Update in Moz spider/tools?? Flagging duplicate content / ignoring canonical
-
Hi all,
Has there been an update in the SEOmoz crawling software?
We now have thousands of dupe content/page title warnings for paginated product page URLs that have correctly formatted canonicals.
e.g.
http://www.woolovers.com/british-wool/mens/tweed-green/wool-countryman-suede-patch-sweater.aspx
... has following pages with identical content that have been flagged:
http://www.woolovers.com/british-wool/mens/olive-green/wool-countryman-suede-patch-sweater.aspx?p=true&rspage=4
..plus 4 more URL's.
But they all have canonical set. There's even a notice at the bottom of report that tells us there's a canonical set to http://www.woolovers.com/british-wool/mens/tweed-green/wool-countryman-suede-patch-sweater.aspx
What gives, SEOmoz ??
Thanks
Michael
-
Hey Lawrence,
Campaigns have a 95% tolerance for duplicate content. This includes all the source code on the page and not just the viewable text. So if a URL is at least 95% similar in code and content to another URL, this warning will appear.
You can run your own tests using this tool: http://www.webconfs.com/similar-page-checker.php
We don't know what standard Google uses, but it's safe to say they are a bit more sophisticated than us - so you might be okay in this regard as long as you have a couple hundred words of unique text and some unique coding per page. Google won't say how much duplicate content is too much, so we like to be better safe than sorry.
I hope this help. Let me know if you need further assistance.
-Chiaryn
-
Hi Chiaryn,
Thanks for reply and explanation. The different colour-specific pages e.g. Tweed Green and Olive Green have some different content but it's nothing like enough in cases of two greens, two blues etc. as we simplify colour names for search so when there is an Olive and a Tweed Green they both end up having 'Green' as variable in page title, H1 etc. Will fix this.
Do you think the reviews at the bottom of the pages will also trigger dupe content warning? i.e. even if we make all other on-page elements unique for each colour url? (page title, H1, H2, prod description etc) The reviews are quite extensive and are the same on all the separate colour specific product page versions of each style and was thinking today whether we should remove them from these colour product pages (OR perhaps let the colour product pages have their OWN reviews)
http://www.woolovers.com/british-wool/mens/tweed-green/wool-countryman-suede-patch-sweater.aspx
Thanks again
-
Oh, brilliant (re: "See more" aspect) Thanks for the info. Will let you how we tackle this and the repercussions (!) and look forward to hearing how you get on also!
-
Hi Michael,
Thanks for writing in. I already emailed you in response to the ticket you sent in to the Help Desk, but I will copy my answer here for you review.
--
I looked into your campaign and it seems that this is happening because of where your canonical tags are pointing. These pages are considered duplicates because their canonical tags point to different URLs. For example, http://www.woolovers.com/british-wool/mens/tweed-green/wool-countryman-suede-patch-sweater.aspx is considered a duplicate of http://www.woolovers.com/british-wool/mens/olive-green/wool-countryman-suede-patch-sweater.aspx?p=true&rspage=4 because the canonical tag for the first page is http://www.woolovers.com/british-wool/mens/tweed-green/wool-countryman-suede-patch-sweater.aspx while the canonical for the second URL ishttp://www.woolovers.com/british-wool/mens/olive-green/wool-countryman-suede-patch-sweater.aspx, with one URL showing tweed-green and the other showing olive-green.
Since the canonical tags point to different URLs it is assumed that http://www.woolovers.com/british-wool/mens/tweed-green/wool-countryman-suede-patch-sweater.aspx and http://www.woolovers.com/british-wool/mens/olive-green/wool-countryman-suede-patch-sweater.aspx are likely to be duplicates themselves.
Here is how our system interprets duplicate content vs. rel canonical:
Assuming A, B, C, and D are all duplicates,
If A references B as the canonical, then they are not considered duplicates
If A and B both reference C as canonical, A and B are not considered duplicates of each other
If A references C as a canonical, A and B are considered duplicated
If A references C as canonical, B references D, then A and B are considered duplicates
The examples you've provided actually fall into the fourth example I've listed above.I hope this clears things up. Please let me know if you have any other questions.
--
-Chiaryn
-
We use the "See more" script on our sites, and from what I understand, at least from other Mozzers, this is an okay practice. http://www.seomoz.org/q/using-more-info-javascript-toggledisplay-tag-for-more-info-text
We also use the rel="prev" and rel="next" to some success, but I can't comment on how that's functioning canonical-wise, because IT WAS DROPPED from our latest redesign and is going to be added to our client's website in the latest release. Oye.
I'd love to hear how this works out for you. There are some really great Mozzers on here with loads of experience about canonical tags and duplicate page issues. Can't wait to see what they have to contribute.
-
Hi there,
Thanks for your response.
It's not product page A being seen as a duplicate of product page B etc, but several versions of product A seen as duplicate due to pagination, stemming from reviews for the products that span several pages, so making the rest of the content, titles etc different other than the (crawlable) reviews isn't really an option.
Will look more into "noindex, follow" tags in pagination.
We could have a View All page for indexing showing all reviews (with lots of scrolling!) , with the paginated versions canonicalized to that version (could still serve the paginated version of product page from site navigation perhaps with "noindex, follow" meta tag) Text doesn’t take long to load and this approach would consolidate the review content.
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/view-all-in-search-results.html
Other option is to use rel=”prev” and rel=”next” implementation which shows Google the relationship between the pages (not sure if it will still be flagged as dupe content in SEOmoz though! Depends if they follow the tag). This way individual pages might get indexed (not sure if that's a good thing?!) perhaps if there's something in a review from (say) page 5 of the product reviews.
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/pagination-with-relnext-and-relprev.html
Ideally I'd like to implement all reviews on one page and hide them with a facebook-style 'See more' function. Not sure if that counts as hiding content? Will look into this.
-
Hi Michael,
Not sure if this helps you out at all, but I found this about the canonicals and SEOMoz crawl report in a previous Q http://mz.cm/11erRj6:
As far as the SEOmoz crawl reports go, not that setting a canonical won't stop these pages being reported as duplicate content.
From the help:
"Keep in mind that that canonicals will stop the pages from ranking against each other, but they will still show up as duplicate content from a UI perspective, so we will still count them as duplicate."
I have the same issues on my accounts. I'm focusing on making the pages content as unique as possible, or using the "noindex, follow" meta tags to see if that makes a difference.
I know you may have a lot of pages on your website, but perhaps writing short descriptions on your products would help. It might be worthwhile, but completely understandable that it may be a huge undertaking if you have hundreds or thousands of pages.
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
-
Duplicate content across two websites
Hi. I'm looking at ways to compare duplicate content across two different websites instead of one, as with the Moz crawler. Instead it will flag up up duplicates present on both site A and B.
Moz Pro | | Blink-SEO0 -
Hi guys What the best way to adress duplicate content on photo gallery?
inside my moz report for duplicate contentit says that the photo gallery has duplicate content. let me post and example. is saying this site->http://www.yoursite.com//photogallery/name-of-the-page site photogallery category page name its being duplicated to all these other urls : http://www.yoursite.com//photogallery/name-of-the-page-categoryone http://www.yoursite.com//photogallery/name-of-the-page-categorytwo http://www.yoursite.com//photogallery/name-of-the-page-categorythree http://www.yoursite.com//photogallery/name-of-the-page-categoryfour and so on! each one has it own canonical tag to its own individual page. the site structure is this: http://www.yoursite.com//photogallery/ in here there are all the links pointing to the right categorypage ie: http://www.yoursite.com//photogallery/ >>>> http://www.yoursite.com//photogallery/categoryone pic 1 pic 2 pic 3 http://www.yoursite.com//photogallery/categorytwo pic 1 pic 2 pic 3 http://www.yoursite.com//photogallery/categorythree pic 1 pic 2 pic 3 http://www.yoursite.com//photogallery/categoryfour pic 1 pic 2 pic 3 So i don't know how to interpret Moz diagnose. how could i interpret moz reports to find out what to fix and how to fix it? Sorry for the long post! ;
Moz Pro | | surgeonsadvisor0 -
Text analysis Tool: WDF*IDF - Within Document Freqeuncy x Inverse Document Frequency / tools?
Checking Keyword-density is just to primitive... what is your recommendation for the subject WDFPIDF?
Moz Pro | | inlinear
The SEO-Tool onpage.org (german) offers an interesting tool to analyse your text. But there are differences between languages and factors like proximities, synonyms etc. What are your experiences? tools? does mOz develop a tool for this? This would be a nice Feature for the On-Page Grader! best regards,
Holger1 -
Duplicate conent
I found some duplicate content on my site.... but in my SEOMOZ campaigns account. It says that I do not have duplicate content... what is wrong? is the tool working ?
Moz Pro | | sandyallain0 -
Changing the way SEOmoz Detects Duplicate Content
Hey everyone, I wanted to highlight today's blog post in case you missed it. In short, we're using a different algorithm to detect duplicate pages. http://moz.com/blog/visualizing-duplicate-web-pages If you see a change in your crawl results and you haven't done anything, this is probably why. Here's more information taken directly from the post: 1. Fewer duplicate page errors: a general decrease in the number of reported duplicate page errors. However, it bears pointing out that: **We may still miss some near-duplicates. **Like the current heuristic, only a subset of the near-duplicate pages is reported. **Completely identical pages will still be reported. **Two pages that are completely identical will have the same simhash value, and thus a difference of zero as measured by the simhash heuristic. So, all completely identical pages will still be reported. 2. Speed, speed, speed: The simhash heuristic detects duplicates and near-duplicates approximately 30 times faster than the legacy fingerprints code. This means that soon, no crawl will spend more than a day working its way through post-crawl processing, which will facilitate significantly faster delivery of results for large crawls.
Moz Pro | | KeriMorgret2 -
Data Update for RogerBot
Hi, I noticed that rogerbot still give me 404 for http://www.salustore.com/capelli/nanogen-acquamatch.html refferal form http://www.salustore.com/protocollo-nanogen even I made changes since a couple of week. Same error with one "Title Element Too Short" on our site. Any suggestion on how to refresh it? Best Regards n.
Moz Pro | | nicolobottazzi0 -
Notice rel canonical
Hi, Why does my sites get the crawler notice for rel canonical when using the PRO account crawlers?? The canonical is there and it works, and to me it looks just like any other canonical link, the canonical is only at some links but not everyone, why is that?
Moz Pro | | careeron0 -
Which tools do not use backlinking and/or tagging?
I am new to SEOmoz and was wondering if any, which tools on SEOmoz does not use or require backlinking and/or tagging?
Moz Pro | | aschraegle0