Canonicalisation - different languages and channels
-
Hi
If the same content is placed on different URL's for the purposes of providing information on different channels (i.e mobiles), or has been translated into a different language (but is still the same content), do the serach engines still count this as duplicate content and will a canonical URL have to be tagged in these instances?
Thanks in advance for your assistance.
-
The problem with serving content for different channels is that crawlers read 2 pieces of the same content and can penalize you. There a few workarounds for that.One is obviously the fact that you can add a rel=canonical tag, but if you are serving same content due to only channels, it may pose an issue.
Example: if your webpage URL is www.mywebsite.com/abc (which can be accessed via navigational links on your website) and you have a url www.mywebsite.com/xyz which you use for mobiles, PPC or any other channel, but both having the same content, it will cause problems.
The way to deal with such issues is adding parameters (campaign id, etc) to 1 URL to tell google that you are using this version of the page(the one with campaign id) for some specific channel.
If you are making your website ready for the mobile, the best way is to tackle is to write device detection codes in your htaccess file.
It may look something like this:
RewriteCond %{HTTP_USER_AGENT} ^.iPad.$
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://ipad.mydomain.com [R=301]
If you are serving content in different languages, then it shouldnt be much of a problem (generally speaking)
-
Hi - in general, yes, it's best to use something like the rel=canonical tag (http://www.seomoz.org/blog/canonical-url-tag-the-most-important-advancement-in-seo-practices-since-sitemaps) or to specifically tag mobile content as such - http://searchengineland.com/dont-penalize-yourself-mobile-sites-are-not-duplicate-content-40380
If it's translated to different languages, you're in the clear - that's considered substantively unique content and not subject to duplicate filtering (at least, 99% of the time).
Happy to help - great to have you in PRO!
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
-
I want to set different price type for India and USA through schema. for eaxmple website is abc.com & there is no cookie/country level redirection.
I am currently working on a website (Ed tech) that is doing business in India as well as USA. The courses are same. Content being served is also same. There is no cookie level redirection. The only difference is in the price range and price type. In schema we have set price type as $. We want to set different price type for India and USA through schema. How can we do this? For example given below website ranks for India & USA with the same domain name but prince range that we can setup either in INR or USA
Technical SEO | | DJ_James0 -
Same URL, different Drupal content types
Hi all, I am working in Drupal which isn't always SEO-friendly. I want to convert some of our articles that are currently in an old article type to our new shiny longform template without losing SEO value. The process we use right now is to: change the URL of the old article in the CMS from /article-title to /article-title-old and then make the longform template /article-title in the CMS. Then hit publish. That way we can avoid having to mess with redirects. My concerns are that this will be seen as a bait and switch by Google. They are, after all, two separate pages — node-1 and node-2 on the back end — that are being smushed into the same skin aka same URL. I don't know if updating to the new template wipes out some of the info Google may have deemed important. I guess you could argue it's a redesign by CMS but I'm still not sure. Thoughts?
Technical SEO | | webbedfeet0 -
Can hreflang replace canonicalisation ?
Hi Im working with a site that has ALOT of duplicate content and have recommended developer fix via correct use of Canonicalisation i.e the canonical tag. However a US version (of this UK site) is about to be developed on a subfolder (domain.com/uk/ & domain.com/US/ etc so also looking into adopting the hreflang attribute on these. Upon reading up about the hreflang attribute i see that it performs a degree of canonicalisation too. Does that mean that developing the international versions with hreflang means there's no need to apply canonicalistion tags to deal with the dupe content, since will deal with the original dupe content problems as well as the new country related dupe content, via the hreflang ? I also understand that hreflang and canonicalisation can conflict/clash on different language versions of international subfolders etc as per: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Igbrm1z_7Hk In this instance we are only looking at US/UK versions but very likely will want to expand into non english countries too in the future like France for example. So given both the above points if you are using hreflang is it advisable (or even best) to totally avoid the canonical tag ? I would be surprised if the answers yes, since whilst makes logical sense given the above (if the above statements are correct), that seems strange given how important and standard best practice canonical usage seems to be these days. What best ? Use the Hreflang alone, or the Canonical tag alone or both ? What does everyone else do in similar situation ? All Best Dan
Technical SEO | | Dan-Lawrence0 -
What is the best practice to seperate different locations and languages in an URL? At the moment the URL is www.abc.com/ch/de. Is there a better way to structure the URL from an SEO perspective?
I am looking for a solution for using a new URL structure without using www.abc.com**/ch/de** in the URL to deliver the right languages in specific countries where more than one language are spoken commonly. I am looking forward to your ideas!
Technical SEO | | eviom0 -
How different does content need to be to avoid a duplicate content penalty?
I'm implementing landing pages that are optimized for specific keywords. Some of them are substantially the same as another page (perhaps 10-15 words different). Are the landing pages likely to be identified by search engines as duplicate content? How different do two pages need to be to avoid the duplicate penalty?
Technical SEO | | WayneBlankenbeckler0 -
.co.uk/index.html or just .co.uk - my on-page reports are different for both - why?
It looks like the same thing, yet it has a different on-page report for each version - why is this. Please share your ideas with me on this. The original url is http://bath.waspkilluk.co.uk/index.html. Many Thanks - Simon.
Technical SEO | | simonberenyi0 -
Differing numbers of pages indexed with and without the trailing slash
I noticed today that a site: query in Google (UK) for a certain domain I'm looking at returns different numbers depending on whether or not the trailing slash is added at the end. With the trailing slash the numbers are significantly different. This is a domain with a few duplicate content issues. It seems very rare but I've managed to replicate it for a couple of other well known domains, so this is the phenomenon I'm referring to: site:travelsupermarket.com - 16'300 results
Technical SEO | | ianmcintosh
site:travelsupermarket.com/ - 45'500 results site:guardian.co.uk - 120'000'000 results
site:guardian.co.uk/ - 121'000'000 results For the particular domain I'm looking at the numbers are 19'000 without the trailing slash and 800'000 with it! As mentioned, there are a few duplicate content issues at the moment that I'm trying to tidy up, but how should I interpret this? Has anyone seen this before and can advise what it could indicate? Thanks in advance for any answers.0 -
Differences between Lynx Viewer, Fetch as Googlebot and SEOMoz Googlebot Rendering
Three tools to render a site as Googlebot would see it: SEOMoz toolbar.
Technical SEO | | qlkasdjfw
Lynxviewer (http://www.yellowpipe.com/yis/tools/lynx/lynx_viewer.php )
Fetch as Googlebot. I have a website where I can see dropdown menus in regular browser rendering, Lynxviewer and Fetch as Googlebot. However, in the SEOMoz toolbar 'render as googlebot' tool, I am unable to see these dropdown menus when I have javascript disabled. Does this matter? Which of these tools is a better way to see how googlebot views your site?0