Canonical: Same content but different countries
-
I'm building a website that has content made for specific countries. The url format is:
MyWebsite.com/<country name="">/</country>
Some of the pages for <specific url="">are the same for different countries, the <specific url="">would be the same as well. The only difference would be the <country name="">.</country></specific></specific>
How do I deal with canonical issues to avoid Google thinking I'm presenting the same content?
-
In response to your second question, it's fine to have /usa/ although /us/ or /en/ would be a more typical deployment (lots of people go like, /en-us/ and /en-gb/ as that structure allows for really granular international deployment!)
As long as the hreflangs are accurate and tell Google what language and region the URLs are for, as long as the hreflangs are deployed symmetrically with no conflicts or missing parts - it should be ok
Note that Google will expect to see different content on different regional URLs, sometimes even if they're the same language but targeted at different countries (tailor your content to your audience, don't just cut and paste sites and change tags and expect extra footprint). Stuff like shipping info and prices (currency shown) should also be different (otherwise don't even bother!)
Your hreflangs, if you are doing USA as your EN country, should not use 'en-gb' in the hreflang (instead they should use 'en-us')
If you're thing God the HTML implementation will make the code bloated and messy, read this:
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/189077?hl=en
There are also HTTP header and XML sitemap deployment options (though IMO, HTML is always best and is the hardest, strongest signal)
-
Yep every page should reference every language, including its own language. but obviously with different URLs in the link fields, as different pages should have different regional equivalents (hope that makes sense)
-
Thank you, so if I had approximately 30 different countries, then I would reference all 30 different country URLs?
-
Basically the canonical tags should self reference, so long as they are also supported by hreflangs.
So for example if you had these two URLs:
... then on site.com/en/category/product you'd need:
**... and on site.com/fr/category/product you'd need:**
It's pretty simple really! Remember, only canonical URLs (usually not parameter-based child URLs) should self-reference with a canonical tag. Remember that Hreflangs need to be mutually agreed between pages for them to work (so if the FR page links to the EN page with a hreflang, but there's no hreflang coming back - it fails!) - Keep hreflangs simple and exactly symmetrical
-
Hi, newbguy,
It appears that your concern is about losing the different language versions of the same page? I assume that the content is the same apart from language or location. If this is the case here are some links that should help.
https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2011/12/new-markup-for-multilingual-content.html
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/182192?hl=en
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/182192?hl=en
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/189077
https://yoast.com/rel-canonical/
https://moz.com/learn/seo/canonicalization
If after having a look through these you are still stuck, let me know.
If you do need further help can you please tell me
- Is the content the same on each page?
- Is the content in the same language on each page?
Please keep in mind that the URLs in your example are technically different as they <country name="">is different in each one.</country>
I hope this helps,
Steve
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
-
Canonical URL Tag Usage
I have a large website, almost 1500 pages that each market different keywords for the trucking logistics industry. I don't really understand the new Canonical URL Tag USAGE. They say to use it so the page is not a duplicate but the page that MOZ is call for to have the tag isn't a duplicate. It promotes 1 keyword that no other page directly promotes. Here is the page address, now what tag would I put up in the HEAD so google don't treat it as a duplicate page. http://www.freightetc.com/c/heavyhaul/heavyhaul.php 1. Number 1 the actual page address because I want it treated like its own page or do I have to use #2 below? 2. I don't know why I would use #2 as I want it to be its own page, and get credit and listed and ranked as its own page. Can anyone clarify this stuff to me as I guess i am just new to this whole tag usage.
On-Page Optimization | | dwebb0070 -
Difference in using dividers in TITLE TAG
Hi everyone, i know that dividers in title or even title tag doesnt have much of an impact on better rankings. I had great rankings for many keywords, not using dividers or using only one divider. However for better reading comprehension and usability, and also aesthetics i started to use the pipe as my main divider and other secondary dividers. I saw many pages drop in rankings vs other less competent and with less content pages. My format was as follows: Product Brand | Product description - Additional info or local info ie. Fiber Glass MBI | Insulation Batts for Home and Commercial use - Acoustic and Thermal Insulation I changed the format for a handful of pages, and saw immediate results on rankings and traffic on those pages. Product Brand with Product Description - Additional Info ie. Fiber Glass MBI Insulation Batts for Commercial use - Acoustic and Thermal Insulation. Does it sound like something i should implement page wide. I personally like the aesthetics of the pipe as it gives a cleaner look, but the better rankings on the changed pages with using only one divider makes me think. Does it sound familiar, or its just a coincidence, Regards,
On-Page Optimization | | JesusD0 -
Rel-canonical
Hi, I am a bit confused. A potential clients website has three versions: http://www. http:// http://dev. In each version they have used the rel=canonical back to each base version. So http://www." http://" http://dev." I would have expected duplicate content but I see only one version of the content when I check using "....." in Google. Using the site: tool I see that all three versions are indexed. When moving through the navigation on them, they all redirect to the one home page - the www version. Any idea what is going on and what should be recommended?Redirecting all versions to the www. version? Is it a problem?
On-Page Optimization | | AL123al0 -
Duplicate content: Form labels and field content
I have a site that has 500 pages, each with unique content, the only content that could be deemed the same is the 'Make Contact' form, which has the same labels and placeholder text on each page. Is this likely to cause any duplicate content penalties?
On-Page Optimization | | deployseo0 -
Duplicate Content Daily Rates
Our finance information site want to publish daily rates each day of the main currency / share etc prices. We've created a template with the main headers e.g. Eurozone. GBP v EUR 1.1762. Australia. GBP v AUD 1.1494.... and list top 20 currencies. We want to roll this out daily Mon - Friday. The only content that will change would be the rates on a daily basis. It's v useful info to users but we're a little cautious about it being seen as duplicate content. What advice would you give re title tags too in this new product rollout.
On-Page Optimization | | stevanl0 -
Pagination on related content within a subject
A client has come to us with new content and sections for their site. The two main sections are "Widget Services" - the sales pages, and "Widget Guide" - a non-commercial guide to using the widgets etc. Both the Services and Guide pages contain the same pages (red widgets, blue widgets, triangle widgets), and - here's the problem - the same first paragraph. i.e. ======== Blue widget services Blue widgets were invented in 1906 by Professor Blue. It was only a coincidence that they were blue. We stock a full range of blue widgets, we were voted best blue widget handler at widgetcon 2013. Buy one now See our guide to blue widgets here Guide to blue widgets Blue widgets were invented in 1906 by Professor Blue. It was only a coincidence that they were blue. The thing about blue widgets as they're not at all like red widgets at all. For starters, they're blue. Find more information about our blue widgets here ======== In all of these pages, the first paragraph is ~200 words and provides a great introduction to the subject, and the rest of the page is 600-800 words, making these pages unique enough to justify being different pages. We want to deal with this by declaring each page as a paginated version of a two page article on each type of widget (using rel=prev/next). Our thinking is that Google probably handles introuctions/headers on paginated content in a sensible way. Has anyone experienced this before? Is there any issues on using rel="prev" and rel="next" when they're not strictly paginated?
On-Page Optimization | | BabelPR0 -
Content placment best for SEO?
We currently have a scroll bar box at the bottom of our page with information in but from what I can see scroll bar boxes at the bottom of websites looking a little spammy (a lot of over optimized websites using them) would we be best in using a strategy like this site www.solopress.com/ which implement a show more link that drops information down would this be read as good information for Google or look just as spammy?
On-Page Optimization | | BobAnderson1 -
CcTLDs Differences Between Each Other
Hi, this is a simple question, many ccTLD look like this: .com.es .es .org.es 1.What is the difference from one another regarding SEO? 2.Does the .com.es has any advantage? Like targeting the "world" and "Spain" 3.Is there one better than other? 4.Will a .com.es or any other domain like that be able to rank globally? or just in Spain? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | andresgmontero0