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
-
"Avoid Multiple Page Title Elements"
Hi, in page recommondation I get a "Acoid Multiple Page Tile Elements" Fix. Make sure your page has only one <title>tag. </span><em>"Web pages are meant to have a single title, and for both accessibility and search engine optimization reasons, we strongly recommend following this practice"</em></p> <p>Well I'm trying....I am not able to find where og why I have multiple titles in this page?</p> <p>This is a norwegian page, but maybe someone can look through it?</p> <p>http://www.proplantime.no/bransjer/bygganlegg/mannskapsliste</p></title>
On-Page Optimization | | Marked_Proplan0 -
Rel=canonical vs noindex/follow - tabs with individual URLs
Hi everyone I've got a situation that I haven't seen in quite this way before. I would like some advice on whether I should be rel=canonicalzing of noindexing/following a range of pages on a clients website. I've just started working on a website that creates individual URLs for tabs within each page which has resulted in several URLs being created for each listing: Example URLs: hotel-downtown-calgary hotel-downtown-calgary/gallery?tab hotel-downtown-calgary?tab hotel-downtown-calgary/map?tab hotel-downtown-calgary/facilities?tab hotel-downtown-calgary/reviews?tab hotel-downtown-calgary/in-the-area?tab Google has indexed over 1500 pages with the "?tab" parameter (there are 4380 page indexed for the site in total), and also seems to be indexing some of these pages without the "?tab" parameter i.e. ("hotel-downtown-calgary/reviews" instead of "hotel-downtown-calgary/reviews?tab") so the amount of potential duplication could be more. These tabbed pages are getting minimal traffic from organic search, so I've got no issues with taking them out of the index - the question is how. There are the issues I see: Each tab has the same title as the other tabs for each location, so lots of title duplication. Each individual tab doesn't have much content (although the content each tab has is unique). I would usually expect the tabs to be distinguished by the parameters only, not have unique URLs - if that was the case we wouldn't have a duplication issue. So the question is: rel=canonical or noindex/follow? I can see benefits of both. Looking forward to your thoughts!
On-Page Optimization | | Digitator0 -
"og:description" vs. name="description"
According to Rock Your SEO with Structured Social Sharing "OG description overrides meta description tag." Moz Crawl Diagnostics seems to ignore og:description and only look for meta name="description" - does that mean my meta descriptions tags should be meta name?
On-Page Optimization | | leighw0 -
Dashes "-" in keyword?
Just running over the page/keyword analyzer and Moz picked up the fact that my link and title are not the same as the keyword I am targeting. I am targeting the keyword "Battlefield 4 CD Key" However my title (and therefore link) are Battlefield 4 CD-Key. Note the dash. Does the dashes matter in SEO or should I try to remove them and have continuity through all of the page.
On-Page Optimization | | MrPenguin0 -
"irrelevant pages of a site"
Hi there! Some pages of my site like "contact" or "registration": Should they have a title and a description tag? They are pages that I don't want them to be shown in the SERPs....Could I be penalized by google If I don't do so? The SEOMOZ crawling tool warms me about this issue (to short titles, no meta-description tags....) Many thanks
On-Page Optimization | | juanmiguelcr0 -
Will canonical tag on non-copy content harm my site?
Days ago I added rel=canonical tags on my site. For the post pages, I add canonical tag on both post page (www.exmample.com/post.html) and comment page (www.exmample.com/post-sms.html), all the canonical tags are pointing to post page, but in fact there are only comments on the comment page. For product pages, I add the canonical tags on both product info page, download page, and order page, all of them are pointing to the info page, while in fact they are displaying different content. I no-indexed the comment page, download page, and order page for a long time. After I added the canonical tags, the traffics dropped (not hugely but slowly and steadily). Are my actions harming my site? Is this a normal flux after adding codes to the entire site, or it's the bad outcome for wrong SEO actions? PS: I can't change the site structure, so it's not possible to combine post and comment pages into one, so do the product pages. Thank you guys
On-Page Optimization | | JonnyGreenwood0 -
What does Canonical mean?
Hi, I was wondering what is meant by canonical? I ran a test on my site and in the notices, SEOMOZ came back with a total of 90 canonicals. As far as I can tell, it refers to the preferred page (not really sure what that means though). I thought initially it was talking about duplicate content, but all the pages are totally different. There is no duplicate content on any of he pages that it lists. So I'm not sure how to fix this. Thanks for the help. Don
On-Page Optimization | | ge01734000 -
How do I address "Critical Factors: Accessible to Engines"?
Hello,I am going thru the on-page report card produced by SEOMOZ and am stumped as to how to address the first critical factor. It looks like the correct meta tag to get search engines to index the site is at the bottom of the header. And as far as I know, which isn't much, the site returns the HTTP code 200 when I refresh.I am new at this, so please let me know if you have some specific solutions. I am using IWeb and the IWeb SEO Tool to make meta code improvements. I have pasted the head code for my website (www.grass2greens.com) below. Thanks in advance!<html lang="en" xml:lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><head><meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"><meta content="iWeb 3.0.4" name="Generator"><meta content="local-build-20120619" name="iWeb-Build"><meta content="IE=EmulateIE7" http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible"><meta content="width=880" name="viewport"><title>Grass to Greens: Asheville Edible Landscapingtitle><link href="Grass_to_Greens__Asheville_Edible_Landscaping_files/Grass_to_Greens__Asheville_Edible_Landscaping.css" media="screen,print" type="text/css" rel="stylesheet"><style type="text/css"><script type="text/javascript" async="" src="http://www.google-analytics.com/ga.js"><script type="text/javascript" async="" src="http://www.google-analytics.com/ga.js"><script src="Scripts/iWebSite.js" type="text/javascript"><script src="Scripts/iWebImage.js" type="text/javascript"><script src="Scripts/iWebMediaGrid.js" type="text/javascript"><script src="Scripts/Widgets/SharedResources/WidgetCommon.js" type="text/javascript"><script src="Scripts/Widgets/HTMLRegion/Paste.js" type="text/javascript"><script src="Grass_to_Greens__Asheville_Edible_Landscaping_files/Grass_to_Greens__Asheville_Edible_Landscaping.js" type="text/javascript"><script type="text/javascript"><meta content="Grass to Greens offers a range of edible landscape design, consultation, installation, and maintenance services. Free Consultations! We specialize in beautiful and useful vegetable gardens, season extension, tree work, orchards and food forests, stone work, fencing, and rain water catchment. Grass to Greens is an edible landscaping company committed to creating food security and fostering social justice through urban agriculture in the Asheville area. " name="description"><meta content="Landscaping Asheville Edible Gardens" name="keywords"><meta content="follow,index" name="robots"><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="Grass_to_Greens__Asheville_Edible_Landscaping_files/Grass_to_Greens__Asheville_Edible_LandscapingMoz.css">head> Grass to Greens: Asheville Edible Landscaping
On-Page Optimization | | dcaudio0