"Google chose different canonical than user" Issue Can Anyone help?
-
Our site https://www.travelyaari.com/ , some page are showing this error ("Google chose different canonical than user") on google webmasters. status message "Excluded from search results".
Affected on our route page urls mainly. https://www.travelyaari.com/popular-routes-listing
Our canonical tags are fine, rel alternate tags are fine. Can anyone help us regarding why it is happening?
-
Hi Robin,
Nigel has offered some good advice here - the one thing I would also add is that you may want to set up mobile switchboard tags to make it clear to Google that the desktop version is the canonical version for PCs and the mobile version is canonical for mobile.
See more info here: https://developers.google.com/search/mobile-sites/mobile-seo/separate-urls#annotations-for-desktop-and-mobile-urls
-
Hi Robin
I have checked a few of those as well and the desktop version is coming up high in search for PC search and the m. for mobile.
Whilst it is true that Google can choose its own canonicals I think in your case both versions are being shown on the appropriate device and I think the only reason you are seeing the error is that on your mobile version you have the PC version tag as canonical so Google is quite rightly picking the m. - See screenshot
Despite what you are seeing it is not affecting your rankings.
I would also make all listings https as you are linking from a secure page to a lot of non-secure pages.
Regards
Nigel
-
Ah OK Robin you didn't make that clear - I'll have a look.
The stuff about title and description is still very valid.
Regards
Nigel
-
Hi, thank you. But the answer mentioned is not a sure shot.
Problem is not with this URL. The URLs listed inside this URL "https://www.travelyaari.com/popular-routes-listing" Kindly open it and find the lists.
Under new Google Search Console: Index Coverage> Not Indexed> Google chose different canonical than user>66k pages affected.
Those URLs are listed there as an issue. I need to know what is exactly "Google chose different canonical than user".
-
Hi Robin
You have two versions of the page, the desktop and mobile.
If you search from mobile the m. comes up
If you search from PC the desktop page comes up.So there really is no problem. It could just be that if someone is searching on mobile then the desktop version is set as the canonical and so Google has rightly chosen the m.
What is sure is that your search results are not being affected.
My advice though would be to change your title to '**Bus Routes In India - Route Directory | **Travelyaari'
This is because the title does not convey the full meaning. Your page would probably move much higher on the page with this title. And the description: "Get Indian Bus Schedules, timetables & information about bus routes in India. Get daily scheduled bus services & bookings on bus routes more than 20000+ - Travelyaari" Get those keywords in there!
I hope this helps
Regards Nigel
-
Hi,
Please check this old thread on the same (Ruth's reply).
https://moz.com/community/q/google-ignoring-canonical-and-choosing-its-own
Hope this helps!!
Thanks
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
-
Thumbtack Blatantly Violating Google TOS?
Hi, We have a business registered on Thumbtack so we receive their newsletters. I'm aware that review sites offering a "badge" or verification logo which links back to your profile is nothing new. But the email I received from Thumbtack is a fairly blatant attempt to game Google for popular keywords. I was just curious on your thoughts about this. I believe it was Overstock who did something like this and got slapped by Google pretty hard for a while. Could Thumbtack be heading down the same path? Image: http://i.imgur.com/FWPnmEP.jpg
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | kirmeliux0 -
How can I tell if my site was penalized from the most recent penguin update?
Hey all, I want to be able to see if my website was penalized from the most recent penguin update because we have several hundred websites built and at the bottom of each on it says something along the lines Website by, Web Design by, Hosting by and links back to our homepage. Could this possibly be penalizing us since these links have similar anchor text and on sites that have nothing to do with our services? Thanks, Ryan
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | MonsterWeb280 -
Penguin issues
Hello everyone, I run about 10 sites and pretty much every single one got hit by Penguin (the traffic plummeted on 24th April). I have never done reciprocal links (except 1 domain upto 2005 or so), I have never bought links, I have never spammed message boards or anything like that (except 1 different domain got hit by negative SEO by someone else) and I have never employed anyone to do any of the above. The way I have created sites for the last 10 years is to try to make them useful and let the links build naturally which more or less worked until April this year. I've been tearing my hair out ever since. The only thing you can say about all of them (apart from that I own them but I've been careful with whois etc) is that the link profile is 100% natural apart from the 2 provisos above. Since April I've hired people but I'm down $20K but not any better in the rankings. A few of the sites are: short-hairstyles.com was number 1 for short hairstyles and short haircuts for years then Penguin came and its dropped off for both. It had 10000 or so spammy message board links posted by someone as negative seo I have got some removed but google webmaster tools still reports them as there. There are tentative signs of recovery (maybe) but no traffic increase. 1001-hairstyles.com has been there or there abouts for 10 years for the keyword hairstyles and hair styles until April. A site ourlipsaresealed.skyblogs.be has 30000 links to it (there are only 40000 total) with the anchor text haarstijls which is dutch for hairstyles, I don't think its malicious just they set a template and do a new page every day and they also link in the same way to a competitor who wasn't affected. An seo firm have been working on this one for a few months, the traffic increased 50% a couple of weeks ago but bombed the day after to worse than before. Prom-hairstyles.org when the same way as above in April. The only back link oddity is a site polyvore.com links to it about 400 times (out of 1000 or so total) they are using our pictures to sell their prom dresses (with out permission) but mostly deep link. Most of the other sites went in a similar way but have no obvious backlink anomalies. Do I use the link disavowel tool? I am a bit wary of it because if you watch matt cutts video he keeps reiterating that the tool is for people who have used dodgy link practises in the past and want to do a clean up but that isn't me so am I owning up to something I haven't done by using it? Are the search results as strange in everybody's niche? In mine there is some real dross as well as loads of pinterest and other user generated stuff. Sorry to go on for so long and thanks for getting this far. Ian
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | jwdl0 -
Why did Google reject us from Google News?
I submitted our site, http://www.styleblueprint.com to Google to pontentially be a local news source in Nashville. I received the following note back: We reviewed your site and are unable to include it in Google News at this
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | styleblueprint
time. We have certain guidelines in place regarding the quality of sites
which are included in the Google News index. Please feel free to review
these guidelines at the following link: http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=35769#3 Clicking the link, it anchors to the section that says: These quality guidelines cover the most common forms of deceptive or manipulative behavior, but Google may respond negatively to other misleading practices not listed here (e.g. tricking users by registering misspellings of well-known websites). It's not safe to assume that just because a specific deceptive technique isn't included on this page, Google approves of it. Webmasters who spend their energies upholding the spirit of the basic principles will provide a much better user experience and subsequently enjoy better ranking than those who spend their time looking for loopholes they can exploit. etc... Now we have never intentionally tried to do anything deceptive for our rankings. I am new to SEOmoz and new to SEO optimization in general. I am working through the errors report on our campaign site but I cannot tell what they are dinging us for. Whatever it is we will be happy to fix it. All thoughts greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Jay0 -
Anyone else noticing that their expired domains have lost PR?
A while back I experimented with buying some expired domains that had some PR. I built a small website on each and created content with anchor text that linked back to my main site. For one of my sites I noticed a significant drop in rankings this week. At first I thought it was because of the latest Panda update. But, the drop was slow, not sudden like most Panda hits have been. Then, I noticed that some of my previously purchased domains that had held their PR for quite a while are now PR N/A. I'm guessing that the latest algorithm change caught on to what I was doing. Probably what I was doing was grey hat. I honestly think that every SEO goes through a period where they try out some grey or even black tactics. This makes me even more desiring to be completely White hat now....and build links that are going to last. I was just wondering if any of you guys have experienced anything like this this week? Would love to hear your thoughts. EDIT: A second question - What would you guys do with these domains? They're still in the Google index so they're not penalized, likely just stripped of PR. Would you scrap them completely? Remove the links back to my sites? Do nothing?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | MarieHaynes2 -
Canonicals affected traffic?
Dear Sir/Madam, We are white label classified platform providers and recently we marked canonicals on all the partner sites pointing to our home site as authority because we thought that Search Engines might penalize us for duplicate content as the classified ads are similar on all site, only theme and layout is different but now we are witnessing a huge decrease in our partner`s classifed section organic traffic. Can you please advise that is it because of canonicals , if yes than what should we do? like should we take canonicals off and if we take it off than how can we handle it legally.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | razasaeed0 -
How much time do you think Google employees spend reverse engineering what we do?
Lets face it, it's the corner stone of SEO, reverse engineering sites to guess at what big G does. It would just make sense they did the same to learn all our tactics.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | naffhampton1 -
HELP! My client got a DDOS Attack! Need advice
Here the setup: Server is hosted inhouse. It got attacked using a DDOS from 20+ IP addresses spoofing in different counries. Our server overloaded and didn't work anymore. URL is registered at GoDaddy. Signed up at Dreamhost. We pointed DNS to Dreamhost successfully. Attacks kept coming and messed up other sites on the Dreamhost shared server. We didn't know we were being followed at first. We originally thought they were attacking the IP address on our inhouse server. Dreamhost noticed the attack and put us on a seperate IP and disabled our URL until the attacks 'stopped'. MY QUESTION IS: What do I do if they don't stop? Close shop? 99% of the business is internet driven. This has to be the blackest Blackhat SEO ever.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Francisco_Meza0