Ref = Canonical
-
Does it make sense to use the Canonical statement on pages on your web site that already have the correct URL. Or, should I ask, "Does it do any harm?"
-
Thanks for the speedy response Streamline,
We have just rewritten our web site using a directory structure, rather than having all of the HTML pages in the root folder, and used rel=canonical on all pages, because we were/are really worried about our (fairly good) rankings being negatively impacted.
We have also used rel=canonical in the redirect pages, as we believed that this was an appropriate use of of the 'tag.'
PS
(Sorry about the earlier 'Ref' typo)
-
It doesn't do any harm and in fact, I would recommend using canonical tags just in case some people access your site via a link that has parameters in the URL, such as www.yoursite.com/?utm_campaign=twitter, etc. The canonical tag will ensure that the search engines are always aware about indexing the correct URL.
Also, it's important to note that the proper syntax is rel="canonical" and not ref="canonical".
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 to deal with rel=canonical when using POST parameters
Hi there,
On-Page Optimization | | mjk26
I currently have a number of URLs throughout my site of the form: https://www.concerthotels.com/venue-hotels/o2-academy-islington-hotels/256133#checkin_4-21-2024&checkout_4-22-2024&rooms_1&guests_2&artistid_15878:256133 This sends the user through to a page showing hotels near the O2 Academy Islington. Once the page loads, my code looks at the parameters specified in the # part of the URL, and uses them to fill in a form, before submitting the form as a POST. This basically reloads the page, but checks the availability of the hotels first, and therefore returns slightly different content to the "canonical" version of this page (which simply lists the hotels before any availability checks done). Until now, I've marked the page that has had availability checks as noindex,follow. But because the form was submitted with POST parameters, the URL looks exactly like the canonical one. So the two URLs are identical, but due to POST parameters, the content is slightly different. Does that make sense? My question is, should both versions of this page be marked as index,follow? Thanks
Mike0 -
Homepage canonical url with splash or not with splash? All other links are without but logo links with splash
Hello, There is so much contradicting information about the homepage canonical URL. Many websites have all the links without the trailing splash but their homepage URL still contains the splash. Now Moz is an example with this. Their urls don't have the splash, and their canonical does not have the splash. Why is it so and why so much different ways people have it?
On-Page Optimization | | advertisingcloud0 -
Rel=canonical vs noindex/follow - tabs with individual URLs
Hi everyone I've got a situation that I haven't seen in quite this way before. I would like some advice on whether I should be rel=canonicalzing of noindexing/following a range of pages on a clients website. I've just started working on a website that creates individual URLs for tabs within each page which has resulted in several URLs being created for each listing: Example URLs: hotel-downtown-calgary hotel-downtown-calgary/gallery?tab hotel-downtown-calgary?tab hotel-downtown-calgary/map?tab hotel-downtown-calgary/facilities?tab hotel-downtown-calgary/reviews?tab hotel-downtown-calgary/in-the-area?tab Google has indexed over 1500 pages with the "?tab" parameter (there are 4380 page indexed for the site in total), and also seems to be indexing some of these pages without the "?tab" parameter i.e. ("hotel-downtown-calgary/reviews" instead of "hotel-downtown-calgary/reviews?tab") so the amount of potential duplication could be more. These tabbed pages are getting minimal traffic from organic search, so I've got no issues with taking them out of the index - the question is how. There are the issues I see: Each tab has the same title as the other tabs for each location, so lots of title duplication. Each individual tab doesn't have much content (although the content each tab has is unique). I would usually expect the tabs to be distinguished by the parameters only, not have unique URLs - if that was the case we wouldn't have a duplication issue. So the question is: rel=canonical or noindex/follow? I can see benefits of both. Looking forward to your thoughts!
On-Page Optimization | | Digitator0 -
Canonical Question For Different Languages
My client has a site that supports different languages in the following structure: www.domain.com - English version www.domain.com/IT - Italian version www.domain/DE - German version etc.... I have set the languages up within Webmaster Tools but do I need to set up the canonical tag for all internal pages as they are basically the same but just in a different language i.e. www.domain.com/index.php is the same as www.domain.com/DE/index.php but in a different language. Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | bigfootdigital0 -
Which pages should use rel="canonical" links?
I have many pages showing up as multiple content. Most of the them belong to product pages for my store, login pages that show up everywhere on the site, etc. I know that I need to use the rel=canonical link in the header but after searching the forum I'm still unsure of what pages need it. Is it the pages that I don't want searched/crawled by Google or the other way around? Thanks! Crystal
On-Page Optimization | | COfashionista0 -
What does Canonical mean?
Hi, I was wondering what is meant by canonical? I ran a test on my site and in the notices, SEOMOZ came back with a total of 90 canonicals. As far as I can tell, it refers to the preferred page (not really sure what that means though). I thought initially it was talking about duplicate content, but all the pages are totally different. There is no duplicate content on any of he pages that it lists. So I'm not sure how to fix this. Thanks for the help. Don
On-Page Optimization | | ge01734000 -
Canonical Notice
I am curious why I receive this canonical notice even though there is a canonical for this homepage. Nq3fD.jpg
On-Page Optimization | | paumer800 -
Almost all pages showing under Notices Rel Canonical - why???
Hi, I'm just going through my latest crawl since my new site launch and havce noticed almost all of my websites pages are listed under the notices rel canonical section, Why is this? All pages have the unique pages titles followed by the site name in the title, for example: Product | Site name All pages have unique meta descriptions and content (although we only offer lots of differt varients of the same product). Is this something I should be worried about?
On-Page Optimization | | EclipseLegal0