Rel Canonical
-
hi folks
sorry i really am confused and not very good with technical terms
i have 553 Rel Canonical notices but i cant understand what Rel Canonical actually means it kinda sounds like there links that go nowhere to help the seo ranking? am i right or just in way over my head?
please use the most basic language you can
cheers
donal
-
The "Notice" level is just telling you that your pages all have rel=canonical elements on them, and they all seem to be pointing to themselves. This is really just a heads up, and doesn't indicate a problem, per se.
As you grow, I think you may want to control how some of your very similar pages are indexed, such as color and quantity variations. These pages can look "thin" to Google, in that they're very similar. Currently, though, your site is small enough that it shouldn't be a big issue, and our notice is the lowest least severe message (notice < warning < error).
The rel=canonical element basically tells Google that two URLs are equivalent or very similar, and to only allow one to rank. This helps control duplicates and avoid issues with Panda or having Google filter out pages in unexpected ways.
-
im still totally confused but ill make the question different is it a good thing to have 553 Rel Canonical things or should i try get rid/fix them??
-
Canonical URL's are two url's that point to the exact same webpage.
It's not a link that users can click on or anything. It's like an invisible note to search engines that tells them there are other URL's on your website that point to the same page. It keeps search engines from getting confused.
-
Hi Donal
I really can't explain it better than the SEOMoz guide itself, which you can read here.
Getting the notices in the ranking report is not a bad thing at all - it only serves to remind you that you have the tags on your site and to make sure they're set up correctly.
Have a read through the guide given above, as it helps explain how and why we might want to use them in simple terms.
Hope this 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
-
Do we need rel="prev" and rel="next" if we have a rel="canonical" for the first page of a series
Despite having a canonical on page 1 of a series of paginated pages for different topics, Google is indexing several, sometimes many pages in each topic. This is showing up as duplicate page title issues in Moz and Screaming Frog. Ideally Google would only index the first page in the series. Do we need to use rel="prev" etc rather than a canonical on page 1? How can we make sure Google crawls but doesn't index the rest of the series?
Moz Pro | | hjsand1 -
301 or canonical for multiple homepage versions?
I used 301 redirects to point several versions of the homepage to www.site.com. i was just rereading moz's beginners guide to seo, and it uses that scenario as an example for rel canonical, not 301 redirects. Which is better? My understanding is that 301s remove all doubt of getting links to the wrong version and diluting link equity.
Moz Pro | | kimmiedawn0 -
Does Rogerbot recognize rel="alternate" hreflang="x"?
Rogerbot just completed its first crawl and is reporting all kinds of duplicate content - both page content and meta title/description. The pages it is calling duplicate are used with rel="alternate" hreflang="x", but are still being labeled as dupes. The title and descriptions are usually exactly the same, so I am working on getting at least those translated into different languages. I think its getting tripped up because the product page its crawling are only in English, but the chrome of the site is in the translated languages. The URLs look like so: Original: site.com/product Detected duplicates: site.com/fr/product, site.com/de/product, site.com/zh-hans/product
Moz Pro | | sedwards0 -
Why does Rel Canonical show up as a notice?
In the crawl diagnostics screen "Rel Canonical" shows up as a notice for every page that has a rel="canonical" meta tag in it. Why is this the case? Shouldn't every page have a canonical tag on it to show the absolute URL to the content? Wouldn't a better notice be to display pages that do not have a canonical tag instead? I could be wrong but that would make more sense to me. (In fact.. let's be honest here.. I probably am wrong.. but I'd like someone to explain it if they could.) Thanks
Moz Pro | | rrolfe1 -
Duplicate page content showing up with proper use of canonical tag
Hi, In the Crawl diagnostics reports, I'm getting lots of duplicate errors warnings e.g. duplicate page title. In most cases these are tracking urls and the page has a canonical tag pointing to the original page. It would be helpful if the crawl analysis reports could separate these out from ones that are of genuine concern. It can also happen when there's a noindex tag on a page. Thanks, Leigh
Moz Pro | | Leighm0 -
Canonical Confusion
Hey guys, I'm having a hard time grasping canonical links and the warnings I'm getting on my report card. I'm using Yoast SEO Plug-In and can see that every page on my site has a canonical reference to the URL of the page I'm at. Can someone please enlighten me on this subject. I'm reading everything I can about Canonicalization (honestly...an easier word please) but I does not make sense yet. Thanks! I added the notice I'm getting on my report card. This is my domain http://bbguard.com.ve swG7x.png
Moz Pro | | FDSConsulting0 -
Why do pages with canonical urls show in my report as a "Duplicate Page Title"?
eg: Page One
Moz Pro | | DPSSeomonkey
<title>Page one</title>
No canonical url Page Two
<title>Page one</title> Page two is counted as being a page with a duplicate page title.
Shouldn't it be excluded?0 -
Rel-canonical tag confusion
I had our web development company implement the rel-canonical tag on all pages of our website to get rid of the duplicate content months ago. However, when I use the On Page optimizer tool (in previous version) it would tell me I'm not using the rel-canonical tag correctly on the page I was grading and when I untagged use rel-canonical tag in our CMS (which was pointing to the correct page) my grade would go to an A. Now with the new version it says I'm using it wrong either way, when I have the tag used in my CMS and everything else is good I have a B, but one I click to not use Rel-canonical tag I have a C. Both ways it shows up in On-page tool without a check in Apprpriate Use of Rel Canonical. I've attached pictures. In C version it says - Canonical URL "/info/solutions/" and "/info/solutions/" In B version: Canonical URL "/info/solutions/" What am I doing wrong and how do i fix this? Because ALL of my grades have dropped to Bs and Cs. Thanks! iklEHOjJLZE4966 [URL]]([URL=http://imgur.com/5BYcV][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/5BYcV.jpg[/IMG][/URL]) 5BYcV
Moz Pro | | aircyclemegan0