded American none-the-less) on almost exclusively legit blogs. We're not trying to manipulate what they say, how they link to us, what anchor text they use or anything. We're just sending them product, asking that they do a review and give us a link and that's it. Our worry is that given the nature of the site and the product offering, it's going to be easy to get these legit blog links, but more difficult to get links that "aren't on blogs". Is this going to hurt us, or will Big Google be kind and realize this isn't shady manipulation. It's legit part of our ongoing effort to get the word out. Further evidence that our campaign isn't to manipulate (although we all know we're in it for the links) is that so far 75% of our sales have been driven by these reviews. A few of the bigger sites that have done reviews have each directly resulted in 10+ sales from that single review. So what are all ya'll's thoughts? I suspect we'll be OK, but wanted some others to provide their views.
Algorithm Updates | | AarcMediaGroup0 -
Using a stop word when optimizing pages
I have a page (for a spa) I am trying to fully optimize and, using AdWords have run every conceivable configuration (using Exact Match) to ascertain the optimal phrase to use. Unfortunately, the term which has come up as the 'best' phrase is "spas in XXX" [xxx represents a location]. When reviewing the data, phrases such as "spas XXX" or "spa XXX" doesn't give me an appropriate search volume to warrant optimizing. So, with that said, do I optimize the page without the word "in", and 'hope' we get the search volume for searches using the word "in", or optimize using the stop word? Any thoughts? Thank you!
Algorithm Updates | | MarketingAgencyFlorida0 -
Why is a sub page ranking over home page?
Hey guys! I was wondering whether any of you Mozzers out there could shed some light on this query for me. Currently, one of our clients is ranking (on the second page, at least) for one of their target keywords. However, it's not the home page that is ranking - it is a sub page. I guess you could say both are targeted to rank for the keyword in question but the home page has a considerable more PA (+10) and has a lot more incoming links so it's a little bit baffling as to why the sub page has been given an advantage. Does anyone know why this may be? Also, on a secondary note, should I continue to build links to the home page or target this particular sub page to have a better chance of ranking higher for the keyword? Any advice on this welcome! Cheers!
Algorithm Updates | | Webrevolve0 -
Changing in website design reduce traffic? I don't think so.
HI, Around the month of Nov I was working on the website. Due to some reasons I have to change the design of website. I saw my traffic going down and down(70 - 100/day) so roll back it on previous one. after that it improve little bit but not as on previously. (traffic 250 - 300/day). Question: All Urls, content and links are same then how that can effect on the traffic. We have removed all the errors that was shown in the seomoz report.But traffic is still the issue here. We are working on SEO area enough and try to recover from it. Your suggestion may be helpful for us.So I am looking forward for your answers. how i can over come with it. Thanks Regards
Algorithm Updates | | lucidsoftech0 -
Google Cached Pages
I made some on-site changes to a site last week, in particular their page titles. This was all done on the same day at the same time. Now, one of those pages, got re-indexed on August 8th and has my updated changes, which also helped with my ranking. The other page I made changes to still shows a cached version from July 27th, which is before I made the changes. Why wouldn't google have an updated page from August 8th for both pages, not just one?
Algorithm Updates | | MichaelWeisbaum0