Indexing of internal search results: canonicalization or noindex?
-
Hi Mozzers,
First time poster here, enjoying the site and the tools very much.
I'm doing SEO for a fairly big ecommerce brand and an issue regarding internal search results has come up.
www.example.com/electronics/iphone/5s/ gives an overview of the the model-specific listings. For certain models there are also color listings, but these are not incorporated in the URL structure.
Here's what Rand has to say in Inbound Marketing & SEO: Insights From The Moz Blog
Search filters are used to narrow an internal search—it could be price, color, features, etc.
Filters are very common on e-commerce sites that sell a wide variety of products. Search filter
URLs look a lot like search sorts, in many cases:
www.example.com/search.php?category=laptop
www.example.com/search.php?category=laptop?price=1000
The solution here is similar to the preceding one—don’t index the filters. As long as Google
has a clear path to products, indexing every variant usually causes more harm than good.I believe using a noindex tag is meant here.
Let's say you want to point users to an overview of listings for black 5s iphones. The URL is an internal search filter which looks as follows:
www.example.com/electronics/apple/iphone/5s?search=black
Which you wish to link with the anchor text "black iphone 5s".
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you no-index the black 5s search filters, you lose the equity passed through the link. Whereas if you canonicalize /electronics/apple/iphone/5s you would still leverage the link juice and help you rank for "black iphone 5s". Doesn't it then make more sense to use canonicalization?
-
Hi there,
Just to round this question off, you could canonicalise the query-string URL searching for black iPhones to the iPhone 5s listings page and keep an individual phone's lising at /123456 separate, yes. It's best to keep the canonical tag for truly duplicated or near-duplicated pages, so you would not want to canonicalise an individual product page to a listings page or similar.
-
The tag is good for duplicate content but if /123456 has unique content then you probably don't need the tag on it. I would refrain from trying to implement the tag on ? on larger terms as it will give you a headache.
Some handy tips here- http://moz.com/learn/seo/canonicalization
In Short -
Set up the tag on the filters e.g a page that's the same content but its showing the colour blue then it will feed back the juice to the original but if you've got a page that's not duplicate and has content on it then you could leave it be. Google's pretty clever at working out relationships on pages and duplicate content is not the worse problem for SEO.
Hope that helps!
-
I meant to say that /123456 is an individual listing and /5gs gives an overview of all listings.
Then I could include a canonical tag at /5gs?search=black pointing to /5gs and NOT include a canonical tag at /5gs/123456 because I want the individual listing to rank?
-
Assuming the info is the same content (duplicate) just with a colour etc.
www.example.com/electronics/apple/iphone/5gs/123456
I would put the tag on that page pointing towards:
www.example.com/electronics/apple/iphone/5gs
What the tag is doing is saying the page (123456) is a duplicate of the another page, here is the other page (the link in tag) then Google will put all relevant juice to the original.
The canonical tag is great for duplicate content but it by putting it on a page deeper in the structure it only affects that page not any others. You can sometimes get a bit ahead by trying to canonical pages that don't exists like www.exsample.com?yay
-
Thanks!
I have a follow up question :).
What if there are listings with unique IDs with the following URL structure:
www.example.com/electronics/apple/iphone/5gs/123456
Then, canonicalizing /electronics/apple/iphone/5gs would prevent the listing from ranking.
What is best practice in these cases? Ideally I would like to pass link juice from the ?search filters to the canonical URL but leave the sub-directories as is.
-
Hi there,
Looks like you've gotten to the bottom of it there. The canonical tag is best as you wouldn't loose any link juice but it would get the desired effect of not indexing the filter.
Looks like you've got a handle on it so good luck!
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
-
How to Get Rid of Dates Shown In Google Search Results
When I enter "Site: URL" to check what a search how Google displays search result, a date appears at the very front. This takes away several characters, really valuable real estate. How can I stop Google from displaying these dates? There are certain Wordpress plugins like "WP Date Remover" however the seem to only apply to blog posts. Dates are appearing on results on all my Wordpress pages. Is there an internal setting in Wordpress that will allow me to remove dates for these non blogpost pages?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan11 -
Blocking Dynamic Search Result Pages From Google
Hi Mozzerds, I have a quick question that probably won't have just one solution. Most of the pages that Moz crawled for duplicate content we're dynamic search result pages on my site. Could this be a simple fix of just blocking these pages from Google altogether? Or would Moz just crawl these pages as critical crawl errors instead of content errors? Ultimately, I contemplated whether or not I wanted to rank for these pages but I don't think it's worth it considering I have multiple product pages that rank well. I think in my case, the best is probably to leave out these search pages since they have more of a negative impact on my site resulting in more content errors than I would like. So would blocking these pages from the Search Engines and Moz be a good idea? Maybe a second opinion would help: what do you think I should do? Is there another way to go about this and would blocking these pages do anything to reduce the number of content errors on my site? I appreciate any feedback! Thanks! Andrew
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | drewstorys0 -
Javascript search results & Pagination for SEO
Hi On this page http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches we have javascript on the paginated pages to sort the results, the URL displayed and the URL linked to are different. e.g. The paginated pages link to for example: page2 http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches#productBeginIndex:30&orderBy:5&pageView:list& The list is then sorted by javascript. Then the arrows either side of pagination link to e.g. http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches?page=3 - this is where the rel/prev details are - done for SEO But when clicking on this arrow, the URL loaded is different again - http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches#productBeginIndex:60&orderBy:5&pageView:list& I did not set this up, but I am concerned that the URL http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches?page=3 never actually loads, but it's linked to Google can crawl it. Is this a problem? I am looking to implement a view all option. Thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
"Null" appearing as top keyword in "Content Keywords" under Google index in Google Search Console
Hi, "Null" is appearing as top keyword in Google search console > Google Index > Content Keywords for our site http://goo.gl/cKaQ4K . We do not use "null" as keyword on site. We are not able to find why Google is treating "null" as a keyword for our site. Is anyone facing such issue. Thanks & Regards
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vivekrathore0 -
Indexing isolated webpages
Hi all,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Tarek_Lel
We are running a classifieds website.Due to technical limitations, we will probably not be able to list or search expired ads, but we still can view ad details view page if you landed on expired ad from external page (or google search results).Our concern is, if the ad page is still exists, but it's totally isolated from the website (i.e not found by search option on the website and no following site links) will google remove it from the index?Thanks, T0 -
An improved search box within the search results - Results?
Hello~ Does anyone have any positive traffic results to share since implementing this? Thanks! MS
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MargaritaS0 -
Incorrect URL shown in Google search results
Can anyone offer any advice on how Google might get the url which it displays in search results wrong? It currently appears for all pages as: <cite>www.domainname.com › Register › Login</cite> When the real url is nothing like this. It should be: www.domainname.com/product-type/product-name. This could obviously affect clickthroughs. Google has indexed around 3,000 urls on the site and they are all like this. There are links at the top of the page on the website itself which look like this: Register » Login » which presumably could be affecting it? Thanks in advance for any advice or help!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Wagada0 -
Best internal linking structure?
We are considering implementing a site-wide contextual linking structure. Does anyone have some good guidelines / blog posts on this topic? Our site is quite (over 1 million pages), so the contextual linking would be automated, but we need to define a set of rules. Basically, if we have a great page on 'healthy recipes,' should we make every instance of the word 'healthy recipes' link back to that page, or should we limit it to a certain number of pages?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline0