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
-
What is the correct code to write the rel=canonical in the HTML HEAD of the page?
is it like: html> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="http://example.com/" /> head> <body> ...<ref>sdfdfref> or like:
On-Page Optimization | | dubraverd0 -
Will it upset Google if I aggregate product page reviews up into a product category page?
We have reviews on our product pages and we are considering averaging those reviews out and putting them on specific category pages in order for the average product ratings to be displayed in search results. Each averaged category review would be only for the products within it's category, and all reviews are from users of the site, no 3rd party reviews. For example, averaging the reviews from all of our boxes products pages, and listing that average review on the boxes category page. My question is, will this be doing anything wrong in the eyes of Google, and if so how so? -Derick
On-Page Optimization | | Deluxe0 -
URL structure of the page: Does this one need to contain the most important keyword for better SEO?
Hi everyone, I’m trying to get "air-conditioner-repair.html" to rank higher for the keyword "air conditioner los angeles". I am wondering whether or not I should change URL to "air-conditioner-los-angeles-repair.html" to get better results? Will be thankful very much for any advise you can offer!
On-Page Optimization | | kirupa0 -
How to optimize WordPress Pages with Duplicate Page Content?
I found the non WWW ans WWW duplicate pages URL only, more than thousand pages.
On-Page Optimization | | eigital0 -
URL Question
This url looks bad: http://www.patrickmunoz.com/#!classes/c1vw1 And when you click around the page change doesn't actually occur, it's a fade into the next page. I think this is a major problem for rankings. Although pages are crawled: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.patrickmunoz.com%2F&oq=site%3A&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j69i58j69i59l3j69i61.3548j0j7&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8 When I search for a simple page - "patrick munoz FAQs" nothing comes up:
On-Page Optimization | | tylerfraser
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.patrickmunoz.com%2F&oq=site%3A&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j69i58j69i59l3j69i61.3548j0j7&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8#q=patrick+munoz+|+FAQs Do you think this is a bad url configuration? Thanks! Tyler0 -
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 -
"On Page" report says 2 rel canonical urls-how do I fix that?
I am reviewing my On Page scores and I'm not getting a perfect score bk of this notice: No More Than One Canonical URL Tag Moderate fix <dl> <dt>Number of Canonical tags</dt> <dd>2</dd> <dt>Explanation</dt> <dd>The canonical URL tag is meant to be employed only a single time on an individual URL (much like the title element or meta description). To ensure the search engines properly parse the canonical source, employ only a single version of this tag.</dd> <dt>Recommendation</dt> <dd>Remove all but a single canonical URL tag</dd> <dd>HOW do I fix that?</dd> <dd>I am using Platinum seo plugin which I have checked "Use canonical urls" and the page in question is</dd> <dd>http://adderalldosage.net/general-adderall-dosage/</dd> </dl>
On-Page Optimization | | ccare7230 -
Max # of recommended links per page?
I've heard it said that Google may choose to stop following links after the first 100 on a page. The landing/category pages for my site's product catalog have earned quite a respectable PR and positioning in search results, and I'm currently paginating their product listings (about 200 products in a category) so that only a couple dozen products are shown on the first page, with links to "next page" and "previous page" being accomplished via query string (i.e. "?page=3"). An alternative option I have is to link to 100% of the contained products within the category's landing page (which would increase my on-page link count to ~300) and use CSS/Javascript to allow the user to simulate browsing between pages on the client side. My goal is to see as many of my product pages indexed as possible. Is this done better using my current scheme (where Googlebot would have to navigate to, say, Landing Page -> Page 6 -> Deeply Buried Product Page) or in the alternative method above, where all the links are in a single page? Since my landing pages are currently treated pretty well by search engines, would that "trust" cause them to follow more links than might normally be done? Thank you!
On-Page Optimization | | cadenzajon0