duplicate content issue

alts solution

Registered Member

Feb 1, 2017

52

1

• Apr 12, 2017

• #1

duplicate content issue
i have a page called car.html and it have pagination,

example :

car.html (pagination first page)
car/page/2 (pagination second page)

if i add a content on both pages it will calculate as a duplicate content ?

 

SEO

Senior Member

Jan 6, 2017

942

754

• Apr 12, 2017

• #2

Set your canonical and you should be fine: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139066?hl=en

 

alts solution

Registered Member

Feb 1, 2017

52

1

• Apr 12, 2017
• Thread Starter Thread Starter

• #3

what about <link rel="prev" href="car.html ">

 

SEO

Senior Member

Jan 6, 2017

942

754

• Apr 12, 2017

• #4

Looks like that should work. Here's a good page discussing the two: https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2011/09/pagination-with-relnext-and-relprev.html

 

stevesolo

Senior Member

Jul 3, 2014

1,090

306

• Apr 12, 2017

• #5

Using the rel=”prev”/”next” and canonical tags, you can deliver your users with an enhanced experience and keep your site from the duplicate content issues that can potentially come with pagination.

 

alts solution

Registered Member

Feb 1, 2017

52

1

• Apr 12, 2017
• Thread Starter Thread Starter

• #6

it's means rel=”prev”/”next” and canonical tags are same effect , right ?

 

Julie85

Power Member

Nov 27, 2016

542

55

• Apr 12, 2017

• #7

alts solution said:

it's means rel=”prev”/”next” and canonical tags are same effect , right ?

Click to expand...

Right. I also think there is a plugin for doing that.

 

SEO

Senior Member

Jan 6, 2017

942

754

• Apr 12, 2017

• #8

alts solution said:

it's means rel=”prev”/”next” and canonical tags are same effect , right ?

Click to expand...

For your use case, you should use rel=prev/next.

rel=prev/next is used for pagination scenarios.
rel=canonical is used for http://example.com/cars.html & http://www.example.com/cars.html and pointing the non-www to the www version.

Sorry I missed the pagination part of your question initially, I was only paying attention to the .html extension, then the .html extension not being present on the URL.