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!
-
I think that this is the video that was mentioned by Rich. It goes back to 2011. Matt does say that he can't account for other search engines, but Google is cool with using a rel="canonincal" tag to point to "itself."
-
Awesome - thanks for the quick responses!
-
Hey there
Having a self referring canonical tag, as it were, is something I'd recommend for a couple of reasons.
As you have pointed out, canonical tags can help remove the chance of other duplicate pages getting indexed. However, Google will indexes URLs and one physical page can have a number of different URLs. For example, if your website has a search function of anything else that might produce a query string (like domain.com/page?query), these URLs can also be indexed and would be seen as duplicate content by Google.
There would not be a physical page to apply the tag to, but if you add a self referring canonical tag, any dynamic URL that is generated by your CMS should not be indexed, helping to limit the chance of any duplicate content penalty.
Furthermore, I believe that having a tag on your page protects you somewhat from scrapers and people stealing your content. If your page is indexed first with your tag, any syndicated or duplicate versions from 3rd parties in theory should not be able to rank that content.
You look at places like Search Engine Land and they have these self referring canonicals too.
Hope this helps. Enjoy your weekend!
-
You can canoncical to the same page yes, i saw a video or blog from Matt Cutts just the other week confirming this but cant for the life of me find it again now. Will pop the link on here if i find it unless anyone else in the community can provide confirmation before hand.
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
-
Optimal use of keywords in header tag
what does optimal use of keywords in header tag actually mean given you indicate this as hurting seo factor?
Technical SEO | | Serg1550 -
Please take a look at my canonical tag - is it written right?
Hi there! I just changed the preferred domain settings from http://example.com to http://www.example.com and received a recommended action from Google: "Ensure that you specify the new host as canonical in all page links or sitemaps." Could you please let me know if "the new host" is equal to "canonical" and if I have to include this tag into every page of my website ? Thank you!
Technical SEO | | kirupa0 -
Canonical URL on frontpage
I have a site where the CMS system have added a canonical URL on my frontpage, pointing to a subpage on my site. Something like on my domain root.Google is still showing MyDomain.com as the result in the search engines which is good, but can't this approach hurt my ranking? I mean it's basically telling google that my frontpage content is located far down the hierarki, instead of my domain root, which of course have the most authority.
Technical SEO | | EdmondHong87
Something seems to indicate that this could very well be the case, as we lost several placements after moving to this new CMS system a few months ago.0 -
Hreflang Implementation
Hello All, I'm currently working on a website with different folders for different country. For now I have defined the href lang implementation as below: http://www.homepage.com/en/default.html"/>
Technical SEO | | buiserik
Language: English - Country: United Kingdom http://www.homepage.com/enus/default.html"/>
Language: English - Country: United States http://www.homepage.com/nl/default.html"/>
Language: Dutch - Country: Netherlands http://www.homepage.com/nlbe/default.html"/>
Language: Dutch - Country: Belgium http://www.homepage.com/fr/default.html"/>
Language: French - Country: All french speaking countries http://www.homepage.com/de/default.html"/>
Language: German - Country: All german speaking countries http://www.homepage.com/es/camisa-a-medida.html"/>
Language: Spanish - Country: Spain http://www.homepage.com/enen/default.html" />
Language: English - Country: All other countries Does this make any sense? Furthermore, how do I implement this on underlying pages. Do I fill out the URL dynamically according to the URL the tags are found on? Or do I use these tags mentioning the homepage on all underlying pages? If so, how do I avoid duplicate content issues between NL and NL-BE and EN-GB, EN-US and EN? Canonicals? Besides the whole hreflang implementation I was wondering if it's worthwhile or advisable to implement lang="en" xml:lang="en_"_ in the HTML tag and http-equiv="content-language" content="en_"_ in the META tags?0 -
How to correct a google canonical issue?
So when I initially launched my website I had an issue where I didn't properly set my canonical tags and all my pages got crawled. Now in looking at the search engine results I see a number of the pages that were meant to be canonical tagged to the correct page showing up in the results. What is the best way to correct this issue with google? Also I noticed that while initially I was ranking well for the main pages, now those results have disappeared entirely and deeper in the rankings I am finding the pages that were meant to be canonical tagged. Please Help.
Technical SEO | | jackaveli0 -
Querystring params, rel canonical and SEO
I know ideally you should have as clean as possible url structures for optimal SEO. Our current site contains clean urls with very minimal use of query string params. There is a strong push, for business purposes to include click tracking on our site which will append a query string param to a large percentage of our internal links. Currently: http://www.oursite.com/section/content/ Will change to: http://www.oursite.com/section/content/?tg=zzzzwww We currently use rel canonical on all pages to properly define the true url in order to remove any possible duplicate content issues. Given we are already using rel canonical, if we implement the query string click tracking, will this negatively impact our SEO? If so, by how much? Could we run into duplicate content issues? We get crawled by Google a lot (very big site) and very large percent of our traffic is from Google, but there is a strong business need for this information so trying to weigh pros/cons.
Technical SEO | | NicB10 -
301 or Rel=canonical
Should I use a 301 redirect for redirect mywebsite.com to www.mywebsite.com or use a rel=canonical?? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | LeslieVS0 -
Canonical tags and relative paths
Hi, I'm seeing a problem with Roger Bot crawling a clients site. In a campaign I am seeing you say that the canonical tag is pointing to a different URL. The tag is as follows:- /~/Standards-and....etc Google say:- relative paths are recognized as expected with the tag. Also, if you include a <base> link in your document, relative paths will resolve according to the base URL Is the issue with this, that there is a /~/, that there is no <base> link or just an issue with Roger? Best regards, Peter
Technical SEO | | peeveezee0