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
-
Ideally, you should use both, but I realize that could be a lot of work. Canonical URLs will work well for the case you mentioned above. Just remember to link to your canonical URL on internal pages and have inbound links point to that canonical URL. You should ask site owners that host those inbound links to change if possible or use 301 to redirect those links that can't be changed.
You may also want to consider creating redirect rules to add or remove the trailing slash for all URLs, because links with and without the slash are considered different URLs and will split link juice.
-
I have a follow question about this. I have a zen cart eCommerce site. Just learned and read both articles that Saibose mentioned but still not sure how to proceed. I have dup content issues. So do I use 301 or rel=canonical? I have two variations. (that I see for now)
1. Main category _ Sub category_product examples below
http://www.perfectindesign.com/awards
http://www.perfectindesign.com/awards/acrylic-awards
http://www.perfectindesign.com/awards/acrylic-awards/slanted-award
Do I pass all link juice to the main category ie awards or sub cat. (should mention there are three sub categories in this example.
2. Main category _product
same as above with out sub categories.
Thanks
-
Likewise, your posted links lead to white pages. If you still need help with this, get those links fixed for us.
-
Tried a couple of times and these pages aren't loading for me in a couple of different browsers. Not sure if you've changed something since the posting of this question, but if you're still subscribed to this thread you may want to look into this.
As someone said already I would just like to reinforce that rel=canonical only has to be used on the target page, however since these pages you're referencing aren't exactly the same you DON'T want to use a 301 redirect. Your rel=canonical tag will simply signal the search engines to pass all ranking to your main page, which is actually a better implementation than using 301, albeit it won't make a huge difference on a small scale.
If this is a Wordpress blog, which I can't really tell if it is or not since the pages aren't loading, you may want to try the WP canonical plugin. It will semi-automate all of your canonical tags so you're not having to modify code all the time.
-
i would use a 301 redirect for this
rel conical tells the search engine where the original content is, it does not pass link juice to the original content. while 301 tells the SE that it is the same page and all link juice will be awarded to the one page. -
I think that Rand posted an article sometime back on this.
Lindsay followed it up last year with this:
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/complete-guide-to-rel-canonical-how-to-and-why-not
You can read through them and have a good understanding of the best practices involved.
What i dont understand is why have you implemented rel=canonical to both pages. Its not required on your target page, that is, http://www.autopartstomorrow.com/parts/6052317-r-econ-semi-met-brake-pads-
You just require it on your other page.
Hope that helps.
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
-
If I am using Lazy Load & Ajax Technology then how "tools.pingdom.com" will consider website performance?
Hello Experts, If I am using Lazy Load & Ajax Technology then how "tools.pingdom.com" will consider website performance? I am not using this technology but few of my competitors are using this technology but still there performance in pingdom tool worst than my ecommerce site Little bit confuse please help. Thanks! Wrights
On-Page Optimization | | wright3350 -
Should I block google indexing "search.php"
My question is I have a search page on our website , you can search by date, number of people staying and so on, I am just wondering should block this in the robots.txt ? Because we have pretty URL'S already for searching by county and searching by towns. I cannot see any benefit of having e.g "search/search.php?sp_dateFrom=16%2F12%2F2015&sp_dateTo=23%2F12%2F2015&sec_drop%5B%5D=727&spesh_town_id=764&q=&occupants=5&bedrooms=3&submit=SEARCH#search" indexed. Would I be correct in doing this ?
On-Page Optimization | | McCaldin0 -
2 Canonical questions
QUESTION 1
On-Page Optimization | | Marketing_Today
I'm working on a site where a canonical link is implemented as That's not the normal format that I am used to, as I would have written it as Is that a problem? QUESTION 2
Why do so many sites these days have a sitewide canonical tag which refers to itself as the canonical?
For example: http://www.site.co.uk/page has a canonical of0 -
301, Canonical, and Page Authority
I have been trying to find an answer to this question for awhile now but I am having trouble. I have a clients site that I need to redirect and Canonical the pages to correct duplicate content issues and title tags however, the issue with this client is that some of the www. pages have a higher PA than non-www and the reverse is true. I am wondering if there is an issue with chasing the PA to get the highest PA per page (even if this means the site is going to be a mix of www. and non-www. pages)? I am extremely new to SEO so I apologize ahead of time if I missed this in the forum.
On-Page Optimization | | Highline_Ideas0 -
Can you find the "problem" metric or metrics?
I just dropped from #2 for my main keyword to #5 and am not sure why. My companies Ranking Metrics compared to top 5 Page Authority:#2, MozRank:#1, MozTrust:#1, MT/MR:#1, Total Links: #1, Internal Links:#1, External Links: #1, Followed Links:#1, No Follow Links: #1, Linking Root Domains:#1, OnPageAnalysis Grade: "A", Broad Keyword usage: Yes, Broad keyword in document:
On-Page Optimization | | Boodreaux0 -
I built a website on magentogo - IrisScottPrints.com. The seomoz crawl report states 301 rel canonical crawl notices. What if anything should I change?
Wondering if I should remove "IRIS SCOTT PRINTS |" from all the title tags and/or change the url structure of the pages, to not include the breadcrumbs... I don't really understand the whole rel canonical structure thing. Also lots of errors on page title too long - does that really matter? Lots of faith in everyone here. Thanks in advance. Marcia
On-Page Optimization | | RedTrout0 -
Is it a good idea to rel=canonical dozens of old outdated pages?
we have dozens old outdated manual pages that still need to be up, but have terrible code issues (they're exported from word) and no image tagging, etc. there are new pages in place, so should i rel=canonical to the new pages? will this transfer any link juice to the newer, more seo-friendly ones?
On-Page Optimization | | DerekM880 -
What does the "base href" meta tag do? For SEO and webdesign?
I have encounter the "base href" on one of my sites. The tag is on every page and always points to the home URL.
On-Page Optimization | | jmansd0