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
-
Very wierd pages. 2900 403 errors in page crawl for a site that only has 140 pages.
Hi there, I just made a crawl of the website of one of my clients with the crawl tool from moz. I have 2900 403 errors and there is only 140 pages on the website. I will give an exemple of what the crawl error gives me. | http://www.mysite.com/en/www.mysite.com/en/en/index.html#?lang=en | http://www.mysite.com/en/www.mysite.com/en/en/en/index.html#?lang=en | http://www.mysite.com/en/www.mysite.com/en/en/en/en/index.html#?lang=en | http://www.mysite.com/en/www.mysite.com/en/en/en/en/en/index.html#?lang=en | http://www.mysite.com/en/www.mysite.com/en/en/en/en/en/en/index.html#?lang=en | http://www.mysite.com/en/www.mysite.com/en/en/en/en/en/en/index.html#?lang=en | http://www.mysite.com/en/www.mysite.com/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/index.html#?lang=en | http://www.mysite.com/en/www.mysite.com/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/index.html#?lang=en | http://www.mysite.com/en/www.mysite.com/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/index.html#?lang=en | http://www.mysite.com/en/www.mysite.com/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/en/index.html#?lang=en | | | | | | | | | | There are 2900 pages like this. I have tried visiting the pages and they work, but they are only html pages without CSS. Can you guys help me to see what the problems is. We have experienced huge drops in traffic since Septembre.
Technical SEO | | H.M.N.0 -
Product page Canonicalization best practice
I'm getting duplicate content errors in GWT for product list pages that look like this: -www.example.com/category-page/product
Technical SEO | | IceIcebaby
-www.example.com/category-page/product/?p=2 The "p=2" example already has a rel=canonical in place, " Shouldn't the non-canonical pages be using the canonical attribute for the first page rather than the additional product pages? Thanks!0 -
What is the best way to handle links that lead to a 404 page
Hi Team Moz, I am working through a site cutover with an entirely new URL structure and have a bunch of pages that could not, would not or just plain don't redirect to new pages. Steps I have taken: Multiple new sitemaps submitted with new URLs and the indexing looks solid used webmasters to remove urls with natural result listings that did not redirect and produce urls Completely built out new ppc campaigns with new URL structures contacted few major link partners Now here is my question: I have a pages that produce 404s that are linked to in forums, slick deals and stuff like that which will not be redirected. Is disavowing these links the correct thing to do?
Technical SEO | | mm9161570 -
How Does Google's "index" find the location of pages in the "page directory" to return?
This is my understanding of how Google's search works, and I am unsure about one thing in specific: Google continuously crawls websites and stores each page it finds (let's call it "page directory") Google's "page directory" is a cache so it isn't the "live" version of the page Google has separate storage called "the index" which contains all the keywords searched. These keywords in "the index" point to the pages in the "page directory" that contain the same keywords. When someone searches a keyword, that keyword is accessed in the "index" and returns all relevant pages in the "page directory" These returned pages are given ranks based on the algorithm The one part I'm unsure of is how Google's "index" knows the location of relevant pages in the "page directory". The keyword entries in the "index" point to the "page directory" somehow. I'm thinking each page has a url in the "page directory", and the entries in the "index" contain these urls. Since Google's "page directory" is a cache, would the urls be the same as the live website (and would the keywords in the "index" point to these urls)? For example if webpage is found at wwww.website.com/page1, would the "page directory" store this page under that url in Google's cache? The reason I want to discuss this is to know the effects of changing a pages url by understanding how the search process works better.
Technical SEO | | reidsteven750 -
Best way to retain banklink values when moving site?
Hi all, I want to get some opinions on what the best practice is when transferring backlink values from an old site to a new one. On the old site, I currently have a product page and this particular product has multiple models all listed on the one singe page. However on the new site, every model of this particular product has its own page. These product model pages would have relatively similar content apart from several key details which differentiates the models. Firstly would you guys recommend this splitting of models of the same product to different pages? If so, my initial thought process is to 301 redirect the old product page to the new model page that is most popular, and adding rel canonical tags to the other model pages. Would you consider this best practice? Or are there better ways I can be doing this to retain backlink values without also getting penalised due to possible content duplication? Thanks! Jac - sent from my manager's account.
Technical SEO | | RuchirP0 -
If a permanent redirect is supposed to transfer SEO from the old page to the new page, why has my domain authority been impacted?
For example, we redirected our old domain to a new one (leaving no duplicate content on the old domain) and saw a 40% decrease in domain authority. Isn't a permanent redirect supposed to transfer link authority to the place it is redirecting to? Did I do something wrong?
Technical SEO | | BlueLinkERP0 -
Proper way to 404 a page on an Ecommerce Website
Hello. I am working on a website that has over 15000 products. When one of these is no longer available - like it's discontinued or something - the page it's on 302s to a 404 page. Example - www.greatdomain.com/awesome-widget Awesome widget is no longer available www. greatdomain.com/awesome-widget 302s to -www.greatdomain.com/404 page. For the most part, these are not worthy of 301s because of lack of page rank/suitable LPs, but is this the correct way to handle them for search engines? I've seen varying opinions. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Blenny0 -
SEOMoz is indicating I have 40 pages with duplicate content, yet it doesn't list the URL's of the pages???
When I look at the Errors and Warnings on my Campaign Overview, I have a lot of "duplicate content" errors. When I view the errors/warnings SEOMoz indicates the number of pages with duplicate content, yet when I go to view them the subsequent page says no pages were found... Any ideas are greatly welcomed! Thanks Marty K.
Technical SEO | | MartinKlausmeier0