Is there a limit to the number of duplicate pages pointing to a rel='canonical ' primary?
-
We have a situation on twiends where a number of our 'dead' user pages have generated links for us over the years. Our options are to 404 them, 301 them to the home page, or just serve back the home page with a canonical tag.
We've been 404'ing them for years, but i understand that we lose all the link juice from doing this. Correct me if I'm wrong?
Our next plan would be to 301 them to the home page. Probably the best solution but our concern is if a user page is only temporarily down (under review, etc) it could be permanently removed from the index, or at least cached for a very long time.
A final plan is to just serve back the home page on the old URL, with a canonical tag pointing to the home page URL. This is quick, retains most of the link juice, and allows the URL to become active again in future. The problem is that there could be 100,000's of these.
Q1) Is it a problem to have 100,000 URLs pointing to a primary with a rel=canonical tag? (Problem for Google?)
Q2) How long does it take a canonical duplicate page to become unique in the index again if the tag is removed? Will google recrawl it and add it back into the index? Do we need to use WMT to speed this process up?
Thanks
-
I'll add this article by Rand that I came across too. I'm busy testing the solution presented in it:
https://moz.com/blog/are-404-pages-always-bad-for-seo
In summary, 404 all dead pages with a good custom 404 page so as to not waste crawl bandwidth. Then selectively 301 those dead pages that have accrued some good link value.
Thanks Donna/Tammy for pointing me in this direction..
-
In this scenario yes, a customized 404 page with a link to a few top level ( useful) links would be better served to both the user and to Google. From a strictly SEO standpoint, 100,000 redirects and or canonical tags would not benefit your SEO.
-
Thanks Donna, good points..
We return a hard 404, so it's treated correctly by google. We are just looking at this from a SEO point of view now to see if there's any way to reclaim this lost link juice.
Your point about looking at the value of those incoming links is a good one. I suppose it's not worth making google crawl 100,000 more pages for the sake of a few links. We've just starting seeing these pop up in Moz Analytics as link opportunities, and we can see them as 404's in site explorer too. There are a few hundred of these incoming links that point to a 404, so we feel this could have an impact.
I suppose we could selectively 301 any higher value links to the home page.. It will be an administrative nightmare, but doable..
How do others tackle this problem. Does everyone just hard 404 a page when that loses the link juice for incoming links to it..?
Thanks
-
Hi David,
When you say "we've been 404'ing them for years", does that mean you've created a custom 404 page that explains the situation to site visitors or does it mean you've been letting them naturally error and return the appropriate 404 (page not found) error to Google? It makes a difference. If the pages truly no longer exist and there is no equivalent replacement, you should be letting them naturally error (return a 404 return code) so as not to mislead Google's robots and site visitors.
Have you looked at the value of those incoming links? They may be low value anyway. There may be more valuable things you could be doing with your time and budget.
To answer your specific questions:
_Q1) Is it a problem to have 100,000 URLs pointing to a primary with a rel=canonical tag? (Problem for Google?) _
Yes, if those pages (or valuable replacements) don't actually exist. You'd be wasting valuable crawl budget. This looks like it might be especially true in your case given the size of your site. Check out this article. I think you might find it very helpful. It's an explanation of soft 404 errors and what you should do about them.
Q2) How long does it take a canonical duplicate page to become unique in the index again if the tag is removed? Will google recrawl it and add it back into the index? Do we need to use WMT to speed this process up?
If the canonical tag is changed or removed, Google will find and reindex it next time it crawls your site (assuming you don't run out of crawl budget). You don't need to use WMT unless you're impatient and want to try to speed the process up.
-
Thanks Sandi, I did.. It's a great article and it answered many questions for me, but i couldn't really get clarity on my last two questions above..
-
Hey David
Check this MOZ Blog post about Rel=Canlonical appropriately named Rel=Confused?
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 I remove 'local' landing pages? Could these be the cause of traffic drop (duplicate content)?
I have a site that has most of it's traffic from reasonably competitive keywords each with their own landing page. In order to gain more traffic I also created landing pages for counties in the UK and then towns within each county. Each county has around 12 towns landing pages within the county. This has meant I've added around 200 extra pages to my site in order to try and generate more traffic from long tail keywords. I think this may have caused an issue in that it's impossible for me to create unique content for each town/country and therefore I took a 'shortcut' buy creating unique content for each county and used the same content for the towns within it meaning I have lots of pages with the same content just slightly different page titles with a variation on town name. I've duplicated this over about 15 counties meaning I have around 200 pages with only about 15 actual unique pages within them. I think this may actually be harming my site. These pages have been indexed for about a year an I noticed about 6 months ago a drop in traffic by about 50%. Having looked at my analytics this town and county pages actually only account for about 10% of traffic. My question is should I remove these pages and by doing so should I expect an increase in traffic again?
On-Page Optimization | | SamCUK0 -
Duplicate pages
Hi I have recently signed up to Moz Pro and the first crawl report on my wordpress site has brought up some duplicate content issues. I don't know what to do with this data! The original page : http://www.dwliverpoolphotography.co.uk/blog/ and the duplicate content page : http://www.dwliverpoolphotography.co.uk/author/david/ If anyone can point me to a resource or explain what I need to do thanks! David.
On-Page Optimization | | WallerD0 -
Does Google use 302's to pass value to the target page?
Hi, I've received the below advice, is this correct? Throughout the site, the 302 (moved temporarily) status code is used for redirects, which Google will use to pass value to the target page. Is this correct? I was under the impression a 301 was used to pass value to the target page? Could someone explain the difference between a 301 and a 302, I'm not 100% sure. Thanks, Nathan
On-Page Optimization | | Heehaw0 -
How can I make it so that the various iterations (pages) do not come up as duplicate content ?
Hello, I wondered if somebody could give me some advice. The problem of various iterations of the clanedar page coming up as duplicate content. There is a large calendar on my site for events and each time the page is viewed it is seen as duplicate content . How can I make it so that the various iterations (pages) do not come up as duplicate content ? Regards
On-Page Optimization | | Tony14Aug0 -
Which redirect to use when redirecting to https page from http page
I have one form under https which is redirected from the regular http page. this site was not made by me and I am trying to understand if the way it was redirected using 302 redirect is a problem Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | ciznerguy0 -
Bold just the primary keyword or primary and secondary
Hello! Advice is much appreciated. I'm targeting two keywords, primary and secondary. Should i bold just the primary keyword or primary and secondary? The same for the alt tag and URL. Should i include just the primary keyword or primary and secondary? Thank you. Shane
On-Page Optimization | | ShaneO0 -
If a site has https versions of every page, will the search engines view them as duplicate pages?
A client's site has HTTPS versions of every page for their site and it is possible to view both http and https versions of the page. Do the search engines view this as duplicate content?
On-Page Optimization | | harryholmes0070