Question on canonicals
-
hi community
let's say i have to 2 e-commerce sites selling the same English books in different currencies - one of the site serves the UK market ( users can purchase in sterling) while another one European markets ( user can purchase in euro). Sites are identical.
SEO wise, while the "European" site homepage has a good ranking across major search engines in europe, product pages do not rank very well at all. Since site is a .com too it s hard to push it in local search engines.
I would like then to push one of the sites across all search engines,tackling duplicate content etc.Geotargeting would make the rest.
I would like to add canonicals tag pointing at the UK version across all EU site product pages, while leaving the EU homepage rank.
I have 2 doubts though:
-
is it ok to have canonical tags pointing at an external site.
-
is it ok to have part of a site with canonical tags, while other parts are left ranking?
-
-
Hi there,
While I agree with Logan that hreflang may actually be your best bet, in response to those specific questions:
-
Cross-domain canonicals are not inherently problematic.
-
By my understanding, at least, you're free to use rel="canonical" whenever you deem appropriate.
-
-
Hi,
It sounds like you should be using hreflang tags. These tags work similar to canonical tags, but help different country-specific versions of Google index content meant for searchers in those geographies. You can read up on the how/why here: https://moz.com/learn/seo/hreflang-tag
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
-
Missing Canonical Tag for a PDF document
Error: Missing Canonical Tag
Technical SEO | | ahmadmdahshan
But URL is not a webpage it is a PDF document, is this fixable?0 -
Rel-canonical and meta data
Hey Mozzers, Help please. I am migrating content for a new website (1000's of pages) and am using the canonical tag on a number of pages. For the pages which I am asking Google not to recognise / index as the master version, and in the interests of time do I need to take the time to fill in the meta <title><description> etc each time?</p> <p>Ben</p></title>
Technical SEO | | Bendall0 -
My Last Question Regarding URLs - I Promise...
Hello I've recently asked the community which urls would be best for a company with a variety of wood flooring products. This question relates to "keywords" within the url which relates to each and every product. Which would you choose, 1. a or b? 2. a or b? 1. - Product: CIRO a. www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-flooring/rustic-oak-ciro - Keyword Match, YES. "Rustic Oak Flooring" b. www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-flooring/ciro - Keyword Match, NO. "Rustic Oak Flooring" 2. - Product: VOGUE a. www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-flooring/prefinished-oak-vogue - Keyword Match, YES. "Pr_efinished Oak Flooring"_ b. www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-flooring/vogue - Keyword Match, NO. "Pr_efinished Oak Flooring"_ Although seemingly a basic part of SEO, I find myself revisiting this question time and time again - what is really better for SEO? Shorter URL's or "slightly" longer to achieve keyword match? _After researching many keywords which we have chosen to use as part of this project, it seems to have any chance of ranking on the first page, the key word (or part of the keyword) must appear within the url. _ I would like to get some "extra" clarification. Thanks for your help!
Technical SEO | | GaryVictory0 -
Why Canonical error?
I just got my SEOMOZ run and it says I have a CANONICAL ERROR: Scorpio Earrings - 7mm Stud - Sterling Silver http://www.astrojewelry.com/jewelry/scorpio-the-scorpion-earrings-30502.htm I'm not sure why--I only changed the <title>tag--not the URL.</span></p> <p><span class="truncated sub-url" title="http://www.astrojewelry.com/jewelry/scorpio-the-scorpion-earrings-30502.htm">Why would this generate a canonical error?</span></p> <p><span class="truncated sub-url" title="http://www.astrojewelry.com/jewelry/scorpio-the-scorpion-earrings-30502.htm">Kathleen</span></p> <p><span class="truncated sub-url" title="http://www.astrojewelry.com/jewelry/scorpio-the-scorpion-earrings-30502.htm">astrojewelry.com</span></p> <p> </p> <p> </p></title>
Technical SEO | | spkcp1110 -
Back Link Question
Hi Folks, Our domain (www.alabu.com) has been around since 2000. We've accumulated a lot of back links over the years, many of which I don't recognize and didn't ask for. I've been reading on here recently about "cleaning up" back links. I do see a lot of ours that just aren't relevant and I don't know why they decided to link to us. We haven't gotten a warning from google or anything like that, but I wonder, how do I know if we could benefit from cleaning up our back links? Is there a benefit to it even if google hasn't warned us? Thanks! Hal
Technical SEO | | AlabuSkinCare0 -
Canonical Link Quesiton
I wrote an article that is a page article, but would also be a very good blog post - So my question is two things: 1. If i post it as a static page and syndicate it as a blog post and have it as a canonical link to the page, google will read see the blog and read the page _url as the one with credit correct? In turn not dinging me for duplicate content. 2. Given if the above statement is correct, should I write the blog and put it on my static page referencing the blog or the way i have it as a static page with the blog using a canonical reference back to the page. Any input would be greatly appreciated.
Technical SEO | | tgr0ss0 -
Canonical Tag Pointing To The Same URL
Does it matter if a canonical tag points to the URL in which the tag is on? Example Page: http://www.domain.com Canonical tag: rel="canonical" href="http://www.domain.com" /> I only ask because a client of mine has a CMS that automatically does that to every page on the site and there's no way to remove it. Will this have a negative impact or does it not matter at all? Any insights would be great because I can't find a clear answer anywhere online. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | MichaelWeisbaum0 -
Canonical Tag
Does it do anything to place the Canonical tag on the unique page itself? I thought this was only to be used on the offending pages that are the copies. Thanks
Technical SEO | | poolguy0