Do crawl reports see canonical tags?
-
Greetings,
I just redesigned my site, www.funderstanding.com, and have the old site pointing to the new site via canonical URLs.
I had a new crawl test run and it showed a large amount of duplicate content. Does the SEO Moz crawl tool validate canonical urls and adjusts the duplicate content count or is this note considered?
FYI, I sent from no duplicate content to having 865 errors since the redesign went up so that seems suspicious. I would think though that assuming the canonical tag were used properly, and I hope it is?, that this would not be a problem??
All help with this is most appreciated.
Eric
-
Thanks! Is there a good way for me to check the whole site to identify a problem? In other words, if one is a problem, I should assume that others could be a problem. What is the best way to check? Thank you so much! I am not quite sure what to do and help is most appreciated. Eric
-
Googles view is:
301 when you can and canonical when you do not have direct server access to do a 301. But, I would and do, have both to ensure both case and endings are correct for the landing page. i.e. someone might tweet http://www.funderstanding.com/V2/Coaster instead of the lowercase version and google will report dupe content if it is not dealt with.
-
<link href="http://www.funderstanding.com/content" rel="canonical"> is the only one that does not pint to the old site from those you mentioned. With links from that page it may find enough of the old site to produce the dupes.
You can fix it and then request a crawl
-
Not sure what you mean? I thought 301s were to be avoided for SEO reasons when using canonicals?
-
A 301 Redirect removed any duplicate content errors that were showing in the crawl report, maybe redirecting the old site to the new site this way would help.
-
Thank you for the quick reply!
Assuming this is what you are looking for here are a few of the URLs on the old site:
http://www.funderstanding.com/coaster
http://www.funderstanding.com/content
http://www.funderstanding.com/category/content/theories
http://www.funderstanding.com/content/right-brain-vs-left-brain
http://www.funderstanding.com/content/behaviorism
Does that help?
Eric
-
Are the canonicals in the old site pointing to the new site? The new site one looks fine, I cannot see any links to the olds site to check.
standarised endings \ - Ok
https: rejected - OK
url match canonical and sitemap - Ok
It seems very odd.
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
-
When Should I Ignore Moz's Report Canonical Missing?
I'm dealing with an eCommerce website which has a category, subcategory, products. Moz is showing all of these and the individual products as missing a canonical. The site is very thin on content at the moment, but all the pages are clearly different, and I don't see why they need a canonical unless this is some rule that eCommerce sites have to follow. Should I ignore Moz's missing canonical report? My understanding is if the product appears in multiple categories, then a canonical should be put in place to the product. Any advice would be appreciated. Christina
Moz Pro | | ChristinaRadisic0 -
Keyword Rankings Report Accuracy
How many of you routinely have inaccurate data in your Moz Pro keyword rankings reports? I just checked 5 of our terms that came in this morning - yes, it's a not logged in, non-personalized, incognito, cleared cache search - and none of them actually ranked where Moz said they ranked. One was listed in the top 5 and wasn't even on the first page. One was listed at position 3 but was actually at position 8, a big difference when it comes to CTR. And the report will have stuff like our brand name not ranked at all one week, then jumping by 45+ positions the next week, then gone the next week. And it doesn't fluctuate like that. I get that the reports are general to what most people see, but should such big disparities be expected?
Moz Pro | | Kingof50 -
One page report are empty !
Hi Rodgerbot, Now, i've no seomoz one page report for any campaign 😞 What happen ? I've previously several report. Thanks,
Moz Pro | | Max840 -
SEOMoz ranking reports inaccurate for Google?
So I have notice that, at least for some searches, the rankings shown in SEOMoz's ranking reports are meaningless. I assume this is due to blended search results including local search. For example, I have a client, who is ranked 3rd overall for one of his most important search terms, but his ranking is based upon his local result (there are 2 organic search results and then he is the first local result). The SEOMoz report shows him being ranked 12th. Anyway I count down to the 12th ranked site (including local search, not including local search) his site is not there. In fact the only place it is in the top 3 pages is in the local result. As a local marketing consultant, almost all of my clients are looking to be found for "Jackson Hole" this or that, or "Jackson, WY" this or that, so this is a pretty critical issue to me. I would appreciate feedback. Thanks!
Moz Pro | | farlandlee0 -
Conical tag question
I have now 124 notices showing rel = conical as follow , can you please advise are they ok , they might be due to new wordpress plugin URL: http://www.domain.com Tag value http://www.domain.com are they ok ? Although they look same but then why are they there , how can i remove them in word press and is there any reason for them to be left or removed . My site always uses www, if you put non www address it resolves automatically to www. My ranking have suddenly dropped as well . can it reason . I am aware of new update .
Moz Pro | | HateDoingSEO0 -
Crawl Diagnostics finding pages that dont exist. Will Rel Canon Help?
I have recently set up a campaign for www.completeoffice.co.uk. Im the in-house developer there. When the crawl diagnostics completed, i went to check the results, and to my surprise, it had well over 100 missing or empty title tags. I then clicked it to see what pages, and nearly all the pages it say have missing or empty title tags, DO NOT EXIST. This has really confused me and need help figuring out how to solve this. Can anyone help? Attached image is a screen shot of some of the links it showed me on crawl diagnostics, nearly all of these do not exist. Will the relation Canonical tag in the head section of the actual pages help? For example, The actual page that exist is: www.completeoffice.co.uk/Products.php Whereas, when crawled it actually showed www.completeoffice.co.uk/Products/Products.php Will have the rel can tag in the header of the real products.php solve this?
Moz Pro | | CompleteOffice0 -
On the Crawl Diagnostics Summary, its reporting over 100 "Title Missing or Empty" issues, but they all check out fine?
Wondering if there Is a bug with the crawler or known timeout issues? Site speed is fast, but we do run a couple of large cron jobs out of hours, which may be the cause of any timeouts, but shouldn't the crawler report that, rather saying no title tags on 100 pages, when there are? SEOmoz newbie, so still finding my feet 🙂
Moz Pro | | sjr4x40