Many canonical warnings. Is this a problem?
-
My site has over 80 canonical warnings. The report states the url is for example http://www.musicliveuk.com and the 'tag value' column says http://www.musicliveuk.com/ Is that a good thing? I'm new to seo and am running my site on wordpress with all in one seo pack. Does this mean the seo pack has automatically added canonical tags to my pages? If so why is it showing as an error? I am also getting lots of 301 permanent redirects and I haven't set any up manually. I'm getting them for every page on my site from the normal url to a url with a slash at the end.
-
Pleasure
-
Indeed I did have two plugins running... DOH!
Thanks guys.
-
Do you have multiple SEO plugins running? Maybe the template has canonical settings out the box?
See lines 65 & 82on the home page.. there are 2.. I'm leaning towards template if I had to guess
-
Thanks guys. I also get warnings that some pages have more than one canonical tag. I don't add any manually and just use the all in one seo pack settings. How can this be and how do I fix it?
-
Agree with Vahe. Also, warnings are not necessarily errors but meant to raise flags for you to check the site to see if everything is meant to be there.
An incorrect rollout of canonicals (e.g. if every page on your site has the home page as the canonical) can result in a lot of pages being removed out of the index.
Regarding the 301s, check all pages for links to other internal pages & look at any links that have a trailing slash at the end and change to remove the trailing slash, e.g. these are 2 different URLs:
- http://www.musicliveuk.com/category/planning-events
- http://www.musicliveuk.com/category/planning-events/
Yet "/category/planning-events/" 301s to "/category/planning-events"
The non www version 301s to the www version too.. so check if there are any internal links to:
and change to:
-
There's nothing wrong. The wordpress SEO pack is actually doing the right thing to ensure search engines like Google see only one version (and the right version) of your website, this being with the www. with the /.
If your site didn't do what you had mentioned above, search engines would have indexed (listed) what they thought was the right version. There are also other several disadvantages to this:
(1) The page rank (domain authority) would be split between the www and non www versions of the site. Some would go even further and say that it would cause site duplication, which is not favoured by search engines.
(2) People linking to your site would not link to one URL version. Again this would cause spreading the link juice.
Since there are the proper 301 redirects on your site, no matter which version people link to, it will go back to the www version with the /. Just make sure that in Bing and Google Webmaster tools you also change your preferred domain settings to the www version.
Hope this helps,
Vahe
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
-
Is there a limit to the number of duplicate pages pointing to a rel='canonical ' primary?
We have a situation on twiends where a number of our 'dead' user pages have generated links for us over the years. Our options are to 404 them, 301 them to the home page, or just serve back the home page with a canonical tag. We've been 404'ing them for years, but i understand that we lose all the link juice from doing this. Correct me if I'm wrong? Our next plan would be to 301 them to the home page. Probably the best solution but our concern is if a user page is only temporarily down (under review, etc) it could be permanently removed from the index, or at least cached for a very long time. A final plan is to just serve back the home page on the old URL, with a canonical tag pointing to the home page URL. This is quick, retains most of the link juice, and allows the URL to become active again in future. The problem is that there could be 100,000's of these. Q1) Is it a problem to have 100,000 URLs pointing to a primary with a rel=canonical tag? (Problem for Google?) Q2) How long does it take a canonical duplicate page to become unique in the index again if the tag is removed? Will google recrawl it and add it back into the index? Do we need to use WMT to speed this process up? Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | dsumter0 -
Critical Page Problems.
As I design my new pages I place them into the page optimizer. When I place the keyword in that I am trying to rank for my page is coming up as an A. With that said, I am still receiving error messages with critical fix results. Here is a screenshot of this: http://screencast.com/t/DuUrP8xM Curious on how I should fix this? The pages are directly on my blog which makes it accessible to search engines ( So I think). Any input would be greatly appreciated.
On-Page Optimization | | Jasonalanmagic0 -
Too Many On-Page Links
If a page has more than 100 links, rather than splitting up the page into multiple pages, is it ok to use name="robots" content="noindex, follow" />? The page in question lists links to articles so the page itself isn't that important to appear in serps, but the articles are the helpful content pages: www.ides.com/articles/processing/injection-molding/
On-Page Optimization | | Prospector-Plastics0 -
Rel Canonical Warning on most pages
I have an e-commerce website and have recently started using SEO moz. candygalaxy.com is the site. I have over 2000 pages that i am receiving the Rel Canonical notice for, which is essentially everyone of my pages. I'm a little bit confused as to what this means, good or bad... I also have over 1800 pages with to many links. I think this is being caused by the fact that my drop down menus' are quite extensive and begin counted on every page. Any tips on how to make those menu's links not count? So that i can reduce the total number of links per page? Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | Jonathan_Murrell0 -
Do I really have too many links on my startpage?
My site www.poker-coaching.net is built with Joomla, and I have one main menu that links all articles (app. 120) in one language from the start page. The site has a language selection menu with translations available in 4 other languages, and for each language, there are another 80 articles linked from the main page. The SEOMOZ crawling report now say that I have too many links from the main page. I always thought it was a good thing for SEO to have articles linked from the main page - do I need to restructure my site and start building multi-level menu structures, where I would have a main menu on the start page and the next level menu would only be shown after a user clicks on a main menu item?
On-Page Optimization | | CatfishTPA0 -
Too many On-Page Links warning + Javascript Menu
We do have javascript menus on each page. These are used by a visitor to contact a specific office in a specif city. Could this be where all these links are being counted? I don't see them elsewhere? What about links that are in the footer? They actually link to the same pages as the menus, but are just straight links.
On-Page Optimization | | Stevej240 -
Too Many On-Page Links on a Directory type website?
Hi there, I run a website which is a directory therefore there are a lot of On-Page links. If you take a look at the site, www.south-african-hotels.com, you will see there are a number of links on all pages which are completely relevant. I'm not sure what to remove as everything is relevant. The top navigation is available throughout and that alone has 120 links in it to give users easy access to information. Do I ignore the Too many On-Page links suggestion or do I change something? Any suggestions welcome! Thank you in advance!
On-Page Optimization | | RyanMackie0 -
Rel="canonical"
Can you tell me if we've implemented rel="canonical" properly? We want this to be our primary: http://www.autopartstomorrow.com/parts/6052317-r-econ-semi-met-brake-pads- while this would be duplicate and refer robots back to the URL above: http://www.autopartstomorrow.com/parts/6054284 We've added the following to both pages: <link rel="canonical" href="http://www.autopartstomorrow.com/parts/6052317-r-econ-semi-met-brake-pads- "/> Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | jonesatl0