Should existing canonical tags be removed where a 301 redirect is the preferred option?
-
Hi,
I'm working on a site that is currently using canonical tags to deal with www and non-www variations. My recommendation is to setup 301 redirects to deal with this issue instead.
However, is it ok to leave the existing canonical tags in place alongside the new 301 redirects or should they be removed?
My thoughts are that this is not a canonical issue and therefore they should be removed? If 301 redirects are not possible it would be better have them that nothing at all but I don't think we need both, right?
Any feedback much appreciated!
-
Hi,
That's a great help, thanks a mill! Leaving them in place as a fall back makes sense.
-
Hi,
It's perfectly acceptable to leave the canonical tags in place. Self-referring canonical tags like this can often be helpful, but leaving them in place certainly isn't going to hurt anything. Here are a few instances where they come into play:
- Tagged links
- Query string parameters
- As a fall back for 301 rules failing or being removed by accident
- Relative links
Hope that helps!
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
-
NoIndex tag, canonical tag or automatically generated H1's for automatically generated enquiry pages?
What would be better for automatically generated accommodation enquiry pages for a travel company? NoIndex tag, canonical tag, automatically generated H1's or another solution? This is the homepage: https://www.discoverqueensland.com.au/ You would enquire from a page like this: https://www.discoverqueensland.com.au/accommodation/sunshine-coast/twin-waters/the-sebel-twin-waters This is the enquiry form: https://www.discoverqueensland.com.au/accommodation-enquiry.php?name=The+Sebel+Twin+Waters®ion_name=Sunshine+Coast
Technical SEO | | Kim_Lazaro0 -
301 redirects- how long to keep and how many are too many?
Hi, I was told we have way too many 301 redirects on our site. We have some that have been there for 3 years. Our site is datacard.com . Question- how long should you keep a redirect out there when building a new page and expiring an old page? Is it 6 months, is it a certain time frame? wondering what the best practices are? Thanks! Laura
Technical SEO | | lauramrobinson320 -
Does 301 redirect of old filenames still work?
I have gone through several revisions of my site. We used to have only static pages in HTML. I had search-engine-optimization.html changed to seo-philippines.html changed to /seo-philippines/ I 301 redirected all of them whenever I change the filenames. This is in the course of 6 years worth of link building and I'm wondering if this has an effect because our rankings go down everytime we do this.
Technical SEO | | optimind0 -
Crawl Diagnostic: Notices about 301 redirects
There are detected five 301 redirects on my site and I want to understand why this is happening? And is this important to fix? http://domain.cl/subfolder ---- redirects to ----> http://domain.cl/subfolder/ What does this tell me "/" I am very curious 🙂 Thanks for every answer
Technical SEO | | inlinear
Holger0 -
Switching from a .org to .io (301 domain redirect)
I'm considering switching my main site from a .org to .io address; the .org is an exact match domain which helped to kickstart it a few years ago and now has about 50% repeat visitors, but was thrown off the Apple affiliation program for trademark infringement. I've found and purchased a nice (non-infringing) .io domain, and I've read the advice here on how to properly 301 the old domain; but my question is - does it matter that it's .io? Is this going to significantly hurt my rankings, even when everything has been 301'd properly? Another thought I had is that I may actually come out better off in the long run, what with Google penalties being applied to exact match domains. Is this a ranking suicide? If so, I'm tempted to leave it as is; even without the affiliation, it's making a good amount every month in ad fees that I don't want to disrupt. Thanks all!
Technical SEO | | w0lfiesmithUK0 -
Quick Seo question regarding 301 redirect
Hi everyone and thank you for showing interested in my problem and for helping me out with this easy thing i have going on
Technical SEO | | caw_roHere is how it puts out : I have 2 websites, same niche, mostly same keywords. Site #1 holding strong on google #2 ranking for months now. Site #2 was holding strong in google top 10 rankings until 2 weeks ago when it got sandboxed for some reason I want to use a 301 permanent redirect from Site #2 to Site #1 to pass all the link juice onto Site #1 and hopefully beat the #1 spot
The question: Will this affect Site #1 is anyway, considering Site #2 is in somehow sandbox ( i assume that, since he dropped more then 70 positions over night ) Is thins a good think to do or i risk damaging Site #1 by doing this ? Thanks allot in advance. Best regards,
Trinca Alexandru0 -
My home page 301 redirects - is this an SEO problem
When ever a browser calls my site canineconcepts.co.uk, it is automatically 301 redirected to canineconcepts.co.uk/en I am not sure if I should be concerned about this from an SEO perspective or not. Any thoughts?
Technical SEO | | CanineConcepts0 -
301 redirects inside sitemaps
I am in the process of trying to get google to follow a large number of old links on site A to site B. Currently I have 301 redirects as well a cross domain canonical tags in place. My issue is that Google is not following the links from site A to site B since the links no longer exist in site A. I went ahead and added the old links from site A into site A's sitemap. Unfortunately Google is returning this message inside webmaster tools: When we tested a sample of URLs from your Sitemap, we found that some URLs redirect to other locations. We recommend that your Sitemap contain URLs that point to the final destination (the redirect target) instead of redirecting to another URL. However I do not understand how adding the redirected links from site B to the sitemap in site A will remove the old links. Obviously Google can see the 301 redirect and the canonical tag but this isn't defined in the sitemap as a direct correlation between site A and B. Am I missing something here?
Technical SEO | | jmsobe0