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
-
Tags problem I need help
Hello I have a problem on my site and I want to help solve it I allow adding tags in search engines However, when writing new content, tags are not added to search engines This is my website link مجلة الحلوة
Technical SEO | | ahmedahmed3230 -
Should I use canonical tag in these cases?
Should I use canonical tag in these cases? On the page itself (with the tag pointing to itself) On pages that doesn't have duplicate versions
Technical SEO | | GoMentor0 -
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 -
Which way round to 301 redirect?
Hi We have just added a new layered navigation menu to our website. so for example we had Before : www.tidy-books.co.uk/chidlrens-bookcases (this has the seo juice) And Now: http://www.tidy-books.co.uk/childrens-bookcases-book-storage/childrens-bookcases Might be a stupid question but do I redirect the 'now' url to the 'before' url or the the other way round I look forward to hearing your thoughts Thanks
Technical SEO | | tidybooks0 -
Canonical tag refers to itself (???)
Greetings Mozzers. I have seen a couple of pages that use canonical tags in a peculiar way, and I wanted to know if this way of using the tags was correct, harmless or dangerous: What I've seen is that on some pages like: www.example.com/page1 There's a canonical tag in the header that looks like this link href="http://ww.example.com/page1" rel="canonical" It looks as though the tag is "redirecting to itself", this seems useless (at least to me). Is there a case where this is actually a recommended practice? Will using the canonical tag in this way "hurt" the page's ranking potential? Cheers Jorge
Technical SEO | | Masoko-T0 -
How many of these Meta values should be included in the Head tag?
| | Hi. We receive advice to include so many Meta values in the Head Tag on each page. Which ones are really needed and are really valuable in the SEO effort? |
Technical SEO | | theideapeople
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | Thank you for your help and ideas! Jay0 -
Google Confusion: Two Sites and a 301 Redirect.
Hi, We have a client who just sprang a new project on us. As always, they went ahead and did some stuff before bringing us into the loop! (oh the joy of providing SEO services!) Anyway, i'm pretty swamped right now and need some extra brains on this. Basically the client had www.examplesiteA.com online for many years (an affiliate site which had built up a strong brand in the industry). They have now decided to turn this affiliate site into a full blown service platform and so with the new site being built they 301'd the whole thing over to www.examplesiteB.com - this is where they want all the old affiliate content to be hosted. So essentially examplesiteA.com is now examplesiteB.com and a new site is being placed on examplesiteA.com - still with me? So this has all happened and a brand new website is on examplesiteA.com and the old examplesiteA is now sitting exactly as it used to, but on the examplesiteB domain. The 301 redirect has been removed and the new examplesiteA seems to have been crawled, but the homepage is not indexed. When you search for examplesiteA, examplesiteB is the top result. Now they are similar domain names and to be fair I have very little data at this point i.e. I don't know when the 301 redirect was removed and it maybe that this all fixes itself with time. How is link equity effected now that examplesiteA.com was 301 redirected to examplesiteB.com and cached in this way, but now the 301 redirect has been removed and does not exist? Would link juice have been diluted throughout the process? Obviously if we had been in on all this before anything was implemented we would have done things differently. Interested to hear what others would do coming in at this point. Thanks and look forward to the advice!
Technical SEO | | MarcLevy0 -
Canonical Tag Pointing To The Same URL
Does it matter if a canonical tag points to the URL in which the tag is on? Example Page: http://www.domain.com Canonical tag: rel="canonical" href="http://www.domain.com" /> I only ask because a client of mine has a CMS that automatically does that to every page on the site and there's no way to remove it. Will this have a negative impact or does it not matter at all? Any insights would be great because I can't find a clear answer anywhere online. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | MichaelWeisbaum0