REL CANONİCAL
-
Hi,
The Original Page: http://www.enakliyat.com.tr/evden-eve-nakliyat-firmalari/
Page 2: http://www.enakliyat.com.tr/evden-eve-nakliyat-firmalari/?sayfa=2
Page 3: http://www.enakliyat.com.tr/evden-eve-nakliyat-firmalari/?sayfa=3
Page 4:http://www.enakliyat.com.tr/evden-eve-nakliyat-firmalari/?sayfa=4
we added this rel="canonical" href="http://www.enakliyat.com.tr/evden-eve-nakliyat-firmalari/" /> tag all these pages
Is it right?
-
There is no SEO software can help you determine if you have implemented correctly the canonical links(which page you are targeting with optimization). What they can do is to notice you about the fact that you have a canonical link present on that specific page. Which data you can export and analyze. Unfortunately this means a lot of manual work for you or your team.
Just think about the fact that you might Point a Canonical link from Page A -> Page A and from Page B-> Page B (because you have a script that will point a canonical to itself). Eventually these two pages are the same, it will be quite confusing to a search engine, right?
Or Page A -> Page B, Page B-> Page C and so on... that's also something that you would like to avoid.
Another case Page A -> Page B, Page B -> Page A.
With exporting the data that SEOmoz gives you and analyzing it in Excel (or a similar program), you will have the chance to avoid these problems.
I hope it helped and cleared the picture a little-bit
Istvan
-
I am not sure but i guess It is simply notifying you that you are doing this.. it sis not necessarily bad! similar to... lets say for some reason you are using 302 redirection instead of 301 so in that case SEOmoz will add 302 redirection under notice tab so that you know what you are doing and if this is not something you like just switch things accordingly!
for exact reasons i guess you should email to help@seomoz.org
-
Thank you Moosa Hemani,
So why SEOMOZ show us the rel=canonical in Crawl Notices, i do not understand
We use this tag in 157 pages -
real canonical... thats perfect!
-
congrats, you did it correctly
-
Yes, that looks right. Have the placed it within the sections of the pages?
-
yep.
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
-
Are links still considered reciprocal if the link from one website is rel="nofollow" and the other isnt ?
Im working on a site that has some press coverage due in the next couple of days from quite a big site in the niche. The press outlet has requested that we link back to the content they post about us, they said the link can be rel="nofollow" if we'd prefer. Id really like to get the full benefit of the link back to our website, obviously if i did a straight link back to the 3rd party press site the links would be reciprocal and cancel each other out in terms of "link juice", but i was wandering if we make our link back to the 3rd party rel="nofollow" will we still get the full benefit of their link to us in terms of link juice ? ie. having the link back to them, but nofollow wouldn't been seen as a reciprocal link. ? (Obviously either way there is still benefit of having the link even if it reciprocal as it will send traffic to our site, but just no "link juice") Note - Ive used the phrase"Link Juice" for lack of a better term, any ideas on how else to refer to this ?
Technical SEO | | Sam-P1 -
Does rel="canonical" support protocol relative URL?
I need to switch a site from http to https. We gonna add 301 redirect all over the board. I also use rel="canonical" to strip some queries parameter from the index (parameter uses to identify which navigation elements were use.) rel="canonical" can be used with relative or absolute links, but Google recommend using absolute links to minimize potential confusion or difficulties. So here my question, did you see any issue using relative protocol in rel="canonical"? Instead of:
Technical SEO | | EquipeWeb0 -
Rel="canonical"
HI, I have site named www.cufflinksman.com related to Cufflinks. I have also install WordPress in sub domain blog.cufflinksman.com. I am getting issue of duplicate content a site and blog have same categories but content different. Now I would like to rel="canonical" blog categories to site categories. http://www.cufflinksman.com/shop-cufflinks-by-hobbies-interests-movies-superhero-cufflinks.html http://blog.cufflinksman.com/category/superhero-cufflinks-2/ Is possible and also have any problem with Google with this trick?
Technical SEO | | cufflinksman0 -
Is rel=canonical needed for URLs with Google Analytics query strings?
If a page URL has Google Analytics query strings, does the page need a canonical tag? e.g., something.com/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=mar-2013-nsl I have rel=canonical on all our pages because some of them will be accessed via URLs that have non-Google strings. The strings are only for marketing purposes, not for identifying a specific page to display. e.g., something.com/?source=acme Should I only implement the canonical tag on the pages that might have non-Google marketing strings in the URL?
Technical SEO | | WayneBlankenbeckler0 -
Rel="Follow"? What the &#@? does that mean?
I've written a guest blog post for a site. In the link back to my site they've put a rel="follow" attribute. Is that valid HTML? I've Googled it but the answers are inconclusive, to say the least.
Technical SEO | | Jeepster0 -
Is it a good idea to use the rel canonical tag to refer to the original source?
Sometimes we place our blog post also on a external site. In this case this post is duplicated. Via the post we link to the original source but is it also possible to use the rel canonical tag on the external site? For example: The original blogpost is published on http://www.original.com/post The same blogpost is published on http:///www.duplicate.com/post. In this case is it wise to put a rel canonical on http://www.duplicate.com/post like this: ? What do you think? Thanks for help! Robert
Technical SEO | | Searchresult0 -
Rel=canonical and Google analytics referrals
Hello guys, If I put (rel=can) from site1.com/page1 to site2.com/page1, will site2.com see in his Google Analytics that people are coming from site1.com in the referrals section or somewhere else? I can't find anything on the web about that. Thanks.
Technical SEO | | YST0 -
Rel=author
Hi everyone, i'm trying to understand the rel=author thing for cotent, i need some clarification please. Firstly do you only use it for content on your site or can you have it for a guest post you have done on another domain which is not your own - linking to your author profile on your domain? Secondly implementing it, i understand it's 3 links: 1., Link on your content where the blog post is with a rel=author going to your domain authort page. 2., a link from your domain author page going to your google + profile. This is rel=me 3 a link on your google+ profile to your blog? if so how do i do this? i only have an option to edit about page and add recommended links? there is no 'contributor' section. I am UK profile also. Any help really appreciated, thanks guys.
Technical SEO | | pauledwards0
