Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
What is the correct Canonical tag on m.site?
-
We have 2 separate sites for desktop (www.example.com) and mobile (m.example.com)
As per the guideline, we have added Rel=alternate tag on www.example.com to point to mobile URL(m.example.com) and Rel=canonical tag on m.example.com to point to Desktop site(www.example.com).However, i didn't find any guideline on what canonical tag we should add ifFor Desktop sitewww.example.com/PageA - has a canonical tag to www.example.com/PageBOn this page, we have a Rel=alternate tag m.example.com/pageAWhat will be the canonical we should add for the mobile version of Page Am.example.com/PageA - Canonical tag point to www.example.com/PageA -or www.example.com/PageB?Kalpesh
-
Hi, I hope this helps,
Do NOT point desktop pages to m. pages via a
rel="canonical" tags use rel="alternate" for that & make surerel="canonical"tag on the m. URL pointing to the corresponding desktop URLAnnotations for desktop and mobile URLs
- On the desktop page, add a
rel="alternate"tag pointing to the corresponding mobile URL. This helps Googlebot discover the location of your site's mobile pages. - On the mobile page, add a
rel="canonical"tag pointing to the corresponding desktop URL.
We support two methods to have this annotation: in the HTML of the pages themselves and in sitemaps. For example, suppose that the desktop URL is
https://example.com/page-1and the corresponding mobile URL ishttps://m.example.com/page-1. The annotations in this example would be as follows.Annotations in the HTML
On the desktop page (
https://www.example.com/page-1), add the following annotation:<code dir="ltr"><linkrel="alternate"media="only screen="" and="" (max-width:="" 640px)"<br="">href="https://m.example.com/page-1"></linkrel="alternate"media="only></code>On the mobile page (
https://m.example.com/page-1), the required annotation should be:<code dir="ltr"><linkrel="canonical"href="https: www.example.com="" page-1"=""></linkrel="canonical"href="https:></code>This
rel="canonical"tag on the mobile URL pointing to the desktop page is required.A page have a self-referencing canonical URL
In the example above, we link the non-canonical page to the canonical version. But should a page set a rel=canonical for itself? I strongly recommend having a canonical link element on every page and Google has confirmed that’s best. That’s because most Sites & CMS’s will allow URL parameters without changing the content.
So all of these URLs would show the same content:
-
https://www.example.com/page-1 -
https://www.example.com/page-1/?isnt=it-awesome -
https://www.example.com/page-1/?cmpgn=twitter -
https://www.example.com/page-1/?cmpgn=facebook
Using a mobile website version of their desktop version, they need to implement a canonical tag on their mobile website page with an URL of the desktop version.
For example,
Your main domain: iamexample.com
Your mobile version: m.iamexample.com
Then, have this tag in the section of your main domain -
And, have this tag in the section of your mobile version page -
Mobile-Specific URLs, Such as AMP Pages or a Mobile-Specific Subdomain
Creating content with mobile in mind is a marketing must -- just be sure to remember to set your canonical URLs when you have pages that are specific to mobile but have the same content as a page on the desktop version of your website. For AMP pages specifically, Google also provides detailed guidelines on how to correctly differentiate your Accelerated Mobile Page from your standard webpage.
SEE:
- https://developers.google.com/search/mobile-sites/mobile-seo/separate-urls
- https://yoast.com/rel-canonical/
- https://moz.com/blog/cross-domain-rel-canonical-seo-value-cross-posted-content
- https://moz.com/learn/seo/canonicalization
- https://moz.com/blog/rel-canonical
Hope this helps,
Tom
- On the desktop page, add a
-
You shouldn't have canonical tags on either pointing to the other IMO. A canonical tag, deployed on a web-page, says to Google "I am the non-canonical version of a page. Unless you have signals like links which contradict this tag strongly, don't index this non-canonical page at all. Only index the canonical URL which I am pointing you to"
So the page which you place the canonical tag on, becomes (itself) non canonical and therefore gives a medium-to-strong signal to Google that it should be de-indexed. As such, if you plaster your mobile site in canonical tags, you are essentially telling Google that the entire mobile site is non-canonical and thereby probably not a great candidate for indexation. Do you want your mobile site to rank? I assume you do
I don't know what guidance you have read. Google's guidance is often woefully out of date as their documentation update cycle for organic-search stuff is really poor. If it was something here on Moz, I personally disagree with it
I would just stick with the alternate tags. Anyway if you have canonicals going in two directions, you will create a soft redirect loop where both URLs specify themselves as non-canonical. That could make things way worse than they are now
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
-
Quick Fix to "Duplicate page without canonical tag"?
When we pull up Google Search Console, in the Index Coverage section, under the category of Excluded, there is a sub-category called ‘Duplicate page without canonical tag’. The majority of the 665 pages in that section are from a test environment. If we were to include in the robots.txt file, a wildcard to cover every URL that started with the particular root URL ("www.domain.com/host/"), could we eliminate the majority of these errors? That solution is not one of the 5 or 6 recommended solutions that the Google Search Console Help section text suggests. It seems like a simple effective solution. Are we missing something?
Technical SEO | | CREW-MARKETING1 -
Do Canonical Tags Pass Link Juice?
I have an ecommerce website where some pages link to a product page with a different URL. EXAMPLE: 1: /category/product1.html (not indexed by Google) with canonical pointing to product1.html Other page link to the product like below. 2: product1.html (indexed by Google) Now the question is, does 1: pass any link juice to product1.html or not? Is it worth to change everything and link only to one URL? My site is running on Magento!
Technical SEO | | bill3690 -
Can anyone tell me why some of the top referrers to my site are porn site?
We noticed today that 4 of the top referring sites are actually porn sites. Does anyone know what that is all about? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | thinkcreativegroup1 -
Rel=canonical Weebly
My problem is with my website as it says I have duplicate page titles and contents because of a /index.html. It says the duplicate content is due to the fact that my homepage on my website is www.seacandytackle.com but it is also www.seacandytackle.com/index.html because I use weebly. How can I use the tag to fix this? It won't let me do a 301 redirect because it is a home page. How can I fix this? What code would I have to use and which url? Also it says that I have duplicate page content between http://www.seacandytackle.com/index.html and http://www.seacandytackle.comhttp://www.seacandytackle.com but I don't recall having any page that looks like http://www.seacandytackle.com http://www.seacandytackle.com from weebly. How can I fix this issue as well? Thank you for any help. Step by step implementation would be particularly helpful in using the rel= tags to fix these duplicate issues.
Technical SEO | | SeaCandyTackle0 -
301 redirect: canonical or non canonical?
Hi, Newbie alert! I need to set up 301 redirects for changed URLs on a database driven site that is to be redeveloped shortly. The current site uses canonical header tags. The new site will also use canonical tags. Should the 301 redirects map the canonical URL on the old site to the corresponding canonical for the new design . . . or should they map the non canonical database URLs old and new? Given that the purpose of canonicals is to indicate our preferred URL, then my guess is that's what I should use. However, how can I be sure that Google (for example) has indexed the canonical in every case? Thx in anticipation.
Technical SEO | | ztalk1120 -
How do I fix the h1 tag?
No More Than One H1 Tag Easy fix <dl> <dt>Number of H1s</dt> <dd>2</dd> <dt>Explanation</dt> <dd>Best practices for both SEO and accessibility require only a single H1 tag. The H1 is meant to be the page's headline, and thus, multiple H1s are confusing. Consider employing H2, H3 or CSS styles to achieve the same results with text visualization.</dd> <dt>Recommendation</dt> <dd>Remove multiple instances of the H1 tag, so that only one exists on the page.</dd> <dd>I get this error yet it does not tell me how to fix it. I'm not even sure what the H1 tag is?
Technical SEO | | 678648631264
</dd> </dl>0 -
Should there be a canonical tag on my 404 error page?
In my crawl diagnostics, I notice some 4xx client errors. They are appearing for pages that no longer exist, so I'm not sure what the problem is. Shouldn't they just be dealt as 404's? Anyway, on closer inspection I noticed that my 404 error page contains a canonical tag which points to the missing page. Could this be the issue? Is it a good idea to remove the canonical tag from this error page? Thanks.
Technical SEO | | Leighm0 -
Index forum sites
Hi Moz Team, somehow the last question i raised a few days ago not only wasnt answered up until now, it was also completely deleted and the credit was not "refunded" - obviously there was some data loss involved with your restructuring. Can you check whether you still find the last question and answer it quickly? I need the answer 🙂 Here is one more question: I bought a website that has a huge forum, loads of pages with user generated content. Overall around 500.000 Threads with 9 Million comments. The complete forum is noindex/nofollow when i bought the site, now i am thinking about what is the best way to unleash the potential. The current system is vBulletin 3.6.10. a) Shall i first do an update of vbulletin to version 4 and use the vSEO tool to make the URLs clean, more user and search engine friendly before i switch to index/follow? b) would you recommend to have the forum in the folder structure or on a subdomain? As far as i know subdomain does take lesser strenght from the TLD, however, it is safer because the subdomain is seen as a separate entity from the regular TLD. Having it in he folder makes it easiert to pass strenght from the TLD to the forum, however, it puts my TLD at risk c) Would you release all forum sites at once or section by section? I think section by section looks rather unnatural not only to search engines but also to users, however, i am afraid of blasting more than a millionpages into the index at once. d) Would you index the first page of a threat or all pages of a threat? I fear duplicate content as the different pages of the threat contain different body content but the same Title and possibly the same h1. Looking forward to hear from you soon! Best Fabian
Technical SEO | | fabiank0