Using Canonical Attribute
-
Hi All,
I am hoping you can help me?
We have recently migrated to the Umbraco CMS and now have duplicate versions of the same page showing on different URLs. My understanding is that this is one of the major reasons for the rel=canonical tag.
So am I right in saying that if I add the following to the page that I want to rank then this will work?
I'm just a little worried as I have read some horror stories of people implementing this attribute incorrectly and getting into trouble.
Thank you in advance
-
Just want to add one comment. Where people end up in trouble is when they apply the canonical tag too broadly (to non-duplicates). This tends to happen when you have a CMS and one template drives multiple pages. So, let's say that all of your product pages are created by:
http://example.com/product.php
...and you just add IDs to that to create a product, like:
http://example.com/product.php?id=123
If you add a canonical tag to "product.php" pointing to a single product, you would essentially tell Google to canonicalize every product page on your site to just that one product. This is because that one physical file impacts hundreds of URLs. So, in that case, you would have to make sure the code logic was in place to apply the proper ID.
-
Mr. Painter said it perfectly.
With that said, I think the decision of whether or not to use canonical tags depends partially on what the varying URLs are. If they are like the books/author example above the Canonical tags are for you.
However a lot of people mistakenly think that using canonical tags to solve the non-www to www duplication is a proper solution when in fact you need to 301 in that case.
So if your URL duplication issues stem from http://books.com/author and http://www.books.com/author then you need to put a redirect in place instead.
Just wanted to add that tidbit on just in case. Good luck!
-
Hell,
first off here is some help - https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139394?hl=en
the way it works is lets say you've got two bits of content on two different areas of a site but it will only index one (and mark other as a duplicate) Example :
&
Now these may be the same content, what we would then do is put a canonical tag on the duplicate page pointing to the page we wanted to be indexed ( I would recommend using one thats closer to the domain) so on www.books.com/genre/author we would put the tag -
What this does it tells Google this page is a duplicate of this one (the one in the link) Google will then ignore that page and only index the page in the canonical **In Short** Canonical is used for duplicate content if you only need one page to been indexed and want to avoid duplicate content issues. if you have duplicate content its perfect for you. Hope that helps clear it up
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
-
Question on Indexing, Hreflang tag, Canonical
Dear All, Have a question. We've a client (pharma), who has a prescription medicine approved only in the US, and has only one global site at .com which is accessed by all their target audience all over the world.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jrohwer
For the rest of the US, we can create a replica of the home page (which actually features that drug), minus the existence of the medicine, and set IP filter so that non-US traffic see the duplicate of the home page. Question is, how best to tackle this semi-duplicate page. Possibly no-index won't do because that will block the site from the non-US geography. Hreflang won't work here possibly, because we are not dealing different languages, we are dealing same language (En) but different Geographies. Canonical might be the best way to go? Wanted to have an insight from the experts. Thanks,
Suparno (for Jeff)1 -
Canonical URL's searchable in Google?
Hi - we have a newly built site using Drupal, and Drupal likes to create canonical tags on pretty much everything, from their /node/ url's to the URL Alias we've indicated. Now, when I pull a moz crawl report, I get a huge list of all the /node/ plus other URL's. That's beside the point though... Question: when I directly enter one of the /node/ url's into a google search, a result is found. Clicking on it redirects to the new URL, but should Google even be finding these non-canonical URL's?? I don't feel like I've seen this before.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jenny10 -
Rel Canonical for HTTP and HTTPS pages
My website has a login that has HTTPS pages. If the visitors doesn't log in they are given an HTTP page that is similar, but slightly different. Should I sure a Rel Canonical for these similar pages and how should that be set up? HTTP to HTTPS version or the other way around? Thank you, Joey
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JoeyGedgaud1 -
Blog tags are creating excessive duplicate content...should we use rel canonicals or 301 redirects?
We are having an issue with our cilent's blog creating excessive duplicate content via blog tags. The duplicate webpages from tags offer absolutely no value (we can't even see the tag). Should we just 301 redirect the tagged page or use a rel canonical?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | VanguardCommunications0 -
This is a clear-cut canonical issue, right?
Hello, A client is having one of their daily blogs published on a industry news site along with on their own site. This is a clear-cut case of having a canonical tag implemented on the client's site on each blog page, right? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Martin_S0 -
Which search engines still use Meta Keywords?
I know Google doesn't use meta keywords in meta tags, but i was wondering if there are other smaller search engines that still do? Id it worth it to add meta keywords for them?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jhinchcliffe0 -
What is the proper syntax for rel="canonical" ??
I believe the proper syntax is like this [taken from the SEOMoz homepage]: However, one of the sites I am working on has all of their canonical tags set up like this: I should clarify, not all of their canonicals are identical to this one, they simply use this naming convention, which appears to be relative URLs instead of absolute. Doesn't the entire URL need to be in the tag? If that is correct, can you also provide me with an explanation that I can give to management please? They hate it when I say "Because I said so!" LOL
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | danatanseo0 -
Original Source and Canonical tags
We've been using canonical links to protect site SEO for contributor content and requiring canonical of our partners (as well as tagging internal duplicate content with canonical). Most other media sites have been doing the same but this is a moving target. I'm now hearing that the original source tag is now a better option. Special focus for us is placement on google news. Any guidance?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jbertfield0