Do I need both canonical meta tags AND 301 redirects?
-
I implemented a 301 redirect set to the "www" version in the .htaccess (apache server) file and my logs are DOWN 30-40%! I have to be doing something wrong!
AddType application/x-httpd-php .html .htm
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^luckygemstones.com
RewriteRule (.*) http://www.luckygemstones.com/$1 [R=301,L]RewriteCond %{THE_REQUEST} ^./index.htm
RewriteRule ^(.)index.htm$ http://www.luckygemstones.com/$1 [R=301,L]IndexIgnore *
ErrorDocument 404 http://www.luckygemstones.com/page-not-found.htm
ErrorDocument 500 http://www.luckygemstones.com/internal-serv-error.htm
ErrorDocument 403 http://www.luckygemstones.com/forbidden-request.htm
ErrorDocument 401 http://www.luckygemstones.com/not-authorized.htmI've also started adding canoncial META's to EACH page:
I'm using HMTL 4.0 loose still--1000's of pages--painful to convert to HTML5 so I left the / off the tag so it would validate.
Am I doing something wrong?
Thanks, Kathleen
-
I wouldn't use both 301s and rel=canonicals for the same purpose. It's fine to have 301s to redirect non-www URLs, and then canonicals for other problems, but I wouldn't double them up for the same issue. The 301s are the proper solution here.
Your 301s don't seem to be triggering. Did you remove this code? Unfortunately, diagnosing someone's rewrites in .htaccess is incredibly difficult without direct access.
How does Google crawl your site? It looks like all of the products are only available by submitting a form (pulldowns). Google can't take that action, which could be causing major problems with your PageRank flow internally. You need paths that Google can use to reach the actual products. Honestly, form selects menus aren't typically a good solution for users, either.
-
Here's the entire contents of my .htaccess file:
AddType application/x-httpd-php .html .htm
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^luckygemstones.com
RewriteRule (.*) http://www.luckygemstones.com/$1 [R=301,L]RewriteCond %{THE_REQUEST} ^.*/index.htm
RewriteRule ^(.*)index.htm$ http://www.luckygemstones.com/$1 [R=301,L]**IndexIgnore ***
ErrorDocument 404 http://www.luckygemstones.com/page-not-found.htm
ErrorDocument 500 http://www.luckygemstones.com/internal-serv-error.htm
ErrorDocument 403 http://www.luckygemstones.com/forbidden-request.htm
ErrorDocument 401 http://www.luckygemstones.com/not-authorized.htmFrankly, I'm not sure what all the flags on the Rewrite lines mean. I know when I updated the index.htm code I lost serious traffic--but without it I seem to have dup content issues. I would just LOVE to be done w/this once and for all--to know it's right would be huge!
Here's the canonical tag in the index.htm file:
Is anything amiss? I will say I had no dup content issues in this week's seomoz run but the loss of traffic means google isn't liking something...
Thanks for your help, Kathleen
-
Using the 301 redirect is the right and necessary thing to do, even if you are using canonical tags, Kathleen. They serve somewhat the same purpose on the home page, but the 301 is vastly more powerful to communicate to the search engines that the www version is your primary page.
You've got a bit of a problem with the canonical tag as you've listed ti though.
By doing the redirect, the canonical version of your home page is now www.luckygemstones.com But your canonical tag is declaring www.luckygemstones.com/index.htm which directly contradicts what you set above. For your home page, it should be
In addition, http://www.luckygemstones.com/index.htm should also be 301-redirecting to http://www.luckygemstones.com (another example of a different URL that applies to the same page). The htaccess you list has that redirect in place, but it doesn't seem to be working on the site - is that htaccess actually live as is?
Paul
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 Redirects a Year Later
I inherited the digital maintenance of a website that was relaunched a year ago. In looking at Google Analytics, organic search a year later is still down 33%. I fear they did not install 301 Redirects but can't really get a specific answer from them. Is it possible to install them a year later to help with Google indexing and get back some of the organic traffic?
Technical SEO | | stansamples0 -
Why do two pages compete while a canonical tag is active?
Hi guys, My SERP analysis show me that two pages compete eachother for the keyword kinderfiets, which should not happen since there is a canonical tag is active. www.halfords.nl/fiets/kinderfiets/kinderfiets/ Ranks #6 and www.halfords.nl/fiets/kinderfiets/ Ranks #7. The first one is a subcategory which is one step deeper than the second one. I prefer consumers to land on the broader subcategory, because that one shows more products.Furthermore, we already did some SEO tweaking for the #7 page, but did not work on the #6 page. So it is even kind of strange that this page ranks higher.Can somebody help me out?Kind Regards,Tom
Technical SEO | | Sebastiaan10 -
301 redirecting a previously abused URL
A client previously had their most important landing page at domain.com/example.htm They carried out the sort of link building that was commonplace a few years back (exact match anchors, paid blog links etc) targeting this URL, but they also got a bunch of legitimate decent quality links here. I believe they may have had a number of issues when link quality algo updates were rolled out, so rather than try and get links removed and go through the disavow process they instead decided to abandon this URL, let it 404 and start afresh at domain.com/example.html - updating all internal navigation, XML sitemaps etc. So fast forward to today. What is the best practice for this URL these days do we think? Is it now possible to 301 domain.com/example.htm > domain.com/example.html and recover whatever value may be left here? The argument for not doing so may be that you could pass over the negative metrics associated with the old URL, but would this not be handled by the real-time penguin update and the poor links just devalued rather than actually harming? And could this just be tested - i.e. add in the 301, monitor the impact and if things don't go the way we'd want then just remove the 301 again? Would be keen to get a few opinions on this. TIA
Technical SEO | | Salience_Search_Marketing0 -
301 redirect question
Hi Everyone When doing 301 redirects for a large site, if a page has 0 inbound links would you still redirect it or just leave it? Im just curious on the best practice for this Thanks in advance
Technical SEO | | TheZenAgency0 -
Redirecting Canonical Hostnames
Hi, I want to rewrite all the url pages of "site.com" to "www.site.com". I read the moz redirection article and i concluded that this would be the best approach. RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} !^www.seomoz.org [NC]
Technical SEO | | bigrat95
RewriteRule (.*) http://www.seomoz.org/$1 [L,R=301]. But i recieved this error: Internal Server Error The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request. Please contact the server administrator, webmaster@localhost and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error. More information about this error may be available in the server error log. I tried this rewrite too... RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} !^www. [NC]
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.%{HTTP_HOST}/$1 [L,R=301] It worked but it just rewriting my domain** "site.com"** and not all the subs "site.com/fr/example.php" to "www.site.com" Why it doesn't work properly, it seem to be easy... Could it be a hosting problem? Is there another way to do it? <address> </address> <address> </address> <address> </address> <address> </address>0 -
Correct Implementation Of Canonical Tags
Hopefully this is an easy one to answer. When canonical tags are added to web pages should there be a canonical tag on a page that canonicalizes(?) (new word!?) back to itself. i.e. four page all point back to page Z. On page Z there is a canonical tag that points to page Z? My feeling without any technical know how is that this is just creating an infinite loop i.e. go to this page for original content, (repeat) Or this could be completely correct! Don't want to go back to the developer and point out the error if I'm wrong!
Technical SEO | | ZaddleMarketing0 -
Canonical Tag Here?
Hello, I have a client who I have taken on (different to my other client in another question), My client has a ecommerce website and in nearly all of his products (around 30-40) he has a little information checklist like.. Made in the UK
Technical SEO | | Prestige-SEO
Prices from 9.99
Top quality
Free delivery on orders over.. This is the duplicate content, what is the best practise for this as the SEOmoz crawler is giving me a multiple of errors.0 -
301 redirect while keeping OLD domain for branding
Say you have CharityName.com. They use a dedicated domain name CharityNameEvent.com to advertise their main event. They use this domain on posters, flyers,etc and want to keep using it because it's easier to remember. CharityNameEvent.com has far, far more inbound links than CharityName.com (about 8 times more). Current problem: their current web developer has put the SAME content on both websites instead of setting up a redirect from CharityNameEvent.com (easy to remember) to CharityName.com/Event which would have made more sense. My intention is to consolidate the 2 websites and make sure CharityName.com benefits from links to the Event. I plan to move and 301 redirect CharityNameEvent.com to CharityName.com/Event. I know this would keep links and PR intact but I have a couple of questions: 1. Is it enough to set up the 301 redirect or would they have to ask websites to ACTUALLY change the links to CharityName.com/Event? 2. They plan and need to keep using CharityNameEvent.com for its ease of use on posters, flyers, etc. The 301 redirect would be in place. Would this cause any problems with search engines, especially when/if some people STILL link to CharityNameEvent.com instead of CharityName.com/Event? Basically, my understanding of 301 redirects is that they're used when a website permanently moves. In this case, the OLD DOMAIN name would still be used for reasons mentioned above but would be 301 redirected to CharityName.com/Event. Any chance this might not maximise the potential of new/old links? Any other way to go about it? Anything I'm missing with this scenario? Thanks
Technical SEO | | carmenmardiros0