Mobile & desktop pages
-
I have a mobile site (m.example.com) and a desktop site (example.com). I want search engines to know that for every desktop page there is a mobile equivalent. To do this I insert a rel=alternate on the desktop pages to the mobile equivalent. On the mobile pages I insert a rel=canonical to it's equivalent desktop page. So far so good BUT:
Almost every desktop page has 4 or 5 copies (duplicate content). I get rid of this issue by using the rel=canonical to the source page. Still no problem here.
But what happens if I insert a rel=alternate to the mobile equivalent on every copy of the source page? I know it sounds stupid but the system doesn't allow me to insert a rel=alternate on just one page. It's all or nothing!
My question:
Does Google ignore the rel=alternate on the duplicate pages but keeps understanding the link between the desktop source page & mobile page ? Or should I avoid this scenario?
Many Thanks
Pieter
-
I would love to see any of it you are willing to share. I am not saying in any way it is an absolute (what is in SEO?), I just worry over not indexing a page for mobile.
Best
-
We did an in-depth study last year to see if setting the mobile pages to "no-index" had any effect. This was done on one of our biggest sites. What we found is that if a site ranks high in desktop results, Google will display the same results in mobile, even if location targeting is turned on in the mobile device.
The only thing that skewed the results is if something relevant was within a few miles, and even then it was few and far between that it showed a difference. We even tried doing the same searches with having our location set to a completely different town or city, and got the same results.
Test was conducted using hotspots, wifi, 4g, 3g and multiple devices so we were not using the same IP. I understand what you are saying, I just don't think it has as large of an impact as people think.
-
David, what i'm trying to reach is this:
On the desktop page I add this between my
<linkrel="alternate"media="only screen="" and="" (max-width:="" 640px)" href="http://m.example.com/page-1"></linkrel="alternate"media="only>
On the mobile page I add this between my
<link< span="">rel="canonical"href="http://www.example.com/page-1"></link<>
In this way i'm saying to search engines that for this desktop URL an alternate mobile URL is available. The desktop URL is the one that will get in to the search results ( based on the canonical on the mobile URL) and users will be served the desktop or mobile page depending on the device they're using ("media="only screen and (max-width: 640px)". In this way duplicate issues are countered.
Besides this I have multiple copies of the my desktop URL. Thes copies get the right canonical to the source page. But when I want to add the rel=alternate to my source, they also are added to my copies of the desktop URL. (The system in which i'm working doesn't allow me to do otherwise)
I made a scheme of this (see image). I'm concerned that the rel=alternate on the desktop's copy URL's may cause problems to achieve the above.
@Robert: Thanks for the input, clear to me. I will test it!
-
David,
I would not suggest this as there are separate mobile search results. I think you are taking a risk with no-indexing your mobile pages. You are better served to use rel=alternate IMO.
Best, -
We use the mobile pages for users only, and set them to "no-index". There is no reason for increased SEO (that I am aware of) to have both a m. and a www. version of a page indexed in Google. If you have a desktop page full of good conetnt, and it is in your sitemap, Google will find it. What you want to do is have the server detect the device the user is accessing the site from, and display the mobile or tablet version. IMO this is to help the user to navigate your site easier, not to get a seo boost by having more pages or showing Google you have mobile-specific pages.
Also, add this to your robots.txt file:
User-agent: Googlebot-Mobile
Allow: /
User-agent: Mediapartners-Google*
Allow: / -
I put this down on paper and cannot see a way it is harmful. I am assuming there is more than one source page topic:
Site is Bikes, categories are wheels, handlebars, chains.
Pages are Bikes/wheels/red, blue, green
Bike/wheel/red = one source page, Bike/wheel/blue = one source page, etc. EDIT - each of these pages has multiple versions
If so, I would change half the source pages and just watch for a week. (Fetch as Google after changing - immediately so you have likelihood of quick reindex)
If you see nothing negative, implement rel=alt for all the other wheels
Does that seem clear?
-
Thanks a lot for the answer! To answer yours; If we want to insert a rel=alternate (or any tag) on the source page it's automatically added in it's copies. We can work around it but asks a lot of work and budget. Don't ask me why/how or the details, the only thing I know for sure is that it wasn't build for SEO ;).
Pieter
-
Humix,
I do not believe it would cause you a problem to have it on every copy of the source page; When you say the "system" won't allow you to place on just main source page, what do you mean?
Robert
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
-
Old Content Pages
Hello we run a large sports website. Since 2009 we have been doing game previews for most games every day for all the major sports..IE NFL, CFB, NBA, MLB etc.. Most of these previews generate traffic for 1-2 days leading up to or day of the event. After that there is minimal if any traffic and over the years almost nothing to the old previews. If you do a search for any of these each time the same matchup happens Google will update its rankings and filter out any old matchups/previews with new ones. So our question is what would you do with all this old content? Is it worth just keeping? Google Indexes a majority of it? Should we prune some of the old articles? The other option we thought of and its not really practical is to create event pages where we reuse a post each time the teams meet but if there was some sort of benefit we could do it.
Technical SEO | | dueces0 -
Mobile webpages
Should mobile pages get their own unique meta title? The meta I see on mobile search results is pulled from my desktop page and the mobile page does not include the title meta tag.
Technical SEO | | Mr.bfz0 -
New Page Showing Up On My Reports w/o Page Title, Words, etc - However, I didn't create it
I have a WordPress site and I was doing a crawl for errors and it is now showing up as of today that this page : https://thinkbiglearnsmart.com/event-registration/?event_id=551&name_of_event=HTML5 CSS3 is new and has no page title, words, etc. I am not even sure where this page or URL came from. I was messing with the robots.txt file to allow some /category/ posts that were being hidden, but I didn't re-allow anything with the above appendages. I just want to make sure that I didn't screw something up that is now going to impact my rankings - this was just a really odd message to come up as I didn't create this page recently - and that shouldnt even be a page accessible to the public. When I edit the page - it is using an Event Espresso (WordPress plugin) shortcode - and I don't want to noindex this page as it is all of my events. Sorry this post is confusing, any help or insight would be appreciated! I am also interested in hiring someone for some hourly consulting work on SEO type issues if anyone has any references. Thank you!
Technical SEO | | webbmason0 -
Is it bad to have your pages as .php pages?
Hello everyone, Is it bad to have your website pages indexed as .php? For example, the contact page is site.com/contact.php and not /contact. Does this affect your SEO rankings in any way? Is it better to have your pages without the extension? Also, if I'm working with a news site and the urls are dynamic for every article (ie site.com/articleid=2323.) Should I change all of those dynamic urls to static? Thank You.
Technical SEO | | BruLee0 -
Search/Search Results Page & Duplicate Content
If you have a page whose only purpose is to allow searches and the search results can be generated by any keyword entered, should all those search result urls be no index or rel canonical? Thanks.
Technical SEO | | cakelady0 -
Is it better to delete web pages that I don't want anymore or should I 301 redirect all of the pages I delete to the homepage or another live page?
Is it better for SEO to delete web pages that I don't want anymore or should I 301 redirect all of the pages I delete to the homepage or another live page?
Technical SEO | | CustomOnlineMarketing0 -
Home page penalty?
What does it mean when your home page has a penalty? I have a site that has good rankings for many pages, but my home page seems to be penalized by Google. I tried searching for my home page URL in Google, www.xxxxxx.com and my page doesn't show up, but sub pages do show up? What would cause this penalty and how do you correct this issue.
Technical SEO | | tadden0 -
Iframes & SEO
I've got a client that wants a site with all content in iFrames. They saw another site they liked & asked if we could do it. Of course we can technically. How big a negative hit would they take with SEO? Is there anything we can do to mitigate it, such as redirects, etc? Thanks for the help!
Technical SEO | | wcksmith0