Recommendation: Add a canonical URL tag referencing this URL to the header of the page.
-
Please clarify:
In the page optimization tool, seomoz recommends using the canonical url tag on the unique page itself.
Is it the same canonical url tag used when want juice to go to the original page?
Although the canonical URL tag is generally thought of as a way to solve duplicate content problems, it can be extremely wise to use it on every (unique) page of a site to help prevent any query strings, session IDs, scraped versions, licensing deals or future developments to potentially create a secondary version and pull link juice or other metrics away from the original. We believe the canonical URL tag is a best practice to help prevent future problems, even if nothing is specifically duplicate/problematic today.
Please give example.
-
Short answer - yes.
Paul
-
Just to confirm please please as I am little confused after my On page report
If a I have a page name eg "http://www.ilovetravel/destinations/cruise/asia-river-cruises/"
do I need to add a canonical url tag to the header of my page
-
Hah! Really good point! Love it.
Stupid scrapers.
Paul
-
I totally agree with Paul.
Another thing I noticed on one of my websites: I had the canonical code in the header. Someone copied my entire page and published it to their website (with canonical tag) so the openly told the search engines that my website was the original copy of the content.
another reason why it could work
regards
Jarno
-
Probably the best concrete example of why this recommendation is valuable is when using Google Analytics campaign variables to point to landing pages.
Say your regular website page is www.mysite.com/mylanding page.html. On that page, you place the canonical tag in the header pointing back at itself.
It seems redundant until you realize that in future, you might very well be linking back to that page from a social media post or banner ad using Google Analytics tracking parameters. So the page would now be indexed under the url www.mysite.com/mylanding page.htm?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=timeline-post&utm_campaign=mycampaign.
Google would see that new URL as a completely different page due to the extra parameters, but it would still have the canonical in the header pointing back to the plain version of the page URL, you would avoid duplicate content issues and splitting of page authority.
This demonstrates how the canonical tag can help prevent future problems even if it's not essential right now.
Make sense?
Paul
-
Example:
The page has a rel=canonical pointing to itself. That is what the tool recommeds.
The page still has a canonical tag pointing to the preferred URL.
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 it still worth changing a url with half the pages target keyphrase in to the entire phrase still ?
Hi If a pages url has half the pages target keyphrase (i.e. 1 word instead of 2) is it still worth changing to include entire keyphrase (2 words) given need to then add 301 redirects etc after ? If it was a new page then I would definately include full keyphrase but the page is a few months old and has quite high page authority as is (i know a 301 should transfer most authority) but given this page and other sub pages would also need to be 301'd if this change occurs and the dev time/cost that would incurred/charged by the design/dev agency. Also thinking Google being cleverer now (the pages content will be about the target kw) so thinking G would work it out from rest of page content and partial match kw in url. In other words to best target keyphrase is it best to leave url as is or change url to include keyphrase ? For example if the pages target kw is 'swimming clubs' and the current url is www.franksleisurecentres.com/clubs changing it to www.franksleisurecentres.com/swimming-clubs :Thanks Dan
On-Page Optimization | | Dan-Lawrence0 -
Wordpress SEO. How to add static content above home page posts.
I think I many have some duplicate content issues as have been adding unque content above posts in categories using the all category SEO. How can I add static content to the posts on the home page though? Any help appreciated!
On-Page Optimization | | SamCUK0 -
Page architecture
We have some good content on our site, particularly relating to UK employment law. One section on unfair dismissal is split into 9 pages - there is a fair amount of legal detail. The question is whether we should combine it all into one "mother of all unfair dismissal" page just to satisfy the Google monster or keep in as it is. Some of the individual pages rank on page 1 already. If we change the architecture are 301 redirects the best way to handle the changing urls? The other more important issue is whether it is easier to read it all on one page or split it. Keeping G happy may not actually keep our users happy. As the content is quite dense we want to ensure we don't overload people. Any thoughts appreciated.
On-Page Optimization | | dexm100 -
Image URL's have knocked my sub-pages down (WP)
I had most of my keywords within the top 10 for this site, some were even ranking in the top 5. For a possible minor boost, more-so to cover all the bases, I decided to add images to all of the pages, and they were uploaded as a gallery with most of the image file names being the same as the keyword. Thus, url's were created with our targeted phrases, extending off of the corresponding sub-page. After that, Google quickly picked up the url's to the images and began indexing them, when that occurred the sub-page which was to be the landing page, quickly tanked. Nothing else on-site changed besides the uploading of the images, so I'm sure they're conflicting and for whatever reason Google can't decide which page to index. The page that contains the images used, or the actual intended landing page. With WP I didn't see a way to not have them link to anything at all, and just be static when using a gallery, stock at least. So, my question is how can I quickly alleviate this problem and what should I do in the future to avoid this? I believe if I change link thumbnails to image file instead of attachment page, that should fix the issue... Then, I'll have dead URL's which I suppose I should 301 to the sub-page. Alternatively, is there a better solution that will work, I was also thinking about no-indexing the attachment URL's, but that doesn't seem to be an option.
On-Page Optimization | | JayAdams320 -
How important is it to include the target keyword phrase in the page URL?
If I want to target a keyword phrase to a particular phrase, but do not want to change the URL of that page, will that negatively impact my rankings? I am also wondering if I can get around it by creating a new, short URL that 301 redirects to the original URL. Would that be as effective as including the keyword in the original URL?
On-Page Optimization | | susannajbost0 -
Page Analyzer & Page 1
I follow the recommended things from the Page Analyzer or Grader, and I am like position #40, so how do I get to page #1 as a minimum.
On-Page Optimization | | sansonj0 -
Canonical to the page itself?
Hello, I'd like to know what happens when you use canonical to the same page itself, like: Page "example.com" rel canonical="example.com" Does that impact in something? Bad or good? See ya!
On-Page Optimization | | seomasterbrasil1 -
Best practice for Meta-Robots tag in categories and author pages?
For some of our site we use Wordpress, which we really like working with. The question I have is for the categories and authors pages (and similiar pages), i.e. the one looking: http://www.domain.com/authors/. Should you or should you not use follow, noindex for meta-robots? We have a lot of categories/tags/authors which generates a lot of pages. I'm a bit worried that google won't like this and leaning towards adding the follow, noindex. But the more I read about it, the more I see people disagree. What does the community of Seomoz think?
On-Page Optimization | | Lobtec0