Pricing value pages
-
We have the main pricing page here: https://www.eginnovations.com/product/pricing
Then depending on what you click, you'll be taken to the appropriate form on one of these pages:
- https://www.eginnovations.com/product/request-quote?pricetype=audit
- https://www.eginnovations.com/product/request-quote?pricetype=saas
- https://www.eginnovations.com/product/request-quote?pricetype=perpetual
- https://www.eginnovations.com/product/request-quote?pricetype=subscription
How should I handle these? Noindex, follow? Set a canonical? I keep getting notifications that these are duplicate content, but it's just a way to keep the form fills organized. Thanks for your help!
-
Absolutely not a problem
-
Thanks for your help!
-
Ah the bane that is parameter variant URLs. Mostly duplicate, tiny differences - Google doesn't usually like them (there are exceptions, but here it's clear that there's a genuine / flagged problem).
No-index / robots.txt are a bit over-the-top for this kind of stuff in my opinion. Obviously you can't use redirects to consolidate as in this situation that would prevent users from accessing the stated form variants (not cool).
You have two sensible options:
1) Canonical (using canonical tags) the parameter hooked forms to their non-parameter based ("pricing") parent (https://www.eginnovations.com/product/pricing)
2) Canonical the less used form variants to the one which is most often used (e.g: all parameter form variants to https://www.eginnovations.com/product/request-quote?pricetype=perpetual - which is stated to be the 'popular' option) - and let them all sit separately to the parent (which contains no forms, this page: https://www.eginnovations.com/product/pricing).
My preference would be to try option 2 so Google at least has a chance of indexing the pricing URL _and _the most popular form variant. If you **still get duplication notices **then go nuclear and slam option 1 down.
When you put a canonical tag on a page referencing another URL as the canonical version, the active page (the one with the canonical tag on it) becomes non-canonical and is usually de-indexed by default. So no need for crazy robots or no-index Meta shenanigans.
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
-
Filter pages - Shopify
Hi there, /collections/living-room-furniture/black
Technical SEO | | williamhuynh
/collections/living-room-furniture/fabric Is that ok to make all the above filter/tag pages canonicalised with their main category /collections/living-room-furniture OR I keep them as it is, so /collections/living-room-furniture/black can rank for filter keywords, example: black living room furniture, /collections/living-room-furniture/fabric fabric living room furniture etc. Also, does it needs to be noindex, follow as well? Note - already removed the main category content from filter pages, updated meta tags as well. Please advice, thank you0 -
Multiple Common Page Links
Hi everyone - I've taken over SEO for a site recently. In many cases, the reasons why something was done were not well documented. One of these is that on some pages, there are lists of selections. Each selection takes the user to a particular page. On the list page, there is often a link from an image, a name, and a couple of others. Each page often has 30 items with 4 links each. For some reason, the 4th of these internal links were no-followed. When I run this site through several different site evaluation tools, they are all troubled with the number of no-follow links on the site. (These instances from above add up to a 5 figure number). From a user perspective, I totally get why there is a link where each of these links exist. If I wanted to click on the image or the name or some other attribute, that totally makes sense. Its my understanding that Google / Bing are only going to consider the 1st instance. If this creates excessive links, wouldn't you want 3 of the 4 links in each set no-followed? If its only excessive unique links that really matter, then why would any be nofollowed.
Technical SEO | | APFM0 -
Local City Pages
Anyone have any input on the tactics being used for a national company trying to target local city pages. For instance, you might be a national printing company and you are trying to compete against local printers in cities by creating a specific page for that city + print keywords.
Technical SEO | | waqid0 -
How to identify orphan pages?
I've read that you can use Screaming Frog to identify orphan pages on your site, but I can't figure out how to do it. Can anyone help? I know that Xenu Link Sleuth works but I'm on a Mac so that's not an option for me. Or are there other ways to identify orphan pages?
Technical SEO | | MarieHaynes0 -
Find where the not selected pages are from
Hi all Can anyone suggest how I can find where gtoogle is finding approx. 1000 pages not to select? In round numbers I have 110 pages on the site site: searech shows all pages index status shows 110 slected and 1000 not selected. For the life of me I cannot fingure where these pages are coming from. I have set my prefered domain to www., setup 301 's to www. as per below RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^growingyourownveg.com$
Technical SEO | | spes123
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ "http://www.growingyourownveg.com/$1" [R=301,L] site is www.growingyourownveg.com any suggestions much appreciated Simon0 -
132 pages reported as having Duplicate Page Content but I'm not sure where to go to fix the problems?
I am seeing “Duplicate Page Content” coming up in our
Technical SEO | | danatanseo
reports on SEOMOZ.org Here’s an example: http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/product/williams-sound-ppa-r35-e http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/product/aphex-230-master-voice-channel-processor http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/product/AT-AE4100.prod These three pages are for completely unrelated products.
They are returning “200” status codes, but are being identified as having
duplicate page content. It appears these are all going to the home page, but it’s
an odd version of the home page because there’s no title. I would understand if these pages 301-redirected to the home page if they were obsolete products, but it's not a 301-redirect. The referring page is
listed as: http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category/cd-duplicators None of the 3 links in question appear anywhere on that page. It's puzzling. We have 132 of these. Can anyone help me figure out
why this is happening and how best to fix it? Thanks!0 -
How can I prevent duplicate content between www.page.com/ and www.page.com
SEOMoz's recent crawl showed me that I had an error for duplicate content and duplicate page titles. This is a problem because it found the same page twice because of a '/' on the end of one url. e.g. www.page.com/ vs. www.page.com My question is do I need to be concerned about this. And is there anything I should put in my htaccess file to prevent this happening. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | onlineexpression
Karl0 -
Expired traffic and 301 value
Hi Folks, Here is our situation we have an old brand domain www.asia-hotels.com >> that was redirecting to>>www.asiahotels.com By mistake, we let that domain expired and only noticed the drop a month later We lost all our pages and this for several weeks Not sure of the exact date but approximately around 24th of December, what a merry Xmas! 😞 Since then we have repurchased the domain, Put back all the pages as they were and re-instated all the 301 redirect as they were. Since that date we haven't seen any uplift in our visits or visibility score. Did we do something wrong with our 301 redirect? I know for sure we used ISAPI rewrite mod for the non www. domain although I am not entirely sure how the www. version has been handled. Is there something we should do at a DNS level to flag the site is back? Should we presetn a reconsideration request? Any help would be greatly welcomed. Thanks for your help. Cheers, Freddy More info I placed a bit more info and the visits graph on my blog: http://www.inmarketingwetrust.com.au/seo-effect-of-domain-expiry-on-301-redirects/ I am not sure if this is due to the fact that some information is cached but when i looked at the site on opensiteexplorer I found that the data is still showing as non redirected sites: http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/asia-hotels.com/www.asia-hotels.com/a!comparison effect-of-301-redirect-expired-on-SERP-visibility-300x204.jpg
Technical SEO | | Gus_Martin0