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
-
Size of a term to make money off of ad based informational site
Hello, I am used to estimating how much money is possible to make out of ranking for Ecommerce terms. Higher price products have a lower conversion rate (cheap items are opposite) so you can look at the keyword size in keyword explorer and estimate pretty well (roughly). My question is, how many times bigger does an ad based (informational) keyword need to be to get similar profit? This is just an estimate. For example, does a term need to be 5? 10? times bigger on average (volume) as an informational keyword to make the same amount of profit (roughly of course)? I realize there are many factors here but you must have some way you think of it? Can you give me some general guidelines?
Moz Pro | | BobGW0 -
Backlink profile from Open Site Explorer does not seem to update
I have been monitoring our backlink profile on Open Site for over a year now and despite getting a number of new domains linking to us they are not reflected in the tool. Our URL is: www.BlueLinkERP.com Any thoughts on why this might be the case? The number of linking domains also seems very low compared with other tools we use (i.e. HubSpot)
Moz Pro | | BlueLinkERP0 -
How to make Seo Tools Site serves ?
hello i want to add seo tools at my site for users i want my visitors able to use pagerank checker , link tracker , backlinks checker , etc - and keyword tools , domain tools , Analytics and Reporting. something like http://smallseotools.com/ what scripts i need ? can i do this all with wordpress ? Thanks 🙂
Moz Pro | | Wagdys0 -
Need Good Idea for my new site SEO strategy.
Hello, I register new domain and i research on keywords and got 16 keywords for 16 pages one keyword for every page.
Moz Pro | | wildcat143
now i want SEO of my site please give me some good idea how to do my white hat SEO of my website? 16 pages + 16 keywords
How many backlinks submission i can do daily base? Directory submission?
Social bookmarking submission?
Blog comment?
Articles submission?
any more..................... Hope you will give me positive response. Thanks0 -
Open Site Explorer - SEO - Company Back Links not visible?
Hi Guys, I am relatively new to the SEO community and have what is hopefully a pretty quick and simple question? I have recently outsourced some of my SEO campaigns to an Australian SEO group which were referred to me buy a friend, and i do not have the time to manage all sites SEO. On pitch the SEO company said they had in excess of 7000 domains, and they would implement a massive back linking strategy for me anywhere upwards of 200 links a month and all legit. Initially there were some basic header and title tag changes needed on the site, and I am now in month 4 of my campaign. Looking forward to using SEOMOZ service and specifically Open Site Explorer, I entered my URL but to my disappointment I could only see 4 links and two I was responsible for. I spoke to the SEO company who responded Open Site Explorer wasn't a good indication of back links and that a lot of their sites were not on the network because of the structure of their linking being only one way. I would appreciate a second opinion (external of this company) on this because of my short time learning and dabbling with SEO. On a side note thoroughly enjoying learning SEO and my journey as part of the SEOMOZ community. Appreciate any feedback or responses I get. Kind regards Bodie http://www.berkeleyriver.com.au
Moz Pro | | Bodie0 -
How often are open site explorer reports updated?
I collect the information contained in open site explorer reports and csv backlinks audits on the 15th of every month. I noticed that the numbers are unchanged from 9/15-10/15. How often are the reports typically updated?
Moz Pro | | seagreen0 -
My Campaign just picked up the .com.au site and is showing data
I've got a campaign set up here in SEOmoz and it appears that it just started picking up data for a site that is not mine. Our site is examplesite.com and i noticed that SEOmoz has begun including examplesite.com.au and is showing 20,000 302's from this site. The .com.au site is in no way related to our business and should not be tracked in our campaign. Has this happened to anyone else?
Moz Pro | | WP_SEO0 -
Is there such thing as a site free from errors?
Or is this a given? I am new to SEO and SEOmoz. One of my campaigns is completley free of errors...the others are a work in progress. Now I realize that SEO is never done, but can a site actually be free of errors? If so... I just gave myself a pat on the back.
Moz Pro | | AtoZion0