Rel=canonical Query
-
Hello Everyone,
We have just launched our new ecommerce site for flooring in the UK.
I have run through the first crawl and there are 549 instances of rel=canonical including the homepage?
Is this a major issue in any way, i have never had to tackle it before and i would appreciate any advice that could be offered on the subject.
Many Thanks
Andrew
-
Andrew
I would essentially suggest to use the crawl report from SEOMoz as a starting point and see which ones translate into real issues and then the effort/reward/prioritize based on time and resources available as well as the importance of that change.
@Maximise is right-on, you can ignore the canonical "warnings". They are more like an FYI.
-
No problem Andrew.
It depends where in the basket area they are. Keep in mind that the search engines won't submit forms or get into any secure areas so those pages would not be worth changing.
-
Many Thanks for your help Maximise,
Yes that is what i was referring to.
That puts my mind at ease a bit, I'm now going to crack on resolving the 75 critical errors and silly mistakes which have also been found, duplicate page titles etc although some of these are in the basket area, are they worth changing?
Kind Regards
Andrew
-
Hi Andrew,
Are you referring to the rel=canonical under the notices section? If so then this is not a problem, it's just showing that there are canonical tags implemented for these pages. You don't need to change anything.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
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
-
Should you 301, 302, or rel=canonical private pages?
What should you do with private 'logged in' pages from a seo perspective? They're not visible to crawlers and shouldn't be indexed, so what is best practice? Believe it or not, we have found quite a few back links to private pages and want to get the ranking benefit from them without them being indexed. Eg: http://twiends.com/settings (Only logged in user can see the page) 302 them: We can redirect users/crawlers temporarily, but I believe this is not ideal from a seo perspective? Do we lose the link juice to this page? 301 them: We can do a permanent redirect with a short cache time. We preserve most link juice now, but we probably mess up the users browser. Users trying to reach a private page while logged out may have issues reaching it after logged in. **Serve another page with rel=canonical tag: **We could serve back the home page without changing the URL. We use a canonical tag to tell the crawlers that it's a duplicate of the home page. We keep most of the link juice, and the browser is unaffected. Yes, a user might share that different URL now, but its unlikely. We've been doing 302's up until now, now we're testing the third option. How do others solve this problem? Is there a problem with it? Any advice appreciated.
On-Page Optimization | | dsumter0 -
Rel="canonical" link should they be to or from an "SEO friendly" url
Thanks for taking the time to review this. So for our example, lets use the following SEO friendly link: http://hiu.calibermediagroup.com/undergraduate-on-campus/academics/colleges/pacific-christian-college-of-ministry-and-biblical-studies/BA-biblical-studies We'll call this link the SEO VERSION The title of the college is" Pacific Christian College of Minstry and Biblical Studies" The title of the program is "BA Biblical Studies" The QUERY version of the link to this page would be something like: http://hiu.calibermediagroup.com/undergraduate-on-campus/academics/colleges/index.php?collegeid=22&programid=34 Keep in mind that the meta title, description, and keyword tags for the page are all administerable The SEO VERSION is automatically created from the title of the college, and the title of the program. Each one of these titles can be overidden with a URL slug individually. For instance, the admin could make the link: http://hiu.calibermediagroup.com/undergraduate-on-campus/academics/colleges/pacific-christian-college-of-ministry/biblical-studies by changing the slug for the college to "pacific-christian-college-of-ministry" and the slug for the program to "biblical-studies". Let's call this version the SLUG VERSION So now we have multiple ways to get to the same content. The question on the table is what is best practice for the rel="canonical" link to keep from getting dinged for duplicate content. Let's say that our SEO VERSION is the canonical link for 1 year. Then the choice was made to optimize the links thru the slugs creating the SLUG VERSION. My assumption is that we would keep the SEO VERSION as the canonical link. But then let's say 6 months later that the title of the program is changed in the admin. Now the SEO VERSION has changed and so has the canonical link. Do we lose the link juice garnered over the last 18 months? It would seem to me, that if we use the QUERY version as the canonical link, then any optimizations or changes affect everything except the canonical link, thus keeping the previous link juice earned. But is having an ugly URL as the canonical link detrimental to SEO? Please advise.
On-Page Optimization | | robertdonnell0 -
Canonical URL, cornerstone page and categories
If I want to have a cornerstone "page", can I substitute an actual page with a category archive of posts "page" (that contains many posts containing the target key phrase)? This way, if I make blog posts about a certain topic/ key phrase (example "beach weddings") and add a canonical URL of the category archive page to the individual posts, am I right then to assume google will see the archive page as the cornerstone page (and thereby won't see the individual posts with the same key phrase as competing)?
On-Page Optimization | | stephanwb0 -
Is it redundant to include a redirect to my canonical domain (www) in my .htaccess file since I already have the correct rel="canonical" in my header?
I've been reading the benefits of each practice, but not found anyone mentioning whether it's really necessary to do both? Personally I try to stay clear of .htaccess rewrites unless it's absolutely necessary, since because I've read they can slow down a website.
On-Page Optimization | | HOPdigital0 -
[HTML Gurus] Is the only nofollow = rel="nofollow"?
From my knowledge only way an HTML link is nofollow is using rel="nofollow". I was wondering if you have a link , is there anything you can put OTHER than rel="nofollow" within the <a></a>tags that make a link nofollow?
On-Page Optimization | | William.Lau0 -
Canonical to the page itself?
Hello, I'd like to know what happens when you use canonical to the same page itself, like: Page "example.com" rel canonical="example.com" Does that impact in something? Bad or good? See ya!
On-Page Optimization | | seomasterbrasil1 -
Rel Canonical
Hi Folks I have 77 Rel Canonical warning, and mostly confuse me. Mainly because they seem to be the exact link I would expect for that page. So I'm not so sure why they have been flagged.... two examples below Any thoughts or tips? (please 🙂 ) | Page Title
On-Page Optimization | | PHDAustralia68
URL | Tag value | Page Authority | Linking Root Domains | | BlueTea: New Sydney Kitchen Designs Company, Renovations, Colour Designs http://bluetea.com.au/ bluetea.com.au/ 37 18 Blog | Blue Tea http://bluetea.com.au/2010/10/?cat=15 | bluetea.com.au/category/blog/ | 1 | 0 |
| |0 -
Follow up on "Canonical Tag Placement - Every Page?"
But if it is like Pete said, I don't understand why e.g. SEO Moz has a Canonical Tag on this Page http://www.seomoz.org/blog/canonical-url-tag-the-most-important-advancement-in-seo-practices-since-sitemaps Which leads to the exact same page!? What is the benefit of doing so? Regards
On-Page Optimization | | Here4You0