Can I use canonical tags to merge property map pages and availability pages to their counterpart overview pages?
-
I have a property website, for each property are 4-5 tabs each with their own URL, these pages include the overview page which is content rich, and auxilliary pages such as maps, availability, can I use a canonical tag to merge the tabs with very little content to their corresponding overview page which is content rich?
I.e.
www.mywebsite.co.uk/property-1/overview
This page has tabs for map, town info, availability which all have their own url i.e.
www.mywebsite.co.uk/property-1/map
www.mywebsite.co.uk/property-1/availability
www.mywebsite.co.uk/property-1/towninfoBecause these auxilary pages do not contain much content can I place a canonical tag in them pointing back to the content rich overview page at www.mywebsite.co.uk/property-1/overview?
-
I'd just add that if the solution chosen is noindex, to do the noindex, follow method, just to give the extra cue if there are links on those pages.
-
You could "noindex" them, which would mean search indexes would not list the content of those pages.
Keep in mind that Google doesn't penalize you for having little content, as long as it is unique. The challenge is found when you have a small amount of content wrapped in a page with a header, footer and sidebar with identical content as the rest of the site. If you do a word count you may find the overwhelming percent of that page's content is duplicate, which is a concern.
If you offered a blank page with a map that said "Map of 1000 block of Sesame Street taken January 2011" along with the image then you could index that page if you felt that might be something people might be interested in.
The determination you need to make is whether the content is of value to users. Is anyone likely to want to find these maps or other information directly from a search engine? If the answer is no, then it's fine to block them either in robots.txt or with a noindex tag.
-
So, for the pages with little content, should I just nofollow them so that they are not a part of the indexed site structure? These pages have very little content i.e. the maps page, so should I just add an exclusion to the page or the robots.txt file
-
In short, No.
Canonicals are designed to merge multiple URLs to the same page. For example if you have an "availability" page which can be sorted, your URLs might be:
www.mywebsite.co.uk/property-1/availability
www.mywebsite.co.uk/property-1/availability/
www.mywebsite.co.uk/property-1/availability/?sort_asc_field=price
www.mywebsite.co.uk/property-1/availability/?sorc_desc_field=price
Those four URLs all lead to the identical page. By using a canonical identifying "www.mywebsite.co.uk/property-1/availability" as your site's main page, it avoids confusion. All your link juice will apply to a single page, and Google will consistently direct users to the correct version of the page.
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
-
How long does it take for canonical tags to work
How long on average does it take for a canonical tag to work? Understand that canonicals are just a suggestion, but after adding a canonical tag and submitting the page via Google fetch, assuming Google follows the canonical, would you expect it to work after a day or two or does it take longer? We added canonicals to old PPC landing pages that are ranking organically, though our new landing pages (which we want to rank organically) are not identical and have a bit more content/features. They are similar though. Canonicals were added to the old pages (pointing to new pages) and requested indexing via search console. Old pages are still ranking and new pages not so much. FYI we are unable to 301 old PPC pages due to other non negotiable reasons unfortunately. Thanks.
Technical SEO | | SoulSurfer80 -
Does Canonical Tag Syntax Matter?
Does anyone know definitively if the format of the canonical tag matters? Silly question I know. vs
Technical SEO | | Healio0 -
Using hreflang tags properly.
On my site "example.com" I have set up the following in the header: The problem is that the tags are universal across the site, so every page has these tags, leading obviously to no return tag errors. I.e. the page www.example.ca/testing.html still has the tags: Not tags with "testing.html" in them. How bad is this? Does it matter?
Technical SEO | | absoauto0 -
What is the best way to use canonical tag
Hi, i have been researching this since yesterday and have looked at this subject many times before but still cannot get my head around it. i done a report on my site which was very useful, i used http://www.juxseo.com for my site www.in2town.co.uk and it brought me some useful information but part of that info was it was telling me that i should have on my home page a canonical tag which would improve my seo. Now i am using sh404sef for my friendly urls and i am using joomla 3.0 and when i approached the makers of the sh404sef to ask about the tag they said i would need to be careful of using it as it could damage my site and my rankings. i have read lots of information but still do not have a clear understanding behind it. can anyone please explain the best way to use this and should i be using where i may have some sort of duplicate page, any help to understand this would be great.
Technical SEO | | ClaireH-1848860 -
Canonical tag problem
Hello I'm newbie here i dont know very well about seo but i would like to ask your help? I'm running report about my website and on report I dont have canonical tag on my products. But if i check from on page report link by link it shows that I have canonical tag. At the same time if i check my pages code i can see below canonical tag codes? Do we use canonical tags wrong? What can cause this different information? Could you please help me? Is it important to use canonical tag beginning or end? I'm using now trial version and trying to understand report is correct what is my mistakes. Thanks in advance My code is
Technical SEO | | FRUTIKO0 -
Can Page Content & Description Have Same Content?
I'm studying my crawl report and there are several warnings regarding missing meta descriptions. My website is built in WordPress and part of the site is a blog. Several of these missing description warnings are regarding blog posts and I was wondering if I am able to copy the first few lines of content of each of the posts to put in the meta description, or would that be considered duplicate content? Also, there are a few warnings that relate to blog index pages, e.g. http://www.iainmoran.com/2013/02/ - I don't know if I can even add a description of these as I think they are dynamically created? While on the subject of duplicate content, if I had a sidebar with information on several of the pages (same info) while the content would be coming from a WP Widget, would this still be considered duplicate content and would Google penalise me for it? Would really appreciate some thoughts on this,please. Thanks, Iain.
Technical SEO | | iainmoran0 -
Home page indexed but not ranking...interior pages with thin content outrank home page??
I have a Joomla site with a home page that I can't get to rank for anything beyond the company name @ Google - the site works fine @ Bing and Yahoo. The interior pages will rank all day long but the home page never shows up in the results. I have checked the page code out in every tool that I know about and have had no luck....by all account it should be good to go...any thoughts/comments/help would be greatly appreciated. The site is http://www.selectivedesigns.com Thanks! Greg
Technical SEO | | DougHosmer0 -
Should there be a canonical tag on my 404 error page?
In my crawl diagnostics, I notice some 4xx client errors. They are appearing for pages that no longer exist, so I'm not sure what the problem is. Shouldn't they just be dealt as 404's? Anyway, on closer inspection I noticed that my 404 error page contains a canonical tag which points to the missing page. Could this be the issue? Is it a good idea to remove the canonical tag from this error page? Thanks.
Technical SEO | | Leighm0