Best way to handle different views of the same page?
-
Say I have a page: mydomain.com/page
But I also have different views:
/?sort=alpha
/print-version
/?session_ID=2892
etc. All same content, more or less.
Should the subsequent pages have ROBOTS meta tag with noindex? Should I use canonical? Both?
Thanks!
-
I generally trust Duane, so I'd take it at some value - I just haven't seen that problem pop up much, practically. Theoretically, you'd create a loop - so, if it leaked, it would keep looping/leaking until no juice was left. That seems like an odd way to handle the issue.
My bigger concern would be the idea that, if you rel-canonical every page, Bing might not take your important canonical tags seriously. They've suggested they do this with XML sitemaps, too - if enough of the map is junk, they may ignore the whole thing. Again, I haven't seen any firm evidence of this, but it's worth keeping your eyes open.
-
What do you think about what Duane said, about assigning value to itself, could this be a LJ leak as it would be a leak if it was assigning value to anouther page?
-
I haven't seen evidence they'll lose trust yet, but it's definitely worth noting. Google started out saying that, too, but then eased up, because they realized it was hard enough to implement canonical tags even close to correctly (without adding new restrictions). I agree that, in a perfect world, it shouldn't just be a Band-aid.
-
I am not sure if SEOMoz will, but search engines wont as it wont be in their index.
-
Thanks gentlemen. I will probably just go with the NOINDEX in the robots meta tag and see how that works.
Interesting side note, SEOmoz will still report this as a duplicate page though ;-( Hopefully the search engines won't.
-
Yes i agree for most it is probably not going to be a problem, But Duane again yesterday blogged about this, he did say they can live with it. but they dont like it, and the best thing is to fix it. http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/webmaster/archive/2011/11/29/nine-things-you-need-to-control.aspx
this leaves me in 2 minds, he said that they may lose trust in all your canonicals if they see it over used, this can be a worry if you have used it for its true use elsewhere.
I also worry about lose of link juice, as Duanes words in the first blog post were, "Please pass any value from itself to itself"
does that mean it loses link juice in the process like a normal canonical does?
I myself would fix it anouther way, but this may be a lot of work and bother for some. Thats why I say its a hard one.
-
I'll 80% agree with Alan, although I've found that, in practice, the self-referencing canonical tag is usually fine. It wasn't the original intent, but at worst the search engines ignore it. For something like a session_ID, it can be pretty effective.
I would generally avoid Robots.txt blocking, as Alan said. If you can do a selective META NOINDEX, that's a safer bet here (for all 3 cases). You're unlikely to have inbound links to these versions of your pages, so you don't have to worry too much about link-juice. I just find that Robots.txt can be unpredictable, and if you block tons of pages, the search engines get crabby.
The other option for session_ID is to capture that ID as a cookie or server session, then 301-redirect to the URL with no session_ID. This one gets tricky fast, though, as it depends a lot on your implementation.
Unless you're seeing serious problems (like a Panda smackdown), I'd strongly suggest tackling one at a time, so that you can measure the changes. Large-scale blocking and indexation changes are always tricky, and it's good to keep a close eye on the data. If you try to remove everything at once, you won't know which changes accomplished what (good or bad). It all comes down to risk/reward. If you aren't having trouble and are being proactive, take it one step at a time. If you're having serious problems, you may have to take the plunge all at once.
-
This is a hard one, cannonical is the easy choice, but Bing advises against it, as you should not have a canonical pointing to itself, it could lead to lose of trust in your website. I would not use the robots for this as you lose your flow of link juice
I would try to no-index follow all pages excpt for the true canonical page using meta tags, this means some sort of server side detection of when to place the tags.
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
-
Best Way to Handle Near-Duplicate Content?
Hello Dear MOZers, Having duplicate content issues and I'd like some opinions on how best to deal with this problem. Background: I run a website for a cosmetic surgeon in which the most valuable content area is the section of before/after photos of our patients. We have 200+ pages (one patient per page) and each page has a 'description' block of text and a handful of before and after photos. Photos are labeled with very similar labels patient-to-patient ("before surgery", "after surgery", "during surgery" etc). Currently, each page has a unique rel=canonical tag. But MOZ Crawl Diagnostics has found these pages to be duplicate content of each other. For example, using a 'similar page checker' two of these pages were found to be 97% similar. As far as I understand there are a few ways to deal with this, and I'd like to get your opinions on the best course. Add 150+ more words to each description text block Prevent indexing of patient pages with robots.txt Set the rel=canonical for each patient page to the main gallery page Any other options or suggestions? Please keep in mind that this is our most valuable content, so I would be reluctant to make major structural changes, or changes that would result in any decrease in traffic to these pages. Thank you folks, Ethan
Technical SEO | | BernsteinMedicalNYC0 -
Is it easier to rank high with a front page than a landing page?
My product is laptop and of cause, I like to rank high for the keyword "laptop". Do any of you know if the search engines tends to rank a front page higher than a landing page? Eg. www.brand.com vs. www.brand.com/laptop
Technical SEO | | Debitoor0 -
Duplicate pages on wordpress
I am doing SEO on a site which is running on WP. And it has all pages and categories duplicates on domain.com/site/ However, as it got crawled I saw that all domain.com/ pages have rel=canonical with main page tag (does it mean something?). Thing is I will fix permalinks structure and I think WP automatically redirects if it is changed from /?page_id= to /%category%/%postname%/ or /%postname%/ Isn't there something I miss? Second problems is a forum. After a crawl it found over 5k errors and over 5k warnings. Those are: Duplicate page content; Duplicate page title; Overly-Dynamic URLs; Missing Meta descr; Title Element too long. All those come from domain.com/forum/ (fortunately, there are no domain.com/site/forum duplicates). What could be an easy solution to this?
Technical SEO | | OVJ0 -
Best way to handle pages with iframes that I don't want indexed? Noindex in the header?
I am doing a bit of SEO work for a friend, and the situation is the following: The site is a place to discuss articles on the web. When clicking on a link that has been posted, it sends the user to a URL on the main site that is URL.com/article/view. This page has a large iframe that contains the article itself, and a small bar at the top containing the article with various links to get back to the original site. I'd like to make sure that the comment pages (URL.com/article) are indexed instead of all of the URL.com/article/view pages, which won't really do much for SEO. However, all of these pages are indexed. What would be the best approach to make sure the iframe pages aren't indexed? My intuition is to just have a "noindex" in the header of those pages, and just make sure that the conversation pages themselves are properly linked throughout the site, so that they get indexed properly. Does this seem right? Thanks for the help...
Technical SEO | | jim_shook0 -
Pagination or View All
Right now our site is using ajax and we need to change it so all 200+ products will get crawled not just the first 52 on page first page. We are looking at doing the rel=next/ rel=previous or doing it so we have a link going to the View all product page. Or maybe doing the rel=next/ previous and using the canonical to point to the view all etc. I have read http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1663744 and http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2011/09/view-all-in-search-results.html about it. Now we are trying to figure out what is the best option. Thought. Here is our site. http://www.rockymountainatvmc.com/t/49/-/181/750/Motorcycle-Tires-All Also if we do not do the rel=next just make the view all items as a link that google can crawl is there a way to still have our current url be the one for view all items but only show 52 item unless the click view all items and not have it look like cloaking? Hope this made sense.
Technical SEO | | DoRM1 -
What is the best approach to specifying a page's language?
I have read about a number of different tags that can accomplish this so it is very confusing. For example, should I be using: OR
Technical SEO | | BlueLinkERP0 -
Indexed pages and current pages - Big difference?
Our website shows ~22k pages in the sitemap but ~56k are showing indexed on Google through the "site:" command. Firstly, how much attention should we paying to the discrepancy? If we should be worried what's the best way to find the cause of the difference? The domain canonical is set so can't really figure out if we've got a problem or not?
Technical SEO | | Nathan.Smith0 -
What are the causes of pages desindexation?
Hello, I was wondering what can be the causes of pages desindexation by Google? A poor quality pages,...? Thank you for your answers, Jonathan
Technical SEO | | JonathanLeplang0