Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Google also indexed trailing slash version - PLEASE HELP
-
Hi Guys,
We redesigned the website and somehow our canonical extension decided to add a trailing slash to all URLs. Previously our canonical URLs didn't have a trailing slash.
During the redesign we haven't changed the URLs. They remained same but we have now two versions indexed. One with trailing slash one without.
I've now fixed the issue and removed the the trailing slash from canonical URLs.
Is this the correct way of fixing it? Will our rankings be effected in a negative way?
Is there anything else I need to do.
The website went live last Tuesday.
Thanks
-
Thats great! The canonical URLs are showing URLs without slash as they are probably reflecting their original URL which is without slash. Hope Google clears them soon..
-
Seems like you got the 301-redirect resolved below - if you've got that in place and fixed the canonical tag, it should be ok. It'll just take some time (usually longer than you'd like) for Google to clear out the pages, especially the deeper ones. If you see gradual de-indexation, though, you'll probably be fine.
-
-
Actual rel="canonical" tags.
-
As soon as we relised everything was fixed. Canonical tag is showing urls without slash and also aplied to htaccess to redirect slash version to non slash version.
<cite>we're using www.shopify.com</cite>
-
-
Could you clarify a couple of things:
(1) When you say canonical URLs, do you mean your internal links, or the actual URLs in your rel="canonical" tags?
(2) If it was just the canonical tags, is everything consistent now (tags, internal links, etc.)?
Since both version will resolve, just fixing the canonical tags (if that's the issue) should be enough - it's just going to take a little time. They should be as effective as a 301-redirect in this case. Either way, though, it can take Google a while to kick out the duplicates. I'd just monitor the index closely and make sure the top-level pages are clearing up (i.e. your home-page and major category duplicates should be disappearing). If that's happening, you're ok - you just need to wait a bit. If that's not happening, then you may have some other mixed signals in play.
-
You are welcome.
Well, the first time you did submit the sitemap right, but now since Google has found new URLs on your website and indexed them, it would be good to notify the big G that they are no longer a part of your website and resubmitting would not hurt.
About the redirections, Google does take a bit of time to understand that the URLs have permanently moved and will gradually remove them from the index. So, keep checking the index for the trailing slash URLs and when they are gone, you can remove the redirections.
Cheers,
-
Thanks a lot.
Now when i click the slash version of the indexed URL from google goes to nonslash version. So it seems we're safe now.
The other thing is when I submitted the sitemap.xml after launch it was without slash. Also all internal links are targeting nonslash URLs. I think google should understand that this is a technical issue and now it has been solved.
When should i remove that redirect?
-
Yups, its done. Just need to be sure if the Home Page is fine. The indexed version of the Home Page stays as it is without any redirection.
Cheers,
-
I checked with this website: http://www.internetofficer.com/seo-tool/redirect-check/
It says:
http://www.mydomain.com/jason.html/
Type of redirect: 301 Moved Permanently
http://www.mydomain.com/jason.html
So looks as if it's done the job. Right?
-
Sounds good, do keep a check to make it 100% sure. I believe the SE's will be fine now.
Cheers,
-
RewriteRule ^([^/]+/)*([^/.]+).html/ http://www.mydomain.com/$2.html [R=301,L]
Looks like above did the trick
-
I think some of these posts can help you understand:
http://html5boilerplate.com/docs/Proper-usage-of-trailing-slash-redirects/
Do try this a test environment and take a backup of the .htaccess file before making any changes, Have it go through a programmer.
Cheers,
-
Please can you tell me how to redirect urls with slash to non slash urls using .htaccess.
-
Jvalops,
This is a common scenario in SEO when you have 2 versions indexed of the same URL. This bascially creates a duplicate issue. Now, this situation has a solution which includes 2 things to implement:
1. Fix it from the search engines's perspective.
2. Make changes at the server level.
You did remove the trailing slash so you fixed it at the server level but you left the search engines to think - Where did the URL go? Am I supposed to show a 404 for that or what?.
So, it is important that you first fix them for the SE's and then make any server level changes because you never know how quick the crawlers can re-visit the disappeared URL and take their own action. Since this is just a recent change I hope that the SE;s will not evaluate it in a negative way but you should be quick to inform them. Now, since you have already removed it, do add a code in the .htaccess file stating that any URL with a slash redirects it to the URL without slash. I hope there are no URLs that have to end with a slash (just have a re-look on this, the home page and others).
After this is done, to make things more clear to the search engines, resubmit your XML sitemap with all the correct URLs on the website and I think you will be just fine.
On the rankings, I don't think it will be affected, unless there was a re-crawl after the indexation.
Cheers,
-
I'm not 100% sure how to answer your question, but an .htaccess 301 might work.
/example.html/ example.html
Try that to see if it works.
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
-
Have Your Thoughts Changed Regarding Canonical Tag Best Practice for Pagination? - Google Ignoring rel= Next/Prev Tagging
Hi there, We have a good-sized eCommerce client that is gearing up for a relaunch. At this point, the staging site follows the previous best practice for pagination (self-referencing canonical tags on each page; rel=next & prev tags referencing the last and next page within the category). Knowing that Google does not support rel=next/prev tags, does that change your thoughts for how to set up canonical tags within a paginated product category? We have some categories that have 500-600 products so creating and canonicalizing to a 'view all' page is not ideal for us. That leaves us with the following options (feel it is worth noting that we are leaving rel=next / prev tags in place): Leave canonical tags as-is, page 2 of the product category will have a canonical tag referencing ?page=2 URL Reference Page 1 of product category on all pages within the category series, page 2 of product category would have canonical tag referencing page 1 (/category/) - this is admittedly what I am leaning toward. Any and all thoughts are appreciated! If this were in relation to an existing website that is not experiencing indexing issues, I wouldn't worry about these. Given we are launching a new site, now is the time to make such a change. Thank you! Joe
Web Design | | Joe_Stoffel1 -
Does the blog widget with latest blog-posts at homepage helps in SEO?
Hi all, We are planning to add a widget at our website homepage which displays recent blog-posts with dates. Google favours new and latest content. So will these consistent new posts help in improving website ranking? Thanks
Web Design | | vtmoz0 -
How to prevent development website subdomain from being indexed?
Hello awesome MOZ Community! Our development team uses a sub-domain "dev.example.com" for our SEO clients' websites. This allows changes to be made to the dev site (U/X changes, forms testing, etc.) for client approval and testing. An embarrassing discovery was made. Naturally, when you run a "site:example.com" the "dev.example.com" is being indexed. We don't want our clients websites to get penalized or lose killer SERPs because of duplicate content. The solution that is being implemented is to edit the robots.txt file and block the dev site from being indexed by search engines. My questions is, does anyone in the MOZ Community disagree with this solution? Can you recommend another solution? Would you advise against using the sub-domain "dev." for live and ongoing development websites? Thanks!
Web Design | | SproutDigital0 -
Do I need to 301 redirect www.domain.com/index.html to www.domain.com/ ?
So, interestingly enough, the Moz crawler picked up my index.html file (homepage) and reported duplicate content, of course. But, Google hasn't seemed to index the www.domain.com/index.html version of my homepage, just the www.domain.com version. However, it looks like I do have links going specifically to www.domain.com/index.html and I want to make sure those are getting counted towards my overall domain strength. Is it necessary to 301 redirect in the scenario described above?
Web Design | | Small_Business_SEO0 -
Privacy Policy: index it/? And where to place it?
Hi Everyone, Two questions, first: should you allow google to index your privacy policy? Second: for a service based site (not e-commerce, not selling anything) should you put the policy in the footer so it's site wide or just on the "contact us" form page? Best, Ruben
Web Design | | KempRugeLawGroup0 -
Help with Schema.org on Ecommerce Products
I’m looking for ways of using schema.org with products that have pricing options. There appear to be two main problems 1) Whilst colour, width, height and depth are all catered for, size appears to be missing – how can we mark up products that are available in sizes that aren’t necessarily covered by width/height/depth (e.g. shoe size). Also, what if the product is available in different finishes – technically, these could not properly be described as colours so how could we mark them up? 2) There doesn’t seem to be any particularly good way of marking up pricing options that are displayed on the same product detail page. For e.g. if a pricing option table is used like this: | ID | Colour | Price 001-red | Red | £3.99 001-green | Green | £4.49 001-blue | Blue | £4.99 | I can mark up each row as an offer, and give each offer a price and sku or mpn, but then I can’t use itemprop=”color” to describe exactly what the option is. Would I just use itemprop=”name” in this case and abandon color altogether (even though it’s technically supposed to be describing the colour of the product and not the name of the offer)? I suppose another way I could approach it would be to mark up each row as an individual product, and assign each one an offer with the details as described above but then the containing page would effectively look like a separate product – which it isn’t. Any help or advice on this would be very much appreciated
Web Design | | paulbaguley0 -
Accordion Fold Ups Bad For Google
http://fandicoach.com/products Right now I have these accordion things on the website. Are they bad for google in terms of being an SEO best practice? I want to avoid doing anything black hat. Thanks!
Web Design | | OOMDODigital0 -
Duplicate Content for index.html
In the Crawl Diagnostics Summary, it says that I have two pages with duplicate content which are: www.mywebsite.com/ www.mywebsite.com/index.html I read in a Dream Weaver tutorial that you should name your home page "index.html" and then you can let www.mywebsite.com automatically direct the user to index.html. Is this a bug in SEOMoz's crawler or is it a real problem with my site? Thank you, Dan
Web Design | | superTallDan0