What is the danger of adding rel="prev" and rel="next"...
-
Our search results pages are, unfortunately, heavily indexed by Google. While the long term plan is to replace these somehow with our product pages, in the short term we are doing all we can to improve things.
One of our issues is that we don't have a canonical link or rel="next" or rel="prev" on these pages.
Would like to add these to consolidate duplicate content as well as help Google drill down within these pages to crawl the links within them.
The concern is... If ten people arrive at our site via:
http://www.oursite.com/?goodstuff=puppies&page=1
and 10 people also arrive at our site via:
http://www.oursite.com/?goodstuff=puppies&page=2
Would adding rel="next" and rel="prev" potentially have a damaging effect on us by removing one of these entry points and therefore removing 10 potential visitors?
Or would it still show both links, but instead would show the canonical in both locations? In short, could adding these tags actually backfire?
Thanks very much!
Craig
-
Check out topic from a few months ago-
http://moz.com/community/q/ecommerce-problem-with-canonicol-rel-next-rel-prev
How old is the site?
In my experience, I've found it best to first see how things are actually being indexed, which pages are showing up in SERPS, and what the user behavior is.
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 specific do I have to be when adding keyword to the meta title which I am trying to rank for?
I am looking for some clarity on what exactly you need to spell out for google in the exact match and what google understands in terms of using keywords in your meta title which I am trying to rank for. For example if my category page is for women's top, with both printed and solid color options, would it be ok to write- "Women's Tops: Printed & Solid Shirts & Tunics" and be able to rank for women's tops, women's printed tops, women's solid shirts etc. or would I have to be more specific and use women's as the keyword modifier before each term and write- "Women's Tops, Women's Printed & Solid Shirts, Women's Tunics"?
On-Page Optimization | | whiteonlySEO0 -
Updating Old Content at Scale - Any Danger from a Google Penalty/Spam Perspective?
We've read a lot about the power of updating old content (making it more relevant for today, finding other ways to add value to it) and republishing (Here I mean changing the publish date from the original publish date to today's date - not publishing on other sites). I'm wondering if there is any danger of doing this at scale (designating a few months out of the year where we don't publish brand-new content but instead focus on taking our old blog posts, updating them, and changing the publish date - ~15 posts/month). We have a huge archive of old posts we believe we can add value to and publish anew to benefit our community/organic traffic visitors. It seems like we could add a lot of value to readers by doing this, but I'm a little worried this might somehow be seen by Google as manipulative/spammy/something that could otherwise get us in trouble. Does anyone have experience doing this or have thoughts on whether this might somehow be dangerous to do? Thanks Moz community!
On-Page Optimization | | paulz9990 -
Google Search Console issue: "This is how Googlebot saw the page" showing part of page being covered up
Hi everyone! Kind of a weird question here but I'll ask and see if anyone else has seen this: In Google Search Console when I do a fetch and render request for a specific site, the fetch and blocked resources all look A-OK. However, in the render, there's a large grey box (background of navigation) that covers up a significant amount of what is on the page. Attaching a screenshot. You can see the text start peeking out below (had to trim for confidentiality reasons). But behind that block of grey IS text. And text that apparently in the fetch part Googlebot does see and can crawl. My question: is this an issue? Should I be concerned about this visual look? Or no? Never have experienced an issue like that. I will say - trying to make a play at a featured snippet and can't seem to have Google display this page's information, despite it being the first result and the query showing a featured snippet of a result #4. I know that it isn't guaranteed for the #1 result but wonder if this has anything to do with why it isn't showing one. VmIqgFB.png
On-Page Optimization | | ChristianMKG0 -
Rel="canonical" at the same page
Hello Everyone!! We have a Joomla Site and in the template we have a php function that create the **link rel="canonical" **and in the href inserts the same page url. For example, if the we do a search and the url have some cookies. That Url is gonna be the **rel="canonical" **for that page. Is it working correctly? We need an advice to to set it up correctly! Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | mycostaricalink0 -
Duplicate content "/"
Hi all, Ran my website through the SEOMOZ campaigns and the crawl diagnostics give me a duplicate error for these urls http://www.mysite.com/cat1/article http://www.mysite.com/cat1/article/ so the url with the "/" is a duplicate of the one without the "/" Can someone point me out to a solution to solve this ? regards, Frederik
On-Page Optimization | | frdrik1230 -
"And" vs "&"
I blog for hotels and I am wondering whether it is best to have on a wordpress tagline the name of the hotel such as Holiday Inn and Suites vs Holiday Inn & Suites. In Google AdWords, the "and" keyword always beats out the "&" word in exact search. The "&" just always looks cleaner. Also, when I refer to the hotel within a blog post, should I use the "and" or "&" in the name? Please help me understand which is best for seo. Thank you!
On-Page Optimization | | lwilkins0 -
Rel="canonical"
Can you tell me if we've implemented rel="canonical" properly? We want this to be our primary: http://www.autopartstomorrow.com/parts/6052317-r-econ-semi-met-brake-pads- while this would be duplicate and refer robots back to the URL above: http://www.autopartstomorrow.com/parts/6054284 We've added the following to both pages: <link rel="canonical" href="http://www.autopartstomorrow.com/parts/6052317-r-econ-semi-met-brake-pads- "/> Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | jonesatl0