Is your live site supposed to have rel canonical tags?
-
I recently started working for a company and got them to use Moz and I have found that our secure site and our live sites are creating "duplicate content" according to the Crawl Diagnostics feature. On our secure site we have rel canonical tags pointing to our live site. I'm not super familiar with rel canonical tags, but our developer says we're doing the right thing. Would love any insight you guys may have if this is actually duplicate content or not. Thanks so much!
-
Agree with Dave's comments. 1) Get the syntax updated on your canonical links at a minimum. 2) Yes your canonical solution will "work", but it is not best practice. This "solution" is really a last resort. I would try and push to move away from using canonicals this way. You optimally want 1 URL.
Just to add some color, a great / classic video on this was made by Matt Cutts. He gives all kinds of examples where you could have duplicate URLs, i.e. www vs non www subdomain, sorting parameters added onto the URL, different file extensions, capitalization changes, etc. He then gives 3 options to fix them.
-
Best practice: Fix your site where you only have one URL per content item and link to it consistently (Best solution)
-
Use 301 redirects to consolidate to one URL (Next best solution)
-
Use a canonical link, if you cannot do 1 or 2. (Last resort)
Note that Matt says that they treat a canonical as a strong suggestion (it is treated similar to a 301), but they do not always have to follow it. He repeatedly says, use the first two options, and would NOT recommend a canonical as your best or first option.
My favorite quote is at 2:24 in the video, "Developers keep SEOs in business"
What your developer may notice is that Matt does say that using a canonical link for consolidating http and https will work. No one here would say that it would not, it is just not optimal. Sure, you can use a pair of scissors to cut your lawn, "it will work". It doesn't mean it's the best idea. I would think any developer worth his/her salt would want to have "clean code" and having duplicate URLs is not "clean" by SEO standards
Ok, so now you need to go back to the developer or your manager with an argument that is stronger than just, "Well, some random dude on the Moz forum said that Matt Cutt's from Google said it was preferred not to use a canonical link even though it would work". I would never want to leave you in such a position. Here is what will/can happen over time if you stay with your current setup.
-
Report consolidation issues. When you look at GA for traffic or OSE for links, any spidering tool for technical issues, social sharing counts, you now have split data for any given page potentially. Sure there are ways around this, but now you have to spend all your time "fixing" reports that should not be broken to start with. Trust me, this will come back to bite you on the bum and will cripple your efforts to show the efficacy of your SEO work. Now who really wants that?
-
Link juice consolidation issues. With any redirect - you lose a bit of link juice. If you have links to both sets of URLs, any single page is not getting as much credit as it should.
-
Down the line 301 redirect bloat. If you ever change anything and need to setup a 301 redirect, now you have to setup 2 of them and having too many 301s can negatively impact server performance.
One last thing. If you can get the URLs consolidated into one using 301s etc. Go with the https That is the way that we are headed with the web and so you might as well get going in that direction.
Good luck!
-
-
I really appreciate the response and the added information. I guess we will see if anyone else responds!
-
I'd be interested in hearing what someone else has to say about the way the canonicals are coded. You're doing yours similar to the way I do DNS Prefetching with the double slash to start the URL:
It works fine with prefetching as all the browser needs to do is find the IP of the domain but I'm not sure here how it'll handle sub-directories including www and I hate variables even when they're "it should work". The more common way to canonicalize your secured page would be:
/>
I'd be interested to hear if anyone has any direct experience with this but at the core of technical SEO issues I always lean to "most common usage" and "how Google shows it in their examples" just to make sure there is minimal chance of hiccups or issues.
That aside though, the developer is right though I'd always still prefer to just see the pages at a single URL. Since that can't be done however ... canonicals are the way to go.
-
That is correct! Here is an example of two URL's of what i'm talking about:
http://www.agroup.com/blog/5-signs-of-a-good-clientagency-relatoinship
https://agrouptt4.secure2.agroup.com/blog/5-signs-of-a-good-clientagency-relatoinshipDoes this help clarify my question? I hope so!
-
I'm not sure I entirely understand the scenario so let me note how I'm hearing it to make sure my understanding is correct to put the answer into context. Please do let me know if my understanding of the scenario is wrong as that may well change my thoughts on it.
You note that your secure site and live site are creating duplicate content. Of course a secure site can be live but I'm taking this to mean you have an area behind a login. That it's creating duplicate content is making me think that a lot of the core information is the same and I'm guessing many of the same pages.
If this is all correct and you can't put the duplicated pages onto one URL only then the canonicals are the way to go and your developer is correct.
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 do I find out which pages are being indexed on my site and which are not?
Hi, I doing my first technical audit on my site. I am learning how to do an audit as i go and am a lost. I know some page won't be indexed but how do I: 1. Check the site for all pages, both indexed and not indexed 2. Run a report to show indexed pages only (i am presuming i can do this via screaming Frog or webmaster tool) 3. I can do a comparison between the two list and work out which pages are not being indexed. I'll then need to figure out way. I'll cross this bridge once i get to it Thanks Ben
Moz Pro | | benjmoz0 -
Where is the directory list now living?
Hi - I'm trying to access the directory list that used to live at this address: http://www.seomoz.org/directories But I am being redirected to: http://www.whitelistproject.com/ with no explanation. Where is the directory list now living? Thanks T.
Moz Pro | | tone4u_gmail.com0 -
How to push negative product review sites down.
Hi Guys, One of my respected clients have some issues with negative product review sites coming up when they search their brand name on google. So for an exmaple, when I search for Company Name on google, the 3rd and 4th results are angry customer reviews. This is harming my clients brand so bad. My questions are, 1. What should I do to push these results down. I am happy to do pretty much ANYTHING to push these sites down. 2. I'm also thinking of doing a blog for this client for SEO purposes and wondering the pros and cons of having the blog as a subdomain vs subfolder. Which will help me to again, push the negative site links down. Thanks
Moz Pro | | Uds0 -
Comparing with Open Site Explorer
Hi, I am trying to compare a website that has a url of e.g. https://mysite.com on Open Site Explorer. Any idea how to do this? It will only compare it when I use www and it also doesn't accept https. So I am comparing www.mysite.com which has redirects on it https://mysite.com but I am worried it's not comparing the right stats? If this makes sense and you can help it would be greatly appreciated. Cheers
Moz Pro | | Hughescov0 -
HTML5 multiple h1 tags
When I run the On-Page Report Card it tells me that I should remove the multiple instances of H1 tags, even though the website is built using HTML5 and has hierarchical structure where each section / article has its own H1 tag. This approach is completely legal with HTML5 and I'm just wondering what impact does it have on SEO and whether the On-Page Report Card recognises the HTML5 and processes it accordingly.
Moz Pro | | coremediadesign0 -
Wordpress tag problem
Hei, Just start using seomoz pro and it's freaking awesome:) I have one question about Crawl Diagnostics and hope you guys can help me out. I just launch my website and i get two errors what greep me out a bit. I don't know how to handle them correctly. I have two duplicate content errors what are caused by Wordpress tag's. If i make more blog posts then i get even more duplicate content issues. how should i handle this "tag" situation? Respectfully, TauriU
Moz Pro | | TauriU0 -
What kind of keyword difficulty should I be aiming for when launching an new site?
I know that words in their 20's or 30's would be ideal, but it's proving hard for me to find relevant keywords with such scores (just a couple with scores in the 30's). Is going for words between 40-50 a waste of time? Thanks.
Moz Pro | | ZakGottlieb711 -
[No Data] Open Site Explorer Top Pages WordPress fix?
Some of my Open Site Explorer Top Pages http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/drho.ro/a!toppages have [No Data]. How do I fix this? I use WordPress and these are .pdf files I uploaded to my server and 301 redirects I created using the Pretty Link Pro plugin
Moz Pro | | drhoro0