Canonicalising To A 301?
-
Hi there,
We currently make use of a 301 rule to always return the trailing slash version of any URL on the site.
Recently, it seems that the canonical tag was implemented incorrectly. Here's an example:
http://www.zando.co.za/women/shoes is redirected to
http://www.zando.co.za/women/shoes/ (trailing slash)
However, our canonical tags, across the site, are going to the non-slash version, as follows:
I'm right in saying this really damaging? Also, if I instruct the Dev team to implement a site-wide fix by adding the trailing slash in all cases, can I expect any weird side affects on my current rankings/indexation?
If so, I can only imagine it being a short-term thing as Google re-aligns it's index of our site?
I treat canonical tags with plenty of caution.
Any insights appreciated.
Cheers,
P.
-
Thanks Good Doctor,
Cheers,
P
-
I agree with everything Dr. Peat said. Those are all extremely Likely reasons for your site showing a Forward / or not and strongly agree with Dr. Peat you should follow tip and match the correct rel="canonical regardless of anything. Even if you think the URL is An exact match one you have told Google you want to have rel="canonical Happy New Year! Tom
-
It's certainly a mixed signal. It's hard to predict what Google will do, and they may just ignore the canonical in that case, but I've seen enough problems that I wouldn't take chances with it. My gut feeling is that the 301 is probably overpowering the canonical (and your Google index is showing the trailing slash in most cases), but I'd fix the canonical. You could see some short-term bounce, but I think it's for the best long-term.
FYI, you've got a ton of title tag duplication within the "/women" pages - you might want to look at adding some uniqueness to the deeper pages. That's unrelated - just something I noticed.
-
Precisely,
After reading various sources, it seems that the fix's pro's would outweigh any possible short term fluctuations.
Besides, I'm sure Google is smart enough to treat trailing-vs-non-trailing-slash URLs without as much variation as, say, one with a different structure.
Wonder if encoding has plays a part? Hahaha. More questions... I do love SEO.
-
PS not all of your webpages shows no forward /
http://www.zando.co.za/Nike-Brazilia-Duffle-Bag-Purple-47577.html
-
Best practices states that you should put the URL is it shows in browser. So if there is a / the rel="canonical should have / hope that that helps
should be
all the best,
Tom
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
-
301 redirect: canonical or non canonical?
Hi, Newbie alert! I need to set up 301 redirects for changed URLs on a database driven site that is to be redeveloped shortly. The current site uses canonical header tags. The new site will also use canonical tags. Should the 301 redirects map the canonical URL on the old site to the corresponding canonical for the new design . . . or should they map the non canonical database URLs old and new? Given that the purpose of canonicals is to indicate our preferred URL, then my guess is that's what I should use. However, how can I be sure that Google (for example) has indexed the canonical in every case? Thx in anticipation.
Technical SEO | | ztalk1120 -
To 301 or not to 301?
I have a client that is having a new site built. Their old site (WP) does not use the trailing / at the end of urls. The new site is using most of the same url names but IS using the /. For instance, the old site would be www.example.com/products and the new site, also WP, will be www.example.com/products/. WordPress will resolve either way, but my question is whether or not to go in and redirect each matching non / page to the new url that has the /. I don't want to leave any link juice on the table but if I can keep the juice without doing a few hundred 301s that certainly wouldn't suck. Any thoughts? Sleepless in KVegas
Technical SEO | | seorocket0 -
301'ing domain to an addon domain
My googlefu failed me in finding this... How to 301 a domain to an addon domain? Domain structure is as follows: http://addondomain.maindomain.com/ http://www.maindomain.com/addondomain/ http://www.addondomain.com/ <--(addon domain has its own domain as well) I want main domain to all point to the addon domain like so: http://www.maindomain.com/ --> http://www.addondomain.com/
Technical SEO | | JasonJackson0 -
Limits to 301 in htaccess?
I'm about to launch a redesign of my company's main website, and we've updated most of the URLs to be more user friendly and SEO optimized. I've just finished editing my spreadsheet, and see that I'll need to implement 244 redirects. My question is: Are there performance issues with loading your .htaccess file up with almost 250 301 redirect commands? I've heard a bloated htaccess file can really slow down apache, should I be approaching this a different way, maybe with php?
Technical SEO | | AdoptionHelp0 -
Difference between URL Rewrites and 301 Redirects for Rankings
What is the difference between URL rewriting and 301 redirects? Specifically if my home page is rewriting the www. version and the /index.html version rather than 301 redirecting them is this equivalent? Does it still pass the link juice on those alternate variations the same way a 301 redirect will?
Technical SEO | | rcarll0 -
301 mistake in Google Webmaster Tools?
Google webmaster tools has a warning for our site map saying that this url (and a couple of others) have a 301 redirect in them. http://www.aquinasandmore.com/catholic-gifts/Immaculate-Heart-of-Mary-Bookmark/sku/59682 I've checked the link and don't see that it actually is redirecting. Any thoughts on why this is popping up?
Technical SEO | | IanTheScot0 -
Do 301 redirects pass page rank quickly
Hi I have been asked to carry out a site audit for a potential client. The site has that many issues I don't where to start in explaining them however, there is one question we are debating and would like to get a second opinion on it. The site I am auditing used to have a homepage rank 7. The site has currently had a redesign (new template with new URLs) and now the root domain 301 redirects to a sub folder two levels deep (not ideal I know!). This happened about a month ago and we are still getting N/A for toolbar page rank. The question is, does Google page rank transfer quicker than normal due to the redirects? or do we still have to wait on the next Google Page Rank update? Thanks in advance Gavelect
Technical SEO | | Equatorites0 -
Rel canonical or 301 the Index Page?
Still a bit confused on best practice for /index.php showing up as duplicate for www.mysite.com. What do I need to do and How?
Technical SEO | | bozzie3110