Two URL's for the same page
-
Hi, on our site we have two separate URL's for a page that has the same content. So, for example - 'www.domain.co.uk/stuff' and 'www.domain.co.uk/things/stuff' both have the same content on the page.
We currently rank high in search for 'www.domain.co.uk/things/stuff' for our targeted keyword, but there are numerous links on the site to www.domain.co.uk/stuff and also potentially inbound links to this page. Ideally we want just the www.domain.co.uk/things/stuff URL to be present on the site, what would be the best course of action to take?
Would a simple Canonical tag from the '/stuff' URL which points to the '/things/stuff' page be wise? If we were to scrap the '/stuff' URL totally and redirect it to the 'things/stuff' URL and change all our on site links, would this be beneficial and not harm our current ranking for '/things/stuff'?
We only want 1 URL for this page for numerous reasons (i.e, easier to track in Analytics), but I'm a bit cautious that changing the page that doesn't rank may have an affect on the page that does rank!
Thanks.
-
Hello Julian,
If you follow my advice above you should be fine.
-
Thank you for the long and detailed answer, theres some great advice there.
Basically both URL's have the right keywords in, it's just the URL was changed a while back so both still remain on the site. The newer URL is the one that ranks high on Google, the old one doesn't appear at all. There is no need for the old one, it serves no purpose that the new one doesn't. So surely getting rid of the old one won't affect the new ones ranking?
I see you put I should have full rankings back within 3-6 weeks, but there would be no reason why the URL that currently ranks high would lose any ranking surely?
Thanks again.
-
I'm going to weigh in here with a slightly different opinion. I wouldn't just go with whichever one ranks best because I think he can do this without long-term damage to rankings and it would be best to go with whichever one he wants from a usability/branding perspective barring any major technological issues/costs.
Though he didn't say why, he did say "Ideally we want just the www.domain.co.uk/things/stuff URL to be present on the site..." and I'm going to assume they have reasons for this.
In that case, I'd follow this course of action:
#1 Apply a rel = "canonical" tag to both pages and reference the /things/stuff URL as canonical. Make this an absolute path (i.e. include http://www.domain.com)
#2 While waiting for search engines to see this tag go ahead and begin updating all internal links to /stuff/* and point them to /things/stuff* instead. You may need to do some mod URL rewrites to change the URLs used within the system. The point here is to change everything you can instead of relying on the redirects as a band-aid for a problem you can mostly fix.
#2.5 Do not change the links in the XML sitemap yet. You want search engines to have a crawl-path to the old URLs for awhile longer so they can find their way back to the page and see the redirect faster than they would by relying on their database of URLs to randomly crawl.
#3 Because there may be external links you do not have the ability to update, apply the 301 redirect from /stuff/* URLs to the counterpart /things/stuff* URLs.
#3.5 Resubmit the old XML sitemap. Google may reject it because of the redirects, but it does usually spark a fresh crawl of the site.
#4 Update the XML sitemap and submit with the new URLs.
#5 Monitor closely. Keep an eye on new 404 errors, as you may have to add additional redirects that fell through the cracks. Crawl the site with Screaming Frog, looking for redirect loops, redirect chains, 301s that could be updated to link directly to the destination, 404 errors, 500 errors, non-canonical URLs... Keep an eye on rankings and traffic from search. If all went well you should have full rankings back within 3-6 weeks. If you do not have it back by 6 weeks you may have a technical issue to deal with that is out of the norm, in my experience. At that point I'd start taking a close look at log files with Splunk.
Note: In this case I would NOT use Google's "URL Removal Tool" as it could possibly cause some of the external links from the URL you're removing to move over via the redirect to the new URL. The 301 and the fact that you are updating all internal links (and external links you have direct control of) to the new URL should get the old one out of the index in due time.
Note: This advice is for moving from one directory to another with the exact same page and structure on the same domain. There are important differences between that and moving to a new domain, or redirecting to content that isn't an exact replica of that on the original URL.
-
Since you have links pointing at them both, I would just redirect the lower ranking one to the higher ranking one. 301
The one that ranks better woud be the one I would keep. Sometimes redirects and url changes can take a while for search engines to find, even if you fetch as Google.
-
Hi,
it wouldn't harm the page no, having said that for site navigation purposes it might be a bit confusing having 301 redirects all over the place instead of the tag. It may help but there is never a guarantee essentially the canonical tag works the same as a 301 for link juice so you can always give that a go first and if nothing happens then 301 it but its up to you.
It comes down the the user would it benefit the user 301 or would it add to page load times or get confusing? If its a permanent site resign go for it though.
it is just telling search engines "this (the page) is the new home/location of the page you're looking for" then they will update their records to reflect it - a bit like when you move house and tell the postman you moved.
Good luck!
-
Thanks for your reply Chris. The thing is I don't need / want the page that isn't ranking in Google anymore, it serves no purpose other than to confuse things when looking at the Analytics! If I were to do a redirect from the page that doesn't rank to the page that does, that wouldn't harm the page that does rank would it?
The page that doesn't rank is linked to from the main navigation, but the page that does rank isn't! Would I be right in thinking a redirect may actually help the page that does rank, even more?
Thanks again.
-
Hi there,
the canonical sounds perfect! Personally I tend to put it on the link closer to the homepage but its preference really logically make the page that's stronger to start with the "original". No need to scrap, the tag will let you keep your layout but give the SEO benefit to just one page.
in short canonical is the perfect match for your needs!
More info - https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139066?hl=en
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
-
Strange SERP's descriptions
Hey, when I googled one of our products i came up with this strange result, see attachment. I searched for: kurs praktische psychologie on google germany. These words also come up in the meta description of this page:** Praktische Psychologie** Fernkurs mit professioneller Betreuung. Testen Sie den praxisorientierten Kurs über die Grundlagen der Psychologie 4 Wochen kostenlos. and in the body: _Sie glauben der Mensch lässt sich trotz all seiner Facetten durchschauen, wenn man sich nur Mühe gibt ihn zu verstehen? Da liegen Sie vollkommen richtig! Der Kurs "Praktische Psychologie" vermittelt Ihnen hierfür alle Kenntnisse und Fähigkeiten, sodass Sie schon bald das Mysterium Mensch ergründen. _ Why is Google still showing this description which i obviously don't want to be shown, and why does it state _spring naar (jump to) Kursgeburh _and how can i avoid this? yd1DStW
On-Page Optimization | | NHA_DistanceLearning0 -
Hiding body copy with a 'read more' drop down option
Hi I just want to confirm how potentially damaging using java script to hide lots of on page body copy with a 'read more' button is ? As per other moz Q&A threads i was told that best not to use Javascript to do this & instead "if you accomplish this with CSS and collapsible/expandable <DIV> tags it's totally fine" so thats what i advised my clients dev. However i recently noticed a big drop in rankings aprox 1 weeks after dev changing the body copy format (hiding alot of it behind a 'read more' button) so i asked them to confirm how they did implement it and they said: "done in javascript but on page load the text is defaulting to show" (which is contrary to my instructions) So how likely is it that this is causing problems ? since coincides with ranking drop OR if text is defaulting to show it should be ok/not cause probs ? And should i request that they redo as originally instructed (css & collapsible divs) asap ? All Best Dan
On-Page Optimization | | Dan-Lawrence0 -
Two keywords in one page
Hi guys, I have a question...is it possible to posicionate two keywords in one only page? If yes, how would it be the process so that Google take note of that action/s. How many criteria/keywords are recommended to positionate in one site? Thanks all
On-Page Optimization | | juanmiguelcr0 -
Dates in URL's
I have an issue of duplicate content errors and duplicate page titles which is penalising my site. This has arisen because a number of URLs are suffixed by date(s) and have been spidered . In principle I do not want any url with a suffixed date to be spidered. Eg:- www.carbisbayholidays.co.uk/carbis-bay/houses-in-carbis-bay/seaspray.htm/06_07_13/13_07_13 http://www.carbisbayholidays.co.uk/carbis-bay/houses-in-carbis-bay/seaspray.htm/20_07_13/27_07_13 Only this URL should be spidered:- http://www.carbisbayholidays.co.uk/carbis-bay/houses-in-carbis-bay/seaspray.htm I have over 10,000 of these duplicates and firstly wish to remove them on block from Google ( not one by one ) and secondly wish to amend my robots.txt file so the URL's are not spidered. I do not know the format for either. Can anyone help please.
On-Page Optimization | | carbisbayhols0 -
On-Page Report Card: Whats up with the TITLE of the page?
Started to fix the SEO issues on a customers website. When I run a "On-Page Report Card" It says that the title of the webpage:
On-Page Optimization | | maklarlabbet
www.visbymaklarna.se/visbymaklarna.html Is "visbymäklarna - Ditt förstahandsval på gotland." But if I check in the source code of the webbrowser the title should be:
name="title" content="Vi är mäklarna på Gotland som sätter människan i första rummet" /> (Actually this is with special encoding for the swedish characters. The title in coded text is: "Vi är mäklarna på Gotland som sätter människan i första rummet") Anyway the title of the webpage source code and the title of what SEOmoz reports is different. Why is that?0 -
Should I buy an established domain that has lost it's high PR due to being offline for several months?
I'm considering purchasing a domain that has sat idle for several months. It was a company's domain that they have owned since the mid1990's but they went out of business. Previously, it had a PR 5 but has since lost it's PR as it has sat 'inactive' with a 'server not found' warning for the past several months. That being said, is there any point in buying the domain (for SEO purposes)? Is there any recourse with Google to try and re-establish the site's credibility or would I be starting over from scratch?
On-Page Optimization | | martybuch230 -
URL Rewrite
(By Google Traductor) Hello, I wanted to ask about some changes that we are evaluating for the issue of passing the url with variables to be more descriptive, for example: http://www.agroads.com.ar/detalle.asp?clasi=139592 tohttp://www.agroads.com.ar/humedimetro-para-cereales-draminski-gmm-139592.html In this case corresponds to the breakdown of a product if you have long published andcan be well positioned to change the title of this position would be lost unless youmanage it with a 301, as one would manage when you have more than 30000 products and title may change several times? There are tools to manage this? Finally, we must apply this to all listed with their respective filters, recommends doingtheir part with 301 redirects and analyze what funciene well to continue with the rest or implement a complete change? I hope I can bring a little light to implement this. Greetings and thanks! Roberto
On-Page Optimization | | romaro0 -
Numbers in URL's - Search friendly or not?
Hi Mozzers, I have a client who has just launched a new website and we are having difficulties in making the URL's search friendly. I wont get into the technical aspects, but I'll explain the potential solutions the developers have given me. current: www.site.com/en/product/browse-by-product/37/22 Where 'en' stands for the English version of the website, 37 is the product category for example 'hard drives', and 22 is the product name or example 'seagate' Option to fix; www.site.com/en/p/product/hard-drives-37/seagate-22 This optional fix reduces the word product down to p, reduces 'browse by product' to 'product' and inserts the category and product names. Note the category identifier '37' has to be included in the URL, and the product identifier '22' also has to be in the URL. Obviously this is not great, but it is required at the moment. Best case scenario would be to have the URL like this... www.site.com/en/hard-drives/seagate So my question is, how far off the best case scenario is the option to fix? Scale of 1 to 10 would be good?
On-Page Optimization | | JoeyDorrington0