3

I wonder if including the "next posts pages" to sitemap would be a good idea. With "next posts pages" I mean for example domain/page/{num}, or domain/category/foo/page/{num}, or even domain/tag/foo/page/{num}.

I'm using the Wordpress SEO by Yoast Plugin and it doesn't include those pages.

Of course, the content of those pages is also included in the single posts, but maybe would be better to include all pages so that Google can index more pages.

  • I suspect that you are headed in the direction of duplicate content which is not a good idea and that if Yoast does not do it, then you probably should not either. I am not a WP person so I will leave room for someone who know WP and Yoast better. – closetnoc Nov 28 '14 at 17:07
4

Those pages are not high quality pages. Who would want to land on page five of unanswered questions on this site? Nobody.

These are low quality pages because:

  • They only a list made of of content found elsewhere on your site.
  • If a user does land on this type of page, they have to click to the content.
  • Even if a user does want a list of this type of content, they would be better served by page 1.
  • The list is constantly changing as you add new posts, so the content the user is searching for may have actually fallen off the page.

I recommend that sites use the meta robots noindex tag on all pages except for page 1 of pagination. Google measures the quality of pages on your site by sending users to those pages and seeing how many of them bounce back to Google to click on something else or refine their search. When Google finds that a page is low quality, it stops ranking for any keywords. When Google finds that your site has lots of low quality pages, your entire site may stop ranking well. This is one of the major components of the Panda algorithm.

  • In fact, I can see this snippet in those pages: <meta name="robots" content="noindex,follow"/> added by the Yoast plugin. – Manolo Nov 29 '14 at 11:47
  • 1
    It's good to know that it does the right thing out of the box. :-) – Stephen Ostermiller Nov 29 '14 at 11:52

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.